Invading Syria (Iraq 2). Yay or nay?

[Horatio Parker]

Redrawing the map around the Sunni/Shiite/Kurd divides might help. But I don't see Turkey, Saudia Arabia, and Iran being thrilled unless they get to help draw the lines. Turkey and the Kurds might be the biggest stumbling block.

Yup. Kurds are an issue. I'd favor a creation of a Kurdistan, but Turkey might not be too keen on the idea. Perhaps one way to sell it to them is that they could offer incentives for their Kurdish minority to emigrate. Erdogan would probably like that. But obviously there is no simple issue and each solution has problems that are created. There is not going to be a solution that satisfies everyone, and it is not likely that violence is going to be completely eliminated in the region.

SLD

I think Kurdistan is a deal breaker for the Turks. Which is a pity. Not only are they effective against IS, they're friendly to us and, to top it off, they're, the YPG anyway, practicing representative democracy, which we're always prating on about.

 

[SLD]

I also think that it would not be particularly difficult to go into the area and clean out ISIS. I suspect with out NATO allies (maybe some Russian support since they'll insist on participating) we could send in about 4 or 5 divisions and take care of business relatively quickly. Of course it's not the initial invasion that creates problems. I also would add that Bush's mistake was more in the nature of not going in with international support, not simply going in. Now that we have the support of the world I think it would be a very different outcome than our original Iraqi invasion. I fear Obama is too wedded to previous problems to go in there. History though rarely really repeats itself. The situation is very different as a result of the rise of ISIS. We don't recognize ISIS as a state, but it is - at least de facto, albeit not de jure. That actually makes it easier to defeat. We should also realize that ISIS is not necessarily supported by those people it controls. It's composed mostly of foreign fighters who have now lorded over their underlings, taking the best villas, raping and killing at random. That's why we have a refugee problem. The Sunnis did not in the end have much support for Al Qaeda in Iraq, and I suspect once we go in and clean house support for ISIS will quickly wane. But like all things in the middle east, predictions are extremely difficult. But still I say it can and should be done.

Then we can move on to the real threats that face us.

SLD

- - - Updated - - -

Yup. Kurds are an issue. I'd favor a creation of a Kurdistan, but Turkey might not be too keen on the idea. Perhaps one way to sell it to them is that they could offer incentives for their Kurdish minority to emigrate. Erdogan would probably like that. But obviously there is no simple issue and each solution has problems that are created. There is not going to be a solution that satisfies everyone, and it is not likely that violence is going to be completely eliminated in the region.

SLD

I think Kurdistan is a deal breaker for the Turks. Which is a pity. Not only are they effective against IS, they're friendly to us and, to top it off, they're, the YPG anyway, practicing representative democracy, which we're always prating on about.

Erdogan is a dick for sure. Maybe we just have to shove it down his throat. He's another middle east dictator (semi one at least) who ought to go.

SLD

 

[Will Wiley]

Keep bombing the ISIS oil smugglers.
Putin “Names And Shames” Obama Into Bombing Islamic State Oil Smugglers

The U.S. claims it wants to hit the Islamic State but in one year of bombing it never really touched one of its biggest sources of income. Hundreds of oil tanker trucks are waiting every day at IS distribution points to smuggle oil to Turkey and elsewhere. Only one such distribution point was ever bombed and that attack was by the Iraqi air force.

Now the Russian President Putin played some “name and shame” at the G-20 meeting in Turkey and, lo and behold, the problem gets solved.

Leave Assad in power, and stop lying about Assad using chemical weapons on his own people.
The Collapsing Syria-Sarin Case

Basically let them sort it out and stop the failed policy of "regime change". But as we played such a big part in ISIS being there , at
least cut of their income.

 

[Jingi walla]

Support Assad for the time being

 

[iolo]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

a five-minute primer:

http://www.vox.com/2015/10/14/9525469/syrias-war-a-5-minute-history

Something important you'll notice: As more outside groups get involved in the war, each escalates by backing their side, and then a rival will also get involved to back the other side. So what you have is not just the Syrian factions escalating but regional and global powers escalating as well, thus worsening the war and entrenching Syria's divisions.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

Yeah, I think Iraq falling apart is an inevitability. I think whatever operation we do in Syria also needs to include a solution for Iraq. I think we all want to have the Kurds on "our side". Of all the sides in this conflict they seem to be the only side fighting for a government we can actually support.

But that would inevitably turn, what is left of, Iraq and Turkey against "us". So that will need a delicate diplomatic hand. We don't want Iraq to want to be annexed by Iran. That would be bad.

