Cyprus-Forum.com

[Robin Hood]

TD:

There's a lot of talk just now about the new draft Syrian constitution that the Russians are supposedly working on, and the word is that they are actually cooperating with the Americans on it. There is also talk of Raqqa becoming part of a new Kurdish entity (perhaps destined to be an American puppet), a prospect which the people of Raqqa - if the Raqqa is being Slaughtered Silently web site is to be believed - do not in any way welcome. Just talk. But, all little pointers as to the existence of a deal behind the scenes.

As this conflict has progressed since last year, when the Russians entered the fray, it is very evident that it is mainly their actions that have bought about the progress that has been made to date and I am sure that behind the scenes the US is aware of it too. But the Russians are not rubbing the Americans noses in the Russian success as the Russians play everything very low key. In fact there are virtually no articles in the Russian Media that suggest that the US/NATO coalition is in any way the losing ‘partner’. In fact the Russians still refer to the US/NATO as ‘their partner’s’ so they are very conscious that if there is to be cooperation then the US cannot be seen to be side lined or belittled.

I am positive there is a lot of background communication and cooperation that we are not aware of but the US do not want to be seen to be dancing to the tunes called by Putin. However it would be foolish to believe that he is not in the commanding position. But, to give the Russians their dues, they refrain from crowing about it as it just isn’t their style. We see a plethora of US Senators and Congressmen on TV putting their views to their public but apart from Putin/Lavrov and the occasional minister, you do not see that on Russian TV or news sites.

Isn’t partition what the Israeli’s are pushing for and is the core of Kerry’s Plan ‘B’?

I still believe that Putin will stick to his conception of a settlement and that it will be the Syrian people that will make the decision, not the US or even Russia. That has always made perfect sense to me! Even the US has dropped the ‘Assad must go' demand........ well in those specific words, they have transposed that for ‘transition’ which of course is the same as saying ‘regime change’, but I don’t think that will happen irrespective of what the ‘WE’ want!

But it certainly is a complex situation.

[supporttheunderdog]

See my post in the War on Syria thread.

All I can say is that I think there a few goodguys in the Syrian fight, when it comes to being either active as pro or anti Assad, withthe exception of the majority of the civilian population who just want a reasonable safe life. My own limited ulnderstanding was that as despots went Assad was no worse than any and better than many..ruthless with obvious opponents but not too capricious in victimising any group. His likely main fault as far as the USA was concerned was that he was anti isreali and openly supported Hezzbollah, which put him in the axis of evil. American foreign policy in the region has been a disgrace, hypocritical in the extreme in supporting various despotic rulers, and casting them off once a better option came along. Few of the benefits of the American way of life filtered through, hence serious local distrust of the USA at all levels.

Regime change through eg the last Iraq war and the Arab Spring has not been a success, mainly because there has been no credible successor with enough local support to properlly fill the space left by the departing regime. That is always a recipe for disaster. That is demonstrated in Syria by the factionalised nature of the opposition and tgat Assad retained suffucient support to survive.

The Americans might be begining to appreciate the meaning of tbe saying, "better the devil you know".

Partition is a possibility. Whther thst is on the cards, I do not know, but one may end up with Kurdish autonomous region, as in Iraq. That raises many possibiliies, not all goid.

[Tim Drayton]

Another possible reason for the need to take territory from Daesh north of Raqqa is that Daesh keep on launching assaults on PYD-controlled areas from there. It seems that the people of Raqqa will not view Kurdish forces as being liberators, which complicates things. Yes, there are reports of leaflets being dropped heralding the coming liberation and urging civilians to get out. We will see. The liberation of Falluja in Iraq seems to be going well at the moment, although it is not over, so it will be good to hit them on another major front. I get the feeling Daesh will be history as this year ends.

[Tim Drayton]

See my post in the War on Syria thread.

