Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Syrian Army moving to face ‘Turkish aggression’ in the north – state media
#1
If this kicks off does it mean that all of NATO will start supporting Turkish army in the fight, and will Russia start supporting the Kurds ?
The ME is a mess and we should just stay out of it. Thing is I believe that Erdogon want a war between muslims and the west, he believes that Turkish muslims have the right to rule Europe.
Fun times ahead for everyone


Quote:13 Oct, 2019 17:18 / Updated 8 hours ago
Get short URL
[Image: 5da366702030270abf7f0701.jpg]
FILE PHOTO: Syrian government troops. © Sputnik / Mikhail Alaeddin
  • 2107

  • 269




Follow RT on[Image: googlenews.svg]

Tensions are mounting in northern Syria as Damascus has started moving its forces to face Turkish troops that are carrying out an operation against the Kurds in the area, state news agency Sana reports.
The Kurdish-led administration in northern Syria said in a statement that an agreement has been reached with Damascus for the Syrian government troops to be deployed along the border with Turkey.
READ MORE
[Image: 5da3550485f5401bb20dc12d.JPG]Turkish-backed forces ‘CUT OFF US troops’ after seizing key highway in Syria

The Syrians will deploy to the strategic Kurdish-held border town of Kobani within 48 hours, Lebanese broadcaster al-Mayadeen reported. RT’s sources in the region also confirmed the reports.
The Syrian Army already entered the city of Manbij in the northern province of Aleppo late on Sunday, al-Mayadeen reported. The Kurd militiamen let the government troops pass through their checkpoints unhampered. The distance between Manbij and Kobani is around 60 kilometers.
Turkey is going to come under intense pressure now that Syrian troops are heading to the north, Joshua Landis, director of the Center for Middle East Studies at the University of Oklahoma, believes.
“The Syrian government is going to try to go across and get the oilfields, the gas fields that are so crucial for Syria’s economic well-being. Also, this is prime agricultural land as the Euphrates River flows down here. The Tabqa Dam that the Americans and the Kurds held, the Syrian government is going to want to take that back as well,” he said.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Syrian counterpart, Bashar Assad, will need to use their best diplomatic skills to avoid an all-out war between their countries, Landis believes.
Earlier this week, the Turkish military entered northern Syria without consent from Damascus in order to fight the Kurdish militia (which Ankara regards as terrorists) in the Kobani region.
Turkey says the aim of the operation is to create a “safe zone” near its border to prevent the Kurdish fighters from making incursions into the country.
ALSO ON RT.COMMerkel tells Erdogan to IMMEDIATELY stop Syrian op – but why should he care what Europe says?
Before the start of the Turkish operation, the US called back several dozen servicemen who were embedded with the Kurdish forces. On Saturday, Donald Trump authorized a withdrawal of the remaining 1,000 US troops from Kobani so they don’t get caught up between the warring sides.
The Kurds, who were Washington’s main allies in fighting Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS) before, called the US move a betrayal.
source
WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, THE EU IS FATHER AND MOTHER
Reply
#2
The 'we' -in regards of staying out of the civil war, is ambiguous due to the deceitful reporting by the MSM.
French, British and other European military forces are still in the region, but their focus is on convincing the
public that all of this is due to the US 'pulling out'.

The continuing need to deliver victim-hood, touchy-feely rhetoric and emotional optics, demands that Turkey
should be seen as an invading force that wishes to obtain land and oppress those who live in that area.

The reality is that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has -for almost five years, 3.6 million Syrian, Iranian
and Afghan refugees in his country and it's a burden on the small economy.

He's resisted the easy way out and just let them flood into Europe and said he will instead, construct homes in
the so-called 'buffer-zone' of Syria for the Syrians so that they can return home.