I'm also on team Kurdistan. They have my vote of confidence.

 

[SLD]

Support Assad for the time being

Supporting Assad will not alleviate the problem in the slightest. And it's not because Assad is a fucking dick asshole. He is. The real problem with Assad is that he is an Alawite Shiite, and the people he seeks to rule are Sunni. Supporting Assad will only make things worse. What it is time to recognize is that there is no Syria. there is no Iraq. We cannot continue to support European imperialistic drawn borders in a region where people simply refuse to recognize them and refuse to support the idea that they are Syrian or Iraqi, but instead identify as Sunni or Shia. It's that failure to recognize the problem that is the problem.

SLD

 

[SLD]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

Yeah, I think Iraq falling apart is an inevitability. I think whatever operation we do in Syria also needs to include a solution for Iraq. I think we all want to have the Kurds on "our side". Of all the sides in this conflict they seem to be the only side fighting for a government we can actually support.

But that would inevitably turn, what is left of, Iraq and Turkey against "us". So that will need a delicate diplomatic hand. We don't want Iraq to want to be annexed by Iran. That would be bad.

I'm also on team Kurdistan. They have my vote of confidence.

Iraq already is annexed by Iran - or at least that's what its "elected" government wants and views itself as. Supporting Assad is creating a huge Shia controlled area (granted they can't control the territory), and only inflames the situation even worse. It's time to recognize on the one hand the legitimate aspirations of the Sunni Muslims who occupy large swaths of Iraq and Syria - the vast majority of whom do not support ISIS (composed mostly of foreign fighters) nor wish to be confrontational with the West. Failure to do so is what is causing this problem.

SLD

 

[Jayjay]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

And what happens if and when the Syrian government has dealt with the other rebels and turns against the Kurds?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

And what happens if and when the Syrian government has dealt with the other rebels and turns against the Kurds?

Then we attack the Syrian government for being evil and change the subject whenever anybody points out that we used to be their ally.

 

[funinspace]

And what happens if and when the Syrian government has dealt with the other rebels and turns against the Kurds?

Then we attack the Syrian government for being evil and change the subject whenever anybody points out that we used to be their ally.

Or not...well we should at least wait a few years ignoring it, so we can be consistent, then we can change sides...
http://www.commondreams.org/views/2007/10/26/united-states-and-kurds-brief-history

For example, in the mid-1970s, in conjunction with the dictatorial Shah of Iran, the United States goaded Iraqi Kurds into launching an armed uprising against the then left-leaning Iraqi government with the promise of continued military support. However, the United States abandoned them precipitously as part of an agreement with the Baghdad regime for a territorial compromise favorable to Iran regarding the Shatt al-Arab waterway. Suddenly without supply lines to obtain the necessary equipment to defend themselves, the Iraqi army marched into Kurdish areas and thousands were slaughtered. Then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger dismissed concerns about the humanitarian consequences of this betrayal by saying that "Covert action should not be confused with missionary work."

The 1980s

The uprising by Iraqi Kurds against the central government in Baghdad resumed in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War, led by guerrillas of the Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP) and the Patriotic Union of Kurdistan (PUK.) Strong Iranian support for the PUK made virtually all Kurds potential traitors in the eyes of Saddam Hussein's regime, which responded with savage repression. In the latter part of the decade, in what became known as the Anfal campaign, as many as 4,000 Kurdish villages were destroyed, more than 100,000 Kurdish civilians were killed and more than one million Iraqi Kurds--nearly one-quarter of the Iraqi Kurdish population--were displaced.

Despite this, the United States increased its support for Saddam Hussein's regime during this period, providing agricultural subsidies and other economic aid as well as limited military assistance. American officials looked the other way as much of these funds were laundered by purchasing military equipment despite widespread knowledge that it was being deployed as part of Baghdad's genocidal war against the Kurds. The United States also sent an untold amount of indirect aid--largely through Kuwait and other Arab countries--which enabled Iraq to receive weapons and technology to increase its war-making capacity.

The March 1988 Iraqi attacks on the Kurdish town of Halabja--where Iraq government forces massacred upwards to 5,000 civilians by gassing them with chemical weapons--was downplayed by the Reagan administration, even to the point of leaking phony intelligence claiming that Iran, then the preferred American enemy, was actually responsible.

 

[fast]

Unless we commit ourselves to an expensive, large, sustained occupying force, with fast, mobile units to counter flare ups, we're not going to see a whole lot of improvement.

I've made other commitments, sorry.

