Posted on 10/06/2015 8:16:29 AM PDT by tcrlaf
President Barack Obama authorized the resupply of Syrian Kurds and the Arab-Syrian opposition as part of a strategy to put pressure on ISIS from the north and strengthen the border, according to two senior administration officials.
The approval came at a National Security Council meeting on Thursday.
CNN reported over the weekend that the President also emphasized to his team that the U.S. would continue to support the Syrian opposition as Russia enters the war-torn country.
"President Obama was clear that we intend to continue our efforts to degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL in Syria and to keep supporting the moderate Syrian opposition," the official said, using another name for ISIS.
While Russia has said that it is conducting military operations to wipe out ISIS, U.S. officials have questioned that aim given that many of its airstrikes have not targeted places ISIS is active. Instead, they have seen the effort mostly as a move to bolster close Moscow ally President Bashar al-Assad.
The latest U.S. assessment of Moscow's activity in western Syria indicates Russia has moved several ground combat weapons and troops into the area to potentially back up Syrian forces in the field planning to attack anti-regime forces, according to two U.S. defense officials.
(Excerpt) Read more at edition.cnn.com ...
What exactly is the "Arab-Syrian opposition"?
Conflict News
SYRIA: US officials say Russian airstrikes could make it harder to keep antiaircraft weapons out of #Syria.
HUH, what????
This is Owellian Doublespeak
Barn door.....horse?
What exactly is the “Arab-Syrian opposition”?
*******************
Isis and AQ
and the Kurds- but he didn’t want to arm them...
Putin has been clear from the start that his intentions are to prop up Assad and towards that end he is attacking the "moderate" opposition, ie the guys we're trying to re-supply.
Obama is a petulant child who scares Russia not one whit. He is playing a very dangerous game w/ other peoples lives.
Our Jerk-in-Chief wants to resupply ISIS, IMHO.
Arab-Syrian opposition == Al Qaeda.
We’re giving arms and support to Muslims to allow them to better fight Christians (Russia).
Is Bammy and crew the only ones who keep calling them ISIL?
The L is for Levant meaning the left side. Same side as Bammy.
...kill Christians in Syria
The Muslime in Chief won't resupply the Kurds in Turkey though.
,,,,,, in other words he’s resupplying ISIS .
Keep repeating same thing that has failed will result in continuing failure.
Gosh. It would sure be nice if we had a President who would get on TV and tell the American people why we are messing around in Syria.
If he can’t do that, then we should stop.
I don’t have any faith that Obama and the Democrats have any interest other than stuffing their pockets with money.
ISIS
Obama Authorizes Resupply of ISIS Through Syrian Opposition Intermediaries.
FUBAR AFP
FUBO…and Biden…and Kerry…and Hillary…etc., etc.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7Y0ekr-3So
Then because our CIA guys are too stupid and vain to understand the culture ( from the view point of citizens who live there - rather than from the street thugs they recruit) the newly appointed CIA backed leader doesn't have deep support of the rebels or of the people. The people desert at the first sound of gunfire and the propped up newest fool falls. Rather than an Arab spring we get Arab ‘hell on earth’...
We're in Syria fighting a thug with the delusion we could replace him with a Thomas Jefferson - when (if we were to succeed) we'll replace the old thug with in a new thug or with total chaos.
I know this is horrible to say but we're too stupid to be involved over there ... Obama will be out of office in less than 400 days... we need to work and pray we can put someone in the White House who isn't a fool.... Until then we should offer measured military support to Putin to clean out ISIS...
Flame away...
Our CIA is once again trying to topple some thug by arming rebels. It NEVER works in the long run... Whenever this stupid CIA policy works in the short run the ‘thug we get thrown out’ is replaced by a new thug - often worse.
Then because our CIA guys are too stupid and vain to understand the culture ( from the view point of citizens who live there - rather than from the street thugs they recruit) the newly appointed CIA backed leader doesn't have deep support of the rebels or of the people. The people desert at the first sound of gunfire and the propped up newest fool falls. Rather than an Arab spring we get Arab ‘hell on earth’...
We're in Syria fighting a thug with the delusion we could replace him with a Thomas Jefferson - when (if we were to succeed) we'll replace the old thug with in a new thug or with total chaos.
I know this is horrible to say but we're too stupid to be involved over there ... Obama will be out of office in less than 400 days... we need to work and pray we can put someone in the White House who isn't a fool.... Until then we should offer measured military support to Putin to clean out ISIS...