The EU promised six billion euros to help Turkey bear the weight of catering for these refugees and didn't deliver.
I believe they've only given a fraction of that and it seems Erdogan has had enough of the deliberate delay.
The EU are opposing this idea of housing for several ideas due and mainly due to their love of migration and
private political and financial ties with those involved

So, not wanting to piss away his ties to Russia, a country that's also assisting sections of the Syrian and Iranian
military in the northern region, Erdogan proposed to construct social housing just over the border of Turkey that
constitutes a four-hundred-by-twenty-mile strip of land where the refugees can live.
It's been loosely-named a 'Safe Zone'.

At the same time, Putin doesn't want to ruin his plan to romance Turkey away from Nato and has even persuaded
Erdogan to purchase a Russian Air Defence System. But Russia has a stake in solving this years-old crisis without
leaning either way on a solution.

The squalor-ridden camps of the refugees in Turkey are violent due to the Islamic differences and so, the Turkish
President believes the accommodation over the border would be preferable for all. The Kurds want that area to
be used for the Kurdistan domain-building and the remains of ISIS want a seat at the table in order to 'manage'
the people via their strict religious doctrines.

It's a complex situation involving forgotten anti-feudal hatred, a multitude of factions in Syria, Iraq and Iran
demanding recognition and a place to call their own. Turkey doesn't come out of this smelling of roses -mind you,
the conflicts between them and the Kurdish system has been going on a long time.
 
But instead... the bad Orange-Man has pulled out of Syria is written by the legacy media and they ignore the truth
that not all of the US forces have left and many other countries have their guys on the ground too.
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#3
Very well said BIAD, the whole area is poison to Europe
WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, THE EU IS FATHER AND MOTHER
Reply
#4
@BIAD  minusculethumbsup2
You are Absolutely Correct in you Summation of the Situation.
Mr. G.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#5
(10-14-2019, 08:44 AM)Wallfire Wrote: If this kicks off does it mean that all of NATO will start supporting Turkish army in the fight, and will Russia start supporting the Kurds ?
source

Nah. NATO didn't support the Turkish invasion of Syria, nor their ongoing feud with the Kurds, so it's not a NATO issue. Now, it were SYRIA in an unprovoked invasion into Turkey, that would be a different matter... but not the way things are shaking out now, which are exactly opposite that. That's not a NATO fight. Syria is just sending troops north the protect it's own territory against Turkish aggression, and NATO is not bound to support Turkey in an offensive and unprovoked attack on it's neighbor.

I still cannot fathom why NATO allowed Turkey into that alliance to begin with, but then again neither can I fathom why NATO continues to exist now that the Warsaw Pact is no longer a "thing" for it to defend against.

I also believe Erdogan would love to see a resurgence of the Ottoman Empire and an expansion into Europe with him at it's head, but I believe he probably realizes that when he tries, Turkey will get squished like a bug. Still, the effort would certainly throw NATO into a tizzy, and might be the very thing to finally break it and let it die a natural death.

As BIAD said, Syria is a complicated issue. Overly complicated, I think. The US and her allies should NEVER have gone into Syria to begin with under te pretense it did. If you recall, we went in under Obama, who was arming and training insurgents in a bid to oust the lawful Syrian government. It was only later, after his efforts generated and propagated ISIS that mission-creep set in, and the "mission" was changed to one against ISIS - the same ISIS that Obama originally crated and supported with arms and training.

That's where the "way-too-complicated" part began, for the US at least. Throw in Turkey as a NATO nation, and it only gets worse. Has any one bothered to look at a map to determine exactly where Turkey sits in relation to the North Atlantic? No logical rationale for including Turkey in that alliance.

Now, the Turks certainly are a mean bunch, and they are horrific fighters, but the problem is they have a problem staying defensive, and go offensive far more than is warranted. Just ask an Armenian some time. Or a Kurd. Or an Austrian or Romanian, or just any of the dozens of nationalities Turks have tried to either wipe out or assimilate into their empire. Going all the way back to Vlad the Impaler in Wallachia - do you know how he got that name, WHOM he was impaling? Invading Ottoman Turks, and lots of them. Matter of fact, I don't know of anyone the Turks have ever gotten along well with, as far back in history as they have existed.

