Posted on 10/18/2019 1:33:20 AM PDT by FRinCanada2
https://www.foxnews.com/world/fighting-breaks-out-in-syrian-town-despite-cease-fire-reporters-say
Just hours after President Trump announced a cease-fire between Turkish and Kurdish-led forces in Syria, journalists have reported continued fighting in the Syrian town of Ras al-Ayn on Friday morning, while other areas have reported relative calm since the agreement.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Or the cease-fire / pause was not agreed to by the forces on the ground. ISIS or ISIS sympathizers or just independent fighters stepping in to fill the leadership void created?
If they don’t stop, then how about we drop a nice big MOAB on their sorry asses!
http://www.google.com/maps/place/36°50’42.0%22N+40°04’38.6%22E/@36.8476054,40.0704662,14z
My concern is that might be exactly what the independent fighters want us to do?
We say we are leaving and not going to be involved in the matter then drop a MOAB on our way out? The optics of that course of action are not good.
Leaving the fight completely as opposed to LEADING the effort to prevent instability and leadership voids being filled by ISIS or ISIS sympathizers??
No big deal. Except for this one location there is calm according to the article. It can take time for the orders to filter down to all the commanders and then on to all troop locations.
That was my initial assessment of this report as well.
My concern again is that ANY fighting during the 120hr agreed upon pause or ceasefire has the potential to undermine US credibility and US ability to enforce our ceasefire agreement.
Agreed?
Has anyone heard any numbers of injured and/or deaths?
Not yet but that info should be reported soon and is very relevant to US credibility during this 120hr period which officially started just a few hours before this report.
Our credibility or lack thereof will be determined by our actions if in fact the cease fire doesn’t hold.
Do you concur with President Trumps assertions that we need to let them fight a little bit in order for them to appreciate the fact that a peaceful agreement is way better?
That question being largely rhetorical since I think there is some wisdom in that approach. Peace through superior firepower is by far the best position to be in.
That being said, I cant help but picture a school kid bully threatening all the kids in school because everyone is afraid to stand up to the bully. Until one day the bully is publicly humiliated by the new kid who desperately tries to negotiate peace between the bully and the all the victims of bullying. When the bully pushes the new kid too far and gets publicly PWNED lol.
After ABC deliberately aired that fake attack by Turkey, I'm hesitant to believe anything anymore that is being reported from Syria.
This morning on Fox they showed smoke rising from some Syrian town, claiming it was from a shelling after the cease fire was announced. How do we know the video wasn't taken last week? And why only a couple locations where smoke was rising? It just didn't make sense.....
The main question is this ....
Which side is the bully and which side is the victim of being bullied?
Clearly the United States is like the teacher breaking up the fight between the bully and the new kid / negotiator trying to resolve the bullying issue without having to involve the school principle who will just call the cops and expel both kids for fighting pending an investigation to determine who the agressor is
Great point. Also missing are live feeds which normally come from multiple sources. Best to grab a fresh bowl of popcorn and watch how this plays out.
I say kill em all until there is no hope of us wasting billions on nation building.
Sounds like tough talk that is not practical if the US or US interests are not at stake what benefit to the US is there in simply killing both sides of a conflict. Or better yet using the bully Vs victim analogy can you imagine the police responding to a school principal asking for assistance in resolving a flight and simply ignoring the underlying issue which led up to the fight. Or worse blaming the bully victim by punishing / expelling the bully victim from school insisting that if all the victims just gave the bully their lunch money then there would be peace. lol
Or maybe the Kurds just don’t want to be forced to leave?
Agreed, does that make the Kurds the Bully or victim standing up to the bully?
Or is Turkey the victim trying to reclaim their lunch money from the Kurd/Bully?
Or is Turkey the victim trying to reclaim their lunch money from the Kurd/Bully?
I think this gives Turkey and the President an opportunity to make the Kurds look like the ones violating the agreement.
and might be Kentucky again
fake news despises Trump
>>>Or the cease-fire / pause was not agreed to by the forces on the ground
The agreement reached was between the US and Turkey. The Kurds were not part of the deal. The deal essentially gives Turkey all that it sought from the start.
After the Kurdish forces are cleared from the safe zone, Turkey has committed to a permanent cease-fire but is under no obligation to withdraw its troops. In addition, the deal gives Turkey relief from sanctions the administration had imposed and threatened to impose since the invasion began, meaning there will be no penalty for the operation.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.