The Syrian Conflict Thread

Besides the Kurds, Turkey would essentially be fighting Russia, Syria and the US if he invaded Kurdish area.

Seems I missed a busy day on one of the more significant threads :(

One thing on the Turkey invasion front though; I highly doubt Turkey would be fighting the US if they invaded. The US has been overly lenient towards Turkey's actions all the way and only lightly condemned certain actions directly and also indirectly via Nato.

They just never convinced me that they're serious about reigning Erdogan in, hence I doubt they'd fight against Turkey, more likely implement some sanctions or just keep condemning his actions.

As for the likelihood of an invasion ... hard to call, if peace talks progress fast enough their opportunity might fade, if it falls apart, Russia just left the door wide open for Turkey to make a mistake imo
 
Source: http://www.timeslive.co.za/world/2016/03/23/No-foreign-powers-should-have-say-in-Syria-peace-talks-Damascus

"When we say that the dialogue must be between Syrians, without outside intervention, this also applies to the Russians and Americans," Bashar al-Jaafari told AFP in an interview.

His comments came as US Secretary of State John Kerry was heading to Moscow for talks with President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, hoping to build momentum for the Syrian peace drive.

Negotiations in Geneva, entering their 10th day Wednesday, were rattled last week by Russia's surprise decision to withdraw most of its troops from Syria, a move experts have said could help the peace drive by weakening Assad's position.

But Jaafari, who serves as Syria's ambassador to the UN in New York and as the lead government negotiator in the talks, said that believing that Moscow can pressure its historic ally in Damascus amounted to a "misreading" of the situation.
 
Pentagon: ISIS finance minister killed

The Pentagon said Friday that it had killed ISIS' finance minister, Abd al-Rahman Mustafa al-Qaduli, whom many analysts consider the group's No. 2 leader.

Those analysts believe al-Qaduli would have been expected to take control of the day-to-day running of ISIS, also called ISIL, if its leader, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, was killed or incapacitated.
The U.S. operation was intended to capture him alive, a U.S. official told CNN. Helicopters loaded with special operations forces swooped in on a vehicle carrying al-Qaduli, but at the last moment something happened that caused them to decide to fire on the vehicle instead. The official would not say what it was that caused them to modify the plan.
Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced the death at a news conference Friday morning.
"We are systematically eliminating ISIL's cabinet," Carter said, adding it was "the second senior ISIL leader we've successfully targeted this month."
Explaining the significance of this particular figure, Carter noted, "We've taken out the leader who oversees the funding for ISIL's operations, hurting their ability to pay fighters and hire recruits."

Asked whether the U.S. was turning the corner on the fight against ISIS, Carter responded, "We're certainly gathering momentum and we're seeing that that momentum is having an effect."
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Joseph Dunford, appearing alongside Carter, agreed that the U.S.-led coalition was gaining momentum, but he cautioned: "By no means would I say that we're about to break the back of ISIL or that the fight is over."
Carter also connected Friday's announcement to the terror attacks in Europe that ISIS has undertaken, including a mass killing in Brussels on Tuesday.
http://edition.cnn.com/2016/03/25/politics/isis-no-2-in-command-killed-u-s-believes/
 
I'm sure they'll provide credible evidence to confirm it then.

Like what? If this guy isn't dead ISIS will parade him around and the USA will have egg on their face. Making a false claim doesn't serve the US' interests. Perhaps you can prove me wrong but they have a good track record of these high profile targets being dead when they announce it like this.

So if we don't hear anything from ISIS in the next day or two we can be 100% certain he's dead.
 
In Syria, militias armed by the Pentagon fight those armed by the CIA

Syrian militias armed by different parts of the U.S. war machine have begun to fight each other on the plains between the besieged city of Aleppo and the Turkish border, highlighting how little control U.S. intelligence officers and military planners have over the groups they have financed and trained in the bitter five-year-old civil war.

The fighting has intensified over the last two months, as CIA-armed units and Pentagon-armed ones have repeatedly shot at each other while maneuvering through contested territory on the northern outskirts of Aleppo, U.S. officials and rebel leaders have confirmed.

In mid-February, a CIA-armed militia called Fursan al Haq, or Knights of Righteousness, was run out of the town of Marea, about 20 miles north of Aleppo, by Pentagon-backed Syrian Democratic Forces moving in from Kurdish-controlled areas to the east.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middleeast/la-fg-cia-pentagon-isis-20160327-story.html
 
Assault on Palmyra

[video=youtube;Lcwnmyjogws]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lcwnmyjogws&feature=youtu.be[/video]
 
Like what? If this guy isn't dead ISIS will parade him around and the USA will have egg on their face. Making a false claim doesn't serve the US' interests. Perhaps you can prove me wrong but they have a good track record of these high profile targets being dead when they announce it like this.

So if we don't hear anything from ISIS in the next day or two we can be 100% certain he's dead.
You seem to be taking things amiss.

So I tell you what:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...instream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia

There's 3 clips on that link. Watch them from start to finish and then explain to me why I shouldn't regard what passes for "news" these days with deep suspicion, and why the entire mass media establishment is not utterly corrupt.
 
You seem to be taking things amiss.

So I tell you what:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-...instream-media-completely-fake-we-all-lie-cia

There's 3 clips on that link. Watch them from start to finish and then explain to me why I shouldn't regard what passes for "news" these days with deep suspicion, and why the entire mass media establishment is not utterly corrupt.

Why is Zerohedge trying to pass off news from 2014 as current? Also what proof does this Dr. Ulfakatte have? Why don't you question any of that?
 
Why is Zerohedge trying to pass off news from 2014 as current? Also what proof does this Dr. Ulfakatte have? Why don't you question any of that?
I asked for an explanation, not questions.

I don't see Zerohedge trying to pass off "old news" as current.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/world-...s-mainstream-media-is-completely-fake/5516749

You can see the date of the globalresearch article they linked to with the same content. Zerohedge then went and provided other sources that back up similar claims.

And I see no reason to focus solely on his testimony when I also gave two other corroborating sources, when the CIA's operation mockingbird is a matter of record, and media bias is par for the course. If you want to exclude the others, then you should substantiate why.

And I don't take kindly to the insinuation that I don't question the German's testimony. I question everything as a matter of course. That's precisely the point here.
 
Last edited:
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X