Flame away...
War Party Targets Putin and Assad
Townhall.com ^ | October 6, 2015 | Pat Buchanan
Having established a base on the Syrian coast, Vladimir Putin last week began air strikes on ISIS and other rebel forces seeking to overthrow Bashar Assad.
A longtime ally of Syria, Russia wants to preserve its toehold on the Mediterranean, help Assad repel the threat, and keep the Islamic terrorists out of Damascus.
Russia is also fearful that the fall of Assad would free up the Chechen terrorists in Syria to return to Russia.
In intervening to save Assad, Putin is doing exactly what we are doing to save our imperiled allies in Baghdad and Kabul.
Yet Putin’s intervention has ignited an almost berserk reaction.
John McCain has called for sending the Free Syrian Army surface-to-air missiles to bring down Russian planes. Not only could this lead to a U.S.-Russia clash, but U.S.-backed Syrian rebels have a record of transferring weapons to the al-Qaida affiliate.
The end result of McCain’s initiative, sending Stingers to Syria, could be airliners blown out of the sky across the Middle East.
Hillary Clinton wants the U.S. to create a no-fly zone. And Friday’s Wall Street Journal endorsed the idea:
“Mr. Obama could make Mr. Putin pay a price. ... In Syria the U.S. could set up a no-fly zone to create a safe haven for refugees against ... Mr. Assad’s barrel bombs. He could say U.S. planes will fly wherever they want, and if one is attacked the U.S. will respond in kind.”
U.S.-Russian dogfights over Syria are just fine with the Journal.
Saturday’s Washington Post seconded the motion, admonishing Obama: “Carve out safe zones. Destroy the helicopter fleet Mr. Assad uses for his war crimes.”
Has the War Party thought this through?
Establishing a no-fly zone over Syria, which means shooting down Syrian fighter-bombers and helicopters, is an act of war. But when did Congress authorize the president to go to war with Syria?
When last Obama requested such authority — in 2013, when chemical weapons were used — the American people arose as one to say no to U.S. intervention. Congress backed away without even voting.
Unprovoked air strikes on Syrian government forces would represent an unauthorized and unconstitutional American war. Does the Party of the Constitution no longer care about the Constitution?
Is a Republican Congress really willing to give Barack Obama a blank check to take us to war with Syria, should he choose to do so?
Is this what America voted for in 2014?
A no-fly zone means U.S. warplanes downing Syrian planes and helicopters and bombing antiaircraft defenses at Syrian airfields.
To Damascus this would mean the Americans have committed to the defeat of their armed forces and downfall of their regime.
The Syrians would fight — and not only the Syrian army. For Russia, Hezbollah and Iran are all allied to the Damascus regime, as all believe they have a vital interest in its survival.
How would Russia, Iran and Hezbollah respond to U.S. air strikes on their ally? Would they pack it in and leave? Is that our experience with these folks?
Today, the U.S. is conducting strikes on ISIS, and the al-Qaida affiliate. But if we begin to attack the Syrian army or air force, we will be in a new war where the entire Shiite Crescent of Iran, Baghdad, Damascus and Hezbollah, backed by Russia, will be on the other side.
We will have taken the Sunni side in the Sunni-Shiite sectarian long war.
How long such a war would last, and how it would end, no one knows.
Whatever one thinks of Putin’s policy in Syria, at least it makes sense. He is supporting an ally, the Assad regime, against its enemies, who seek to overthrow that regime.
It is U.S. policy in Syria that makes no sense.
We train rebels at immense cost to fight Assad, who cannot or will not fight. We attack ISIS, which also seeks to bring down the Assad regime. And we, too, want to bring down Assad.
Who do we think will rise if Assad falls?
Do we have a “government in a box” that we think we can fly to Damascus and put into power if the Syrian army collapses, the regime falls and ISIS approaches the capital?
Have we forgotten the lesson of “Animal Farm”? When the animals revolt and take over the farm, the pigs wind up in charge.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3345309/posts
If they don’t stop flying we will up the anti and pressure...
Vlad laughs “go ahead, Make my day!!
Posturing...
If OBozo oreders US Troops to fire on Israeli soldiers, airmen etc there is a better than 75% chance there will be a coup...
Liars poker...
Watch and See...
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.