This latest event is just more of the same.

I believe the excuse of "we just wanna build refugee houses in Syria for the refugees" is a ruse, an excuse. Firstly, not all of those refugees are Syrian - why would Syria want to settle the Iranians and Afghans? Secondly, Turkey didn't have to take them - they could have defended their border instead, and turned the refugee tide back. they did not because they saw a good opportunity for a ruse and invited the trouble so they could create MORE trouble.

"Buffer zone" my ass. How 'bout they "buffer" somewhere else along the border? What? No Kurds to kill elsewhere? Oh my...

... and on life goes.

.



.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#6
@Ninurta 
You and BIAD have a Good Grasp on what is going on.
Mr. G.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#7
(10-14-2019, 11:24 PM)Ninurta Wrote: ...I believe the excuse of "we just wanna build refugee houses in Syria for the refugees" is a ruse, an excuse. Firstly, not all of those refugees are Syrian - why would Syria want to settle the Iranians and Afghans? Secondly, Turkey didn't have to take them - they could have defended their border instead, and turned the refugee tide back. they did not because they saw a good opportunity for a ruse and invited the trouble so they could create MORE trouble.

"Buffer zone" my ass...


Oh yes make no mistake, I too believe the 'social housing' is simpy a plan to obtain rights and -at a later date, the actual
land that the properties would sit on. If Erdogan's idea of a buffer zone for refugees had merit, then your own President
could do it on Mexican land and President Lopez Obrador might wonder why it hadn't been done sooner!

No, Erdogan -in my view is shoving a potential ethnic cleansing situation into a place that doesn't involve his own country
and even though the Peoples Protection Units (YPG) -an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers' Party agreed with the pact
made by the US to have a 'security mechanism' which was the zone on the Turkey/Syria border, I find it strange that as
soon as the US troops withdraw from monitoring it, all Hell kicks off.

Old blood takes a long time to dry and so with the excuse of 'neutralising terror threats against Turkey' and clearing a way
for the supposed repatriation of the Syrian/Afghan refugees..?!!, Erdogan ordered his forces -with assistance from some
allied Syrian rebels, to a ground assault of the area with hopes of clearing the remains of any ISIS remainers and the agreed
terrorist group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces.
So he said.

But an invasion is an invasion and so the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) -who had obtained autonomous administration
to govern the region with its two million people already living there, looked to the Syrian Government that recognised the
Kurdish control, for assistance.

There's no good side and bad side here, these people have always been at each other's throats and personally, I think the
US is best out of it.
minusculethumbsup

[Image: attachment.php?aid=6513]


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#8
Thumbs Up 
(10-15-2019, 09:42 AM)BIAD Wrote: Oh yes make no mistake, I too believe the 'social housing' is simpy a plan to obtain rights and -at a later date, the actual
land that the properties would sit on. If Erdogan's idea of a buffer zone for refugees had merit, then your own President
could do it on Mexican land and President Lopez Obrador might wonder why it hadn't been done sooner!

minusculebeercheers

I wonder how long it will take Trump to seize that idea? Maybe he's waiting to see how it goes for the Turks... or maybe he's waiting on the Mexican Army units he had Mexico place in the "Mexican buffer zone" to either go to sleep or go out to lunch...

Quote:No, Erdogan -in my view is shoving a potential ethnic cleansing situation into a place that doesn't involve his own country
and even though the Peoples Protection Units (YPG) -an offshoot of the Kurdistan Workers' Party agreed with the pact
made by the US to have a 'security mechanism' which was the zone on the Turkey/Syria border, I find it strange that as
soon as the US troops withdraw from monitoring it, all Hell kicks off.

Therein lies the rub, for me. I'm torn. I detest Turkey's habitual ethnic cleaning jaunts, but I also detest Socialists, and have no problem with the Turks wiping out Socialists - Kurdish or any other sort - entirely off the map of the Middle East. Turks, however, are not all that politically picky when it comes to genocide. So it bothers me, either way. YPG counts as "socialist", even "marxist-Leninist", but I'm not all for wiping out their women and children, too. Turkey has no problem with it. It's a tempest the US should never have gotten involved in to begin with, but there we were...