All I can say is that I think there a few goodguys in the Syrian fight, when it comes to being either active as pro or anti Assad, withthe exception of the majority of the civilian population who just want a reasonable safe life. My own limited ulnderstanding was that as despots went Assad was no worse than any and better than many..ruthless with obvious opponents but not too capricious in victimising any group. His likely main fault as far as the USA was concerned was that he was anti isreali and openly supported Hezzbollah, which put him in the axis of evil. American foreign policy in the region has been a disgrace, hypocritical in the extreme in supporting various despotic rulers, and casting them off once a better option came along. Few of the benefits of the American way of life filtered through, hence serious local distrust of the USA at all levels.

Regime change through eg the last Iraq war and the Arab Spring has not been a success, mainly because there has been no credible successor with enough local support to properlly fill the space left by the departing regime. That is always a recipe for disaster. That is demonstrated in Syria by the factionalised nature of the opposition and tgat Assad retained suffucient support to survive.

The Americans might be begining to appreciate the meaning of tbe saying, "better the devil you know".

Partition is a possibility. Whther thst is on the cards, I do not know, but one may end up with Kurdish autonomous region, as in Iraq. That raises many possibiliies, not all goid.

I take your point. For those of us who believe the USA and other Western powers were at least instrumental in bringing Erdoğan to power in Turkey, and looking at his dictatorial leanings, it is pretty hypocritical for them to demand that a dictator like Assad go.

[Paphitis]

Another possible reason for the need to take territory from Daesh north of Raqqa is that Daesh keep on launching assaults on PYD-controlled areas from there. It seems that the people of Raqqa will not view Kurdish forces as being liberators, which complicates things. Yes, there are reports of leaflets being dropped heralding the coming liberation and urging civilians to get out. We will see. The liberation of Falluja in Iraq seems to be going well at the moment, although it is not over, so it will be good to hit them on another major front. I get the feeling Daesh will be history as this year ends.

I think Raqqa is next because the Coalition have been bombing the outskirts for months now.

Coalition backed forces are just to the south and they are taking villages to the north already. So it looks like things are going pretty well.

There are also Syriac Arab Forces within the SDF, not just Kurdish. The Coalition will be eager to play it right and not upset the Sunnis or the Kurds. This alliance they are forming is proving invaluable but we don't want to get the people of Raqqa offside.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-25/u ... qa/7444978

Well it looks like Coalition Forces will enter Raqqa soon enough without any Russian involvement as far as I can tell. Just puts things into perspective as to who really is control here, when the Coalition will liberate the so called ISIL Capital.

If the Russians want to play nice, they will have to play by our rules otherwise they can watch on the sidelines.

[Paphitis]

It's a bloody amazing accomplishment how the West has been able to construct a lethal fighting force from various militias and form the SDF and that they are now apparently strong enough to take villages and launch an assault on Raqqa. Pretty damn incredible if you ask me.

Even though many of the SDF's elements are Kurdish, I think the creation of the SDF was a very crafty Master Stroke from the West.

[Robin Hood]

It's a bloody amazing accomplishment how the West has been able to construct a lethal fighting force from various militias and form the SDF and that they are now apparently strong enough to take villages and launch an assault on Raqqa. Pretty damn incredible if you ask me.

Even though many of the SDF's elements are Kurdish, I think the creation of the SDF was a very crafty Master Stroke from the West.

Yes a magnificent achievement ..... but then of course, they have had plenty of practice in creating 'irregular' militias, more commonly known as terrorists'!

[Paphitis]

See my post in the War on Syria thread.

All I can say is that I think there a few goodguys in the Syrian fight, when it comes to being either active as pro or anti Assad, withthe exception of the majority of the civilian population who just want a reasonable safe life. My own limited ulnderstanding was that as despots went Assad was no worse than any and better than many..ruthless with obvious opponents but not too capricious in victimising any group. His likely main fault as far as the USA was concerned was that he was anti isreali and openly supported Hezzbollah, which put him in the axis of evil. American foreign policy in the region has been a disgrace, hypocritical in the extreme in supporting various despotic rulers, and casting them off once a better option came along. Few of the benefits of the American way of life filtered through, hence serious local distrust of the USA at all levels.

