The Syrian Conflict Thread

[Solarion]

Syria intervention plan fueled by oil interests, not chemical weapon concern

These strategic concerns, motivated by fear of expanding Iranian influence, impacted Syria primarily in relation to pipeline geopolitics. In 2009 - the same year former French foreign minister Dumas alleges the British began planning operations in Syria - Assad refused to sign a proposed agreement with Qatar that would run a pipeline from the latter's North field, contiguous with Iran's South Pars field, through Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Syria and on to Turkey, with a view to supply European markets - albeit crucially bypassing Russia. An Agence France-Presse report claimed Assad's rationale was "to protect the interests of [his] Russian ally, which is Europe's top supplier of natural gas".

Short version: Assad protecting Russia's gas pipeline interests into Europe. Refuses to allow an oil pipeline from Saudi Arabia into Europe through his territory. Saudi Arabia and the US agree to break down Assad's regime through the funding and arming of Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...ack-war-intervention-oil-gas-energy-pipelines

 

[Unhappy438]

Short version: Assad protecting Russia's gas pipeline interests into Europe. Refuses to allow an oil pipeline from Saudi Arabia into Europe through his territory. Saudi Arabia and the US agree to break down Assad's regime through the funding and arming of Syrian Muslim Brotherhood.

You cant discount the drought and Assads reaction to the subsequent social unrest either. They are factors as well.

 

[Solarion]

You cant discount the drought and Assads reaction to the subsequent social unrest either. They are factors as well.

Oh I think there's no doubt about one thing, Assad has to go. He's a brutal dictator and the world would be better off without him.

 

[Grant]

He's a brutal dictator and the world would be better off without him.

not too sure about that.
it would seem most of the middle east population are only able to function with some semblance of normality under dictatorship - submission is the order of the day.

 

[Nanfeishen]

Oh I think there's no doubt about one thing, Assad has to go. He's a brutal dictator and the world would be better off without him.

If you were stupid enough to get involved in politics , then yes brutal , but if you kept out of it , life could be simple.

‘Run your own lives privately and enrich yourselves as you wish, but do not challenge my government.’

http://www.theatlantic.com/internat...yria-from-pre-civil-war-to-post-assad/281989/

Fair and simple.

 

[Dave]

Oh I think there's no doubt about one thing, Assad has to go. He's a brutal dictator and the world would be better off without him.

Was he worse than the Sauds? Or Kim Jong Un? Or a number of other autocratic dictators? It seems he was quite acceptable to most of the west until a certain point and the destabilisation that followed has seen a dramatic increase in brutality by all sides in Syria.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Oh I think there's no doubt about one thing, Assad has to go. He's a brutal dictator and the world would be better off without him.

without him ISIS would control all of Syria ... the world would then bet better off?

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

[video=youtube_share;C5RW_bIYTy0]https://youtu.be/C5RW_bIYTy0?t=45[/video]

Here's a soldier (45s into the clip) who wears "no boots", at least not "on the ground"

In other news: a buildup to retake Raqqa.

 

[Grant]

IS 'destroyed helicopters' at Russian base

Four helicopters and 20 lorries were destroyed in a series of fires inside the T4 base last week, the images from intelligence company Stratfor suggest.
The cause of the fires is unconfirmed.

The Russian military has denied reports that it had lost helicopters at the base as a result of an IS attack.
A news agency linked to IS, Amaq, was the first to report the incident, without saying what had caused the fires, says BBC Arabic Syria correspondent Rami Ruhayem.
"Burning of four Russian attack helicopters and 20 trucks loaded with missiles inside T4 airport in eastern Homs [province] as a result of a nearby fire," it said in an urgent report, leading to speculation that it could have been accidental.

On the same day, IS released an image it said showed one of its fighters firing Grad rockets at T4, also known as Tiyas.
"What the imagery tells us is that first of all this was not an accidental explosion, as some of the rumours kept saying," Stratfor military analyst Sim Tack said.
"It shows very clearly that there are several different sources of explosions across the airport, and it shows that the Russians took a quite a bad hit.
"An entire combat helicopter unit was wiped out - four helicopters in total - as well as some damage to some of the Syrian planes on the airport, and also very notably a logistic depot, likely one that was being used to supply those specific combat helicopters."

Mr Tack described Amaq's account as "very accurate", and suggested the helicopters and depot were destroyed by IS attacks.
He said it was unclear why IS had not officially said it had caused the destruction.
"In the past IS has claimed similar attacks, they have even videotaped the attacks themselves.
"In this case, we haven't seen any of those materials come out yet. One possibility is that by making the statement they were intending to claim it while not necessarily phrasing it that way."

Russian ministry of defence spokesman Igor Konashenkov insisted that "all Russian combat helicopters in Syrian Arab Republic continue their mission to destroy terrorists. There are no losses among the personnel".
He said the base had been damaged as a result of fighting between IS militants and Syrian army months before Russian military deployment there.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-36368346
video with satellite image in link

 

[Dave]

Poor security if it was IS.