Quote:Old blood takes a long time to dry and so with the excuse of 'neutralising terror threats against Turkey' and clearing a way
for the supposed repatriation of the Syrian/Afghan refugees..?!!, Erdogan ordered his forces -with assistance from some
allied Syrian rebels, to a ground assault of the area with hopes of clearing the remains of any ISIS remainers and the agreed
terrorist group known as the Syrian Democratic Forces.
So he said.

Exactly - "so he said". I don't believe Erdogan wants to "clear out" ISIS. I believe he expects to ally with ISIS,  but is having trouble finding a clear path to do so given Turkey's supposed NATO alliance. Allying with ISIS is a no-go zone for him, yet he has a kinship to them - I haven't forgotten Turkey's creation of a porous border and assisting foreign fighters across to link up with ISIS during the creation and consolidation of the so-called "Caliphate".

Quote:But an invasion is an invasion and so the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) -who had obtained autonomous administration
to govern the region with its two million people already living there, looked to the Syrian Government that recognised the
Kurdish control, for assistance.

Wasn't the SDF among the factions that Obama sent troops, guns, and money to support AGAINST the Syrian government? I don't think they should realistically expect any help at all from Assad, given their history with him...

Quote:There's no good side and bad side here, these people have always been at each other's throats and personally, I think the
US is best out of it.
minusculethumbsup

[Image: attachment.php?aid=6513]

You know, that's usually the way of it in war. There rarely, if ever, are any "good guys" or "bad guys", there are just "guys", trying to energetically eliminate one another. "Good" and "bad" are usually determined at a later date, by the winning side. The US is definitely better off out of it, I just don't think they should have left ANY ISIS fighters alive when we bailed out. I've never been a big fan of leaving a live enemy behind yourself...

... and the Kurdish issue is a thorny one for me. I don't believe in genocide, but I don't believe in Socialism, either. I'm all for letting Turkey wipe out the Socialists, but not their women and children - and how does one tell just which ones are Socialists in the middle of a firefight? I'm pretty sure they don't wave their Socialist Membership cards at you, or hang them on the end of their gun barrels so you can tell whom is who...

Never should have allied with them to begin with, and then we wouldn't have to worry about the moral dilemma of stabbing them in the back and walking away.

.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#9
@Ninurta  "Wasn't the SDF among the factions that Obama sent troops, guns, and money to support AGAINST the Syrian government? I don't think they should realistically expect any help at all from Assad, given their history with him..."

To answer your question with One Word,,,,,, YES!
Quote:WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Barack Obama has signed a secret order authorizing U.S. support for rebels seeking to depose Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and his government, sources familiar with the matter said.



Obama’s order, approved earlier this year and known as an intelligence “finding,” broadly permits the CIA and other U.S. agencies to provide support that could help the rebels oust Assad.

This and other developments signal a shift toward growing, albeit still circumscribed, support for Assad’s armed opponents - a shift that intensified following last month’s failure of the U.N. Security Council to agree on tougher sanctions against the Damascus government.

Source

Google is trying very Hard To Burge all things the Shine A Negative Light Upon Obama and His Corrupt Administration.
These Links are getting harder find fine, Well The Truth is getting harder to find.
Once A Rogue, Always A Rogue!
[Image: attachment.php?aid=936]
Reply
#10
I decided to better educate myself, so I could tell which Kurds are which, and what the various factions politics are.

That was probably a mistake.

What I am finding is that there are so many factions you need a dance card to sort out all the dancers in this soire!

I am currently trying to build the dance card, and it's incredibly complicated. So complicated, in fact, that I am leaning towards an old, old statement - "kill 'em all, and let God sort 'em out". I am rapidly reaching the point where I don't care who kills who there, just as long as it's left an utter wasteland without so much as a blade of grass still standing.