Regime change through eg the last Iraq war and the Arab Spring has not been a success, mainly because there has been no credible successor with enough local support to properlly fill the space left by the departing regime. That is always a recipe for disaster. That is demonstrated in Syria by the factionalised nature of the opposition and tgat Assad retained suffucient support to survive.

The Americans might be begining to appreciate the meaning of tbe saying, "better the devil you know".

Partition is a possibility. Whther thst is on the cards, I do not know, but one may end up with Kurdish autonomous region, as in Iraq. That raises many possibiliies, not all goid.

I take your point. For those of us who believe the USA and other Western powers were at least instrumental in bringing Erdoğan to power in Turkey, and looking at his dictatorial leanings, it is pretty hypocritical for them to demand that a dictator like Assad go.

I see things a little different.

The US has proven to be quite flexible during the Arab Spring and if you remember, it had allowed Mubarak to fall in Egypt. Not that this has proven to be a success, but it is what the Egyptians wanted for better or worse.

This was not in America's interests, as Mubarak was always a pretty loyal poodle in the region. Unless Mubarak did something to irritate the Americans.

The Spring took off with wild fire in many countries, and it will occur again down the track. The US was quite happy to sit it out and would still not be in Syria if it were not for Islamic State's taunts against the "imperialist" Americans. Islamic State was poking the Bear for a long time, until Obama finally decided to do something about the audacious prodding and taunts against America's might.

[miltiades]

General Plonker writes:

"The Coalition will not cooperate with Assad under any circumstances whatsoever. We do not recognize the legitimacy of the Syrian Government until a political solution is achieved and transition occurs."

How on earth do you know that the coalition will not cooperate with Assad ? Such stupid comments might be accepted by some but no to me Plonker. Whow on earth can you say that " WE DO NOT RECOGNIZE. .....
Who the hell is this " WE "
YOU ARE MAKING A FOOL OF YOUR SELF ON THE VERY THREAD THAT EXPOSED YOU WITHOUT A SINGLE SUPPORTER.
Your assessment on the Syrian conflict is ludicrous and damn right stupid. Now, get it in your childish head. Its not YOUR coalition, its not YOUR decision whether the coalition does business or not with Assad.

[supporttheunderdog]

See my post in the War on Syria thread.

All I can say is that I think there a few goodguys in the Syrian fight, when it comes to being either active as pro or anti Assad, withthe exception of the majority of the civilian population who just want a reasonable safe life. My own limited ulnderstanding was that as despots went Assad was no worse than any and better than many..ruthless with obvious opponents but not too capricious in victimising any group. His likely main fault as far as the USA was concerned was that he was anti isreali and openly supported Hezzbollah, which put him in the axis of evil. American foreign policy in the region has been a disgrace, hypocritical in the extreme in supporting various despotic rulers, and casting them off once a better option came along. Few of the benefits of the American way of life filtered through, hence serious local distrust of the USA at all levels.

Regime change through eg the last Iraq war and the Arab Spring has not been a success, mainly because there has been no credible successor with enough local support to properlly fill the space left by the departing regime. That is always a recipe for disaster. That is demonstrated in Syria by the factionalised nature of the opposition and tgat Assad retained suffucient support to survive.

The Americans might be begining to appreciate the meaning of tbe saying, "better the devil you know".

Partition is a possibility. Whther thst is on the cards, I do not know, but one may end up with Kurdish autonomous region, as in Iraq. That raises many possibiliies, not all goid.

I take your point. For those of us who believe the USA and other Western powers were at least instrumental in bringing Erdoğan to power in Turkey, and looking at his dictatorial leanings, it is pretty hypocritical for them to demand that a dictator like Assad go.

America has long been selective in the dictatorial regimes they chose to support and doubly hypocrtical by imposing dictators where they are concerned that an alternative with better democratic credentials may not toe their line.