 

[Grant]

Did ISIS attack Russian military equipment at key Syrian base?

Russia is denying reports that ISIS struck and destroyed a significant amount of its military equipment at an important military base in Syria.

A media outlet affiliated with the terror group claimed on May 15 that ISIS hit the strategic T4 base in central Syria between the cities of Homs and Palmyra.
The global intelligence firm Stratfor also released a series of images that purport to show damaged aircraft and supply depots at the base, which the group calls one of the "most important" in the country.
"The attack, and the considerable losses on the Russian side, stress the continued threat to supply lines for Russia and regime forces," Stratfor said.

Stratfor says the images show the damage incurred was likely not accidental.
"A range of separate locations within the airfield were targeted very accurately, with no sign of damage in the areas separating them," it said. "A single accidental explosion would not have been able to have this result."
In a statement emailed to CNN, Russia's Defense ministry denied that its forces came under attack, saying the satellite images show damage that "resulted from the battle for this airbase between Syrian government troops and rebels" and had "been there for a while."

"All Russian military helicopters that are currently in Syria are on the planned mission to destroy terrorists," the statement said. "[There have been] no losses among personnel at the Russian airbase."
Pentagon spokesman Col. Steve Warren told CNN it's unclear what happened.
"ISIS has claimed responsibility but we're not clear if it was them or if it was an accident," he said.
A U.S. defense official told CNN that it appeared to be an accident that caused a chain reaction of explosions and not the result of enemy action.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/25/middleeast/russia-base-syria/index.html

 

[Dave]

A U.S. defense official told CNN that it appeared to be an accident that caused a chain reaction of explosions and not the result of enemy action.

http://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/25/middleeast/russia-base-syria/index.html

So the US don't think it was IS then.

 

[Unhappy438]

The USA special forces are by far the best in the world, just 350 of them were able to take most of Northern Afghanistan. We should expect similar results against ISIS.

 

[Dave]

The USA special forces are by far the best in the world, just 350 of them were able to take most of Northern Afghanistan. We should expect similar results against ISIS.

When is your book out?

 

[Grant]

So the US don't think it was IS then.

that's what they seem to think. (cant really be trusted)
the russians say it never happened (cant really be trusted)
isis said it did (cannot be trusted at all)
stratfor seems to present a reasonable argument (the unknown entity)

who knows what happened

 

[Unhappy438]

When is your book out?

?

 

[Dave]

?

I thought you were running the basis of your new novel by here, some new adaption of Rambo lll...

Here you can probably even reuse the cover in your 350 Rambos take over Afghanistan novel. Just photoshop the bit about Stallone out.

View attachment 364562

 

[Dave]

that's what they seem to think. (cant really be trusted)
the russians say it never happened (cant really be trusted)
isis said it did (cannot be trusted at all)
stratfor seems to present a reasonable argument (the unknown entity)

who knows what happened

Pretty accurate summary there, though you missed one possibility. It was Rambo as part of the plot for Unhappy's new action adventure novel .

 

[Unhappy438]

I thought you were running the basis of your new novel by here, some new adaption of Rambo lll...

Here you can probably even reuse the cover in your 350 Rambos take over Afghanistan novel. Just photoshop the bit about Stallone out.

Not sure why you have reacted in such a salty manner to my comment, if you're think im talking nonsense go research "Operation Enduring Freedom".

 

[Unhappy438]

I will leave this here for you Dave

In 2001, the CIA's Special Activities Division units were the first U.S. forces to enter Afghanistan. Their efforts organized the Afghan Northern Alliance for the subsequent arrival of USSOCOM forces. The plan for the invasion of Afghanistan was developed by the CIA, the first time in United States history that such a large-scale military operation was planned by the CIA.[26] SAD, U.S. Army Special Forces and the Northern Alliance combined to overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan with minimal loss of U.S. lives. They did this without the need for U.S. military conventional ground forces.[27][28][29]

The Washington Post stated in an editorial by John Lehman in 2006:

"What made the Afghan campaign a landmark in the U.S. Military's history is that it was prosecuted by Special Operations forces from all the services, along with Navy and Air Force tactical power, operations by the Afghan Northern Alliance and the CIA were equally important and fully integrated. No large Army or Marine force was employed".[30]
In a 2008 New York Times book review of Horse Soldiers, a book by Doug Stanton about the invasion of Afghanistan, Bruce Barcott wrote:

"The valor exhibited by Afghan and American soldiers, fighting to free Afghanistan from a horribly cruel regime, will inspire even the most jaded reader. The stunning victory of the horse soldiers – 350 Special Forces soldiers, 100 C.I.A. officers and 15,000 Northern Alliance fighters routing a Taliban army 50,000 strong – deserves a hallowed place in American military history"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_activities_in_Afghanistan#Afghanistan_2001