In other words, at the moment I'm good with Turkey eliminating Kurds. I'm good with Kurds eliminating Turkey. I'm good with Syria and Russia eliminating the lot of 'em. I'm good with nuking the place, paving it over into a parking lot, and placing a McDonald's in the middle of the parking lot.

Just as long as the US watches the action from a safe and sane distance.

.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#11
It might be a fair idea to list the factions and offer their official ideals that they propose.
Since the lame-stream media like to add commentary, so should we! The difference is
that we're not out to convince an electorate for political gains.

I agree that other countries should stay out of it, but such a simplistic notion is always
countered by: "What happens when the fighting effects allies or even ourselves?"

I can appreciate the concerns and that's why instead of just assisting fellow-nations,
we infiltrated the powers of an unstable group and attempted to stifle them at their roots.
That's one of the main reasons security agencies were invented!
(Neither Guohua or Ninurta are obliged to comment at this point!!!)
tinywhat

Seriously, policing other nations has never went well and in my view, retains them in a
semi-religious/oppressive state where they struggle to flourish in a world of trusting accord
and self-development.

Adhering to archaic sectarian rules can be seen as a negative to most, but I believe most of
the harm is done due to the inability to understand the essence of an age-old 'command' and
apply it in a modern world with all its nuances.

And so when other nations -people who don't practice that particular faith, show their uneasiness
and wish to protect themselves ahead of possible troubles, they're seen as meddlers, the infidel
disrupting a private dispute and ironically bring the two foes together in order to expel the only
neutral party in the whole situation!

That probably explains why there's so many sects and off-shoots in that hot and arid area.
minusculethumbsup
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
#12
I was having a chat with some friends about what is going on in Syria.
There was a point made that I dont agree a 100% with but has caused me to think.
We dont understand the culture and for us to go there to try and bring our democracy and way of life is only making the wars longer and more bloody.
We should just let them sort it out and close the borders, it would cost less life s because the people there will never agree to our way of thinking or living. They will only use us to get what they want then turn on us
WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, THE EU IS FATHER AND MOTHER
Reply
#13
(10-16-2019, 08:43 AM)BIAD Wrote: It might be a fair idea to list the factions and offer their official ideals that they propose.
Since the lame-stream media like to add commentary, so should we! The difference is
that we're not out to convince an electorate for political gains.

I agree that other countries should stay out of it, but such a simplistic notion is always
countered by: "What happens when the fighting effects allies or even ourselves?"

I can appreciate the concerns and that's why instead of just assisting fellow-nations,
we infiltrated the powers of an unstable group and attempted to stifle them at their roots.
That's one of the main reasons security agencies were invented!
(Neither Guohua or Ninurta are obliged to comment at this point!!!)
tinywhat

Seriously, policing other nations has never went well and in my view, retains them in a
semi-religious/oppressive state where they struggle to flourish in a world of trusting accord
and self-development.

Adhering to archaic sectarian rules can be seen as a negative to most, but I believe most of
the harm is done due to the inability to understand the essence of an age-old 'command' and
apply it in a modern world with all its nuances.

And so when other nations -people who don't practice that particular faith, show their uneasiness
and wish to protect themselves ahead of possible troubles, they're seen as meddlers, the infidel
disrupting a private dispute and ironically bring the two foes together in order to expel the only
neutral party in the whole situation!

That probably explains why there's so many sects and off-shoots in that hot and arid area.
minusculethumbsup

That's what I tried to do - research the various factions and see what they say about themselves. Of course, they are going to present themselves in the best light possible, which is understandable. So we need a certain amount of "opposition research" to balance out the view. There is no shortage of that - what Kurds say about Turks, what Turks say about Kurds, what Kurds say about other Kurds, etc, and all of that is just as extremely slanted in the opposite direction as what the various factions say about themselves - in other words, the opposition is VERY opposed, and the truth is not in them, any more than it's in what folks are saying about their own side.

