Syria watch...

[3rdRock]

Labour have been dropping big hints that they will not oppose bombing ISIS in Syria.

The vote was only delayed because Labour wanted to elect a new leader first.

+1. Labour and the LibDem's are both in the political doldrums. They'll agree to anything in the foreseeable future.

[kenneal - lagger]

The world is reaping what the USA and its lackeys have sown. ... A phenomena whose origins go right back to Lawrence.

Have you forgotten The British imperialism in the middle east going back to the battle of the Nile under Lord Nelson in 1798 and not ending until well after WW2?

The Battle of the Nile displaced the French from Egypt so we rescued the Egyptians!!

[kenneal - lagger]

If you asked any of the governments in the Middle East if they have any objections to the US, the UK and any one else with an odd bomber spare going into their country to bomb the sh1t out of ISIS you would get only thanks and praise. Whether or not you are happy with those governments is an entirely different question.

[vtsnowedin]

The Battle of the Nile displaced the French from Egypt so we rescued the Egyptians!!

And a very ungrateful lot they have been sense.

[3rdRock]

If you asked any of the governments in the Middle East if they have any objections to the US, the UK and any one else with an odd bomber spare going into their country to bomb the sh1t out of ISIS you would get only thanks and praise.

Perhaps not.

There have been numerous reports in the press over the last couple of years regarding the support offered to ISIS by none other than our 'allies' in the Middle East, namely Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey.

[kenneal - lagger]

But when ISIS starts attacking them, which it will if allowed to carry on, they will be begging for support.

[3rdRock]

But when ISIS starts attacking them, which it will if allowed to carry on, they will be begging for support.

Of course and it will be another golden opportunity for UK plc to sell them some more military hardware.

Funny old world innit!

[PS_RalphW]

ISIS is the new Al Qaeda

The default organisation behind every murder and bomb in the Western world, even when there is no detectable evidence.

The latest lone wolf attack in the US by a US citizen Muslim where he killed 4 Marines before being shot, was initially called 'An act of domestic terrorism'.

Later that day, a US politician, said (paraphrase)

"This was not an act of domestic terrorism. It was an attack on the people of the USA by ISIS because they hate our freedom and democracy".

At the time, there was ZERO evidence to support that statement.

ISIS clearly had a lot of money behind them when they limited themselves to attacking Assad in Syria, and a lot of that came from Sunni Muslim nations, and some from the US/UK, as did a lot of their arms and training.

As so often happens, this tactic backfired big time.

[Little John]

Okay, given everything that has happened and given where the world is right now it is time to form as large a coalition as possible. This means Russia, Assad in Syria, the official Iraqi administration, the Kurds and the USA need to formally ally with one another and, if they do, then it is entirely possible to utterly defeat ISIS. Russia has already recently formally made this specific proposal. But, you would never know it given the virtually complete lack of coverage of that proposal. In short, it appears that the West, led as usual by USA foreign policy, are content to see ISIS become ever more consolidated rather than step back from trying to unseat Assad and/or co-operate with Russia and, in doing so, normalise Russia's existence on the world stage.

[kenneal - lagger]

Adding Turkey to that list would help alot but would be difficult given there enmity with the Kurds.

[biffvernon]

Nafeez Ahmed:

http://www.middleeasteye.net/columns/gu ... -889890058

[kenneal - lagger]

That is no surprise as the Gulf State rulers are Sunni and Assad is Shia.

[raspberry-blower]

That is no surprise as the Gulf State rulers are Sunni and Assad is Shia.

Bashar Al-Assad is Alwaite - there are different branches of Shia Islam, Ken.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alawites

Meanwhile, The Saker has this to say about President Assad:

Another doubt which I used to have in the past was this: would Assad have the wisdom to listen to the Russians and the Iranians or is he a megalomaniac who will listen to nobody? Clearly, listen he did. Had he not, the Russians would never commit their support the way they are doing now. Sure, the Russians are not saying that Assad is indispensable, that it is for the Syrian people to decide, but that is also the politically correct way of backing Assad since they are convinced that the Syrians do want him. Besides, what the Russians are really saying when they say that “it is for the Syrian people to decide” is that it is NOT for the “Friends of Syria” or any other part of the “Axis of Kindness” to decide. In other words: screw you – US/NATO/EU/etc. So for all the diplomatic circumlocutions about the future of Syria the reality is that Assad has the full backing of the Kremlin.

Finally, what I see is that the Russians are clearly “pushing” Assad towards the front stage again. This is, I think, the real purpose of this interview: to promote Assad as a man who can negotiate, who will listen and who is above all a “principled pragmatist”.

President Assad has been elected with a far more convincing mandate than any Western leader will ever achieve. THE WEST HAS NO LEGITIMATE GROUNDS TO INSIST ON "REGIME CHANGE" - IF ANYTHING ASSAD SHOULD BE INSISTING ON "REGIME CHANGE" IN FRANCE AND THE UK.


We might get somewhere if the latter is the case

[kenneal - lagger]

That is no surprise as the Gulf State rulers are Sunni and Assad is Shia.

Bashar Al-Assad is Alwaite - there are different branches of Shia Islam, Ken.

He and his fellow Alawites are still considered heretics by Sunnis and should therefore be killed according to IS.

[AutomaticEarth]

It just got announced that Russia will be carrying out airstrikes in support of Assad if the UN sanctions them. I wonder how we'll respond?