 

[Nexus]

For everyone advocating going to war, keep us updated after you enlist. It takes great integrity to risk all and fight for what one believes is right. And while I don't share your view that we should go to war in Syria I will respect your conviction put into action.

I wish you a safe journey in this next chapter in you life.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Unless we commit ourselves to an expensive, large, sustained occupying force, with fast, mobile units to counter flare ups, we're not going to see a whole lot of improvement.

My issue with this is I don't trust the U.S. military to do anything, especially in the middle east, after what happened with Iraq. And I'm not confident that the solution is that simple, because it's an incredibly complex issue which seemingly becomes even more complex when intervention occurs.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

For everyone advocating going to war, keep us updated after you enlist. It takes great integrity to risk all and fight for what one believes is right. And while I don't share your view that we should go to war in Syria I will respect your conviction put into action.

I wish you a safe journey in this next chapter in you life.

Oh, you misunderstand. Many of those advocating war are upper class white people. They realize that there is more to an army than just the fighters and that the armchair generals sitting safely thousands of miles away from any battle are just as important to the war effort as the frontline soldiers are.

 

[fast]

For everyone advocating going to war, keep us updated after you enlist. It takes great integrity to risk all and fight for what one believes is right. And while I don't share your view that we should go to war in Syria I will respect your conviction put into action.

I wish you a safe journey in this next chapter in you life.

reminds me of this quote:

Capt. Miller: Ah, well, in that case, I'd say this is an excellent mission, sir, with an extremely valuable objective, sir, worthy of my best efforts, sir. Moreover, I feel heartfelt sorrow for the mother of Private James Ryan and am willing to lay down my life, and the lives of my men — especially you, Reiben — to ease her suffering

 

[braces_for_impact]

Unless we commit ourselves to an expensive, large, sustained occupying force, with fast, mobile units to counter flare ups, we're not going to see a whole lot of improvement.

My issue with this is I don't trust the U.S. military to do anything, especially in the middle east, after what happened with Iraq. And I'm not confident that the solution is that simple, because it's an incredibly complex issue which seemingly becomes even more complex when intervention occurs.

I agree. The problem too is we would need a large force and we can't keep sending in the same people that have been there fighting already. We'd need a draft. I don't see anyone getting on board with that. It would also be hideously expensive and very long term.

 

[arkirk]

Unless we commit ourselves to an expensive, large, sustained occupying force, with fast, mobile units to counter flare ups, we're not going to see a whole lot of improvement.

My issue with this is I don't trust the U.S. military to do anything, especially in the middle east, after what happened with Iraq. And I'm not confident that the solution is that simple, because it's an incredibly complex issue which seemingly becomes even more complex when intervention occurs.

It is possible I suppose for some kind of intervention to occur somewhere on the planet that would be supported by altruistic thinking. All this war shit is is shit. There is essentially no way to accomplish anything but destruction with war. When we MAKE WAR we MAKE DESTRUCTION and a cause nothing but suffering. We have to conclude that we cannot solve their problems whether or not they can solve them. We should be willing to relate to peoples all over the world only on a mutual altruistic basis...anything else no country should volunteer for. That included this ISIS matter. I hate to sound calloused but the reality is brutal. The more we do in the ME, the more there is to fix up later and there are not enough educated and capable people to do the fixing, especially after we kill off all of their young.
There is NO SEPARATING THE "ENEMY" from the civilian population. We are the alien force there...us and the ignorance we have fostered destroying all their educational capacity to a point where ISIS runs the schools. Withdrawal from the region will lead to a very short, intense contest for power in power vacuum we have created. That will lead to the realization the ISIS or whoever the winner is does not have the administrative know how to run a country. It will eventually settle out with people of far more prosaic backgrounds if we haven't already killed too many of these people. Our mistake is that Bush and his kind, including Obama make a case that we are somehow the policemen of the world and must be the police. Occupiers make lousey police as their operating principles always put their battle with the locals first. The tremendous asymmetry of modern military domination in the ME is a formula for extreme suffering and destruction of things the local population cannot readily replace....things like sanitation systems, food production, education, etc. The more we bust this stuff up, the more hopeless and expensive rebuilding it becomes. We need to stand ready to assist these people in a rebuilding effort but only after the conflicts slow down...that clearly is not today.

 

[iolo]

Support the legal government in Syria with all we've got, and give all possible support to a free Kurdistan. Anything else just increases the mess, as we all know perfectly well.

And what happens if and when the Syrian government has dealt with the other rebels and turns against the Kurds?

The Kurds smash 'em - but Assad has his head screwed on, and would never do anything so dim.