There is some unattached third party testimony, but it's difficult to ferret out above the noise of the opposing forces throwing accusations at one another. In the end, I believe a hands off policy which allows all the players to decimate one another is the best policy, and then we only have to deal with the victors, who aren't any better than the vanquished. It just leaves us with fewer folks to have to deal with is all. I've not seen so much opposition propaganda, and such STRONG propaganda, since the Balkans. Emotion certainly runs high! Like the Balkans, it's certain to devolve into an ethnic cleansing situation. At least that is the direction all the propaganda is pointing.

ALL of this started out as a Syrian civil war, a purely internal problem for Syria. We had NO business entering that fray, but Obama could not resist poking it with a stick, and THAT  was the genesis for it going "international", as well as the genesis of ISIS. The US poked at it, then Russia had to enter the fray, then Iran, and now Turkey. It has the makings of another really big war among disinterested parties if we keep poking at it, so Trump probably had the right idea in stepping away. I just wish he'd left piles of ISIS bodies to punctuate his last word. I have no problem at all killing off POWs if I know they are going to try to kill ME again once Turkey frees them. One thing for sure, once their dead, you don't have to watch your back for them any more.

In America, the Democrats have been ranting and raving against the Middle East wars, simply because they lay them at the feet of Bush and the Republicans, ignoring the fact that Obama is the one who generated this entire Syrian debacle. Now that we are stepping out of them, the Democrats have done a complete 180, and are agitating for MORE war in the Middle East, again simply because it was Trump and the Republicans who started walking away... compounded by the fact that we are leaving Leftists for dead, their Fellow Travelers. Obama went in to support a Left-wing coup against Assad, ISIS was generated out of that, and we trounced ISIS, then walked off, leaving the Leftists to fend for themselves - and the American Left is having a shit-hemorrhage over it. Suddenly the people they WERE bitching about are saints.

All of this because Assad promulgated laws requiring religious liberty in Syria, the local Muslim Brotherhood had a fit over that and started a civil war because Islam (with the MB leading, of course) could no longer run the show, and Obama decided that purely Syrian local matters were NOT purely Syrian if it worked against his Left-wing cronies. Item: it is illegal in Syria to form a political party along purely religious or ethnic lines. That is a fact. However, since it is working against the Left there, it is suddenly a Leftist problem, and "diversity" is no longer such a good thing in the eyes of the Left, as long as that lack of diversity is restricted to Syria, and works in favor of the Socialists.

"What happens when the fighting affects allies or even ourselves?" - my answer to that is that we trounce the problems ONLY at that point - when it affects US. As far as "allies" goes, I still believe it is a stretch to refer to Turkey as an "ally", particularly in light of recent events. Same goes for the Kurds - they were fighting this fight before most of us were in diapers, and will continue to do so in the future. They were "allies" only against ISIS, and when ISIS was slapped back to their corner, the alliance came to an end. Both should be left to continue their age-old war of attrition without our interference, because the fight is no longer ours.

We still have ISIS factions to eradicate in Afghanistan, the Philippines, North Africa, Indonesia, and other points. Just as I maintained that going into Iraq when we did was a bone-headed move when the fight was really against AQ in Afghanistan, the same is true now vis-a-vis Syria and various ISIS affiliates in the rest of the world. By getting embroiled in Syrian internal affairs, or Turkish, or Kurdish, we are taking our eye off the ball in play, which is ISIS. Back during the Bush era, we took our eyes away from AQ in Afghanistan to concentrate on a non-issue in Iraq, pouring our resources into a non-issue to the point of neglecting the real problem and starting a whole new war on a whole new front.

We should not repeat the same mistake again.

.
" I don't mind killin' a man in a fair fight... or if I think he's gonna start a fair fight... or if there's money involved... or a woman... "

 - Jayne Cobb, Hero of Canton
Reply
#14
I think Ninurta's analysis sums it up perfectly, a load of crazies in the desert we should steer clear of!

minusculeclap minusculeclap minusculeclap
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)