???????????????????????????

[PATRIOT73]

Why the fuss about Syria? Iraq is bombed every day by the RAF
so whats so special about Syria?

[sidthelamp]

Why the fuss about Syria? Iraq is bombed every day by the RAF
so whats so special about Syria?

syria is a sovereign state the last but one or possible two that the west would like to take over

oil domination by the west through nato, usa, if they succeed it will also bring the middle east into line with the new world order dominance of the planet,

as russia is now playing a part to defend syria from IS and its affiliates there is essentially a proxy war between syrian defenders and the west, with turkey being the front end at this point, IS and al qaeda are essentially usa created to oppose russia when they intervened in afghanistan in the 70s and 80s .

more players were announced today from the iraq which is disputing there country from holding a 100000 foot soldiers this alliance made up of 90 000 arab oil states troops with 10 000 from the usa

what we are seeing is the continuing 3rd world war being played out, ie the cold war, with over 40 nations involved and counting,there has not been a time in recent history that a country in the middle east has had the capability of defending itself against a modern airforce , primarily due to turkey bringing down a russian bomber, escalating russia to deploy S400s

we have to look back to the begining of this conflict in 2013 when israel bombed certain targets in syria , all of a sudden syria was attacked from within then CIA created and funded groups started to overwhelm the country,

the situation is fast moving very dangerous for the whole of the middle east , and will become increasingly so in the west, without the perpetrators backing off, more and more forces will be committed to this region , its a time bomb waiting to go off,

the UKs contribution is minimal in a active sense, a few war planes bombing infrastructure is not really adding to the peace in this country, if indeed it escalates then uk forces will be overwhelmed , but that would give the uk government a excuse to escalate on are behalf,

it really makes no sense to have over 40 nations invading one country with state of the art this and that against a few desert rats, unless you elive theres more at stake than what they tell you.

[countryfeedback87]

We were invited to Iraq

[sidthelamp]

this morning turkey again refused to remove its troops from iraq with the announcement that they are there to provide help to the alliance against IS, however the turkey foreign minister made a statement today stating that its troops were in iraq to stop a potential security threat, at the same time russia warned that any targets threatening russian forces would be destroyed.

[westlondoncarparts]

President Putin told the western powers two years ago that if they were successful in bringing down the Syrian Government, there was a risk that the resulting power vacuum would allow extremists to take over and that the whole region would implode into anarchy.

They ignored him and the western created chaos made it possible for IS to take hold. IS have subsequently spread out beyond Iraq and Syria.

The problem that the world now has with IS and their affiliates is such that the best that can be achieved from bombing will be some containment of the IS problem. Bombing alone will not solve all of the existing problem and will likely cause new larger problems in its wake.

The only real positive in the situation is that President Putin and Sergei Lavrov are now very active and have called the bluff of all the western nations who were happy to have IS in Syria as additional opponents of the Assad regime as long as IS did not get too strong. They have also called the bluff of the Turkish Government that has allowed free movement of IS people and IS money over the border with Syria and who have allowed IS to sell oil through Turkey, hoping that this will help IS to contain or inflict destruction upon the Kurds as well as destroy the Assad regime.

The situation in Syria and Iraq and Turkey is likely to get a whole lot worse than it is today. There is severe risk of Turkey collapsing into chaos in due course.

The funding of terrorist opposition groups by the British Government as it followed its foreign policy of regime change in Syria helped to create the civil war there and helped to create the environment in which IS could take hold. British Government policy of not respecting the sovereignty of other nations and of going for regime change when it suits has contributed to breaking completely the sovereign nations of Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine in this new 21st century. The UK is one of the countries that most undermines world peace through its foreign policy and as a permanent member of the UN Security Council undermines the integrity of the UN through its actions.

The British are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi Government. They will not be in Syria at the invitation of the Syrian Government and are likely to bomb the Syrian army as well as IS. This will cause resentment amongst what remains of the Syrian population within Syria and will be a grievance that gets carried forward through many generations. It will also cause further resentment amongst the Syrian refugees fleeing to Europe. In the unlikely event that the British help to topple the Assad regime, it is difficult to see how David Cameron will then bring political stability to a broken country. It will be Iraq and Libya all over again.

The western powers have been bombing IS in Iraq for over a year now with little success. They had the fire power in the air to inflict critical damage on IS when it first started and chose not to use it fully. Intelligent thinking people ask the question why did they not take out IS when they could.

Some of the western powers have been bombing in Syria also. The Russians have reported regular convoys of IS oil tanker trucks several kilometres long travelling from Syria over into Turkey. Intelligent thinking people ask the question why did the western powers not bomb the oil tankers and cut off this key source of finance for IS? Why did they not stop Turkey, a member of NATO, supporting IS in these ways?

British bombing in Syria is likely to be more show than substance. The show will be politically and diplomatically orientated towards NATO and the USA, to show that Britain is doing its bit and is one of the boys.

The situation in Syria is very complicated with many different threads coming together in one geographical area. Any country genuinely interested in peace in Syria will need to identify these different threads separately and do the problem solving on each thread separately. It is difficult to who would actually have the inclination to do this apart from the Russians. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of Syria being the front line in the conflict between the Sunni and Shiite branches of Islam. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of countries like Saudi Arabia funding and providing arms to terrorist groups in Syria. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of the USA doing whatever it can to prevent Syria and Iran joining the new Eurasian Economic Community as it did when it sponsored regime change in Ukraine to prevent that country becoming part of the EAEC. Bombing in Syria will not solve the issue of a Kurdish homeland. Bombing in Syria will not solve the aggression from parts of the Islamic community towards the Yezedi. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of the various fallouts from the illegal invasion of Iraq. And so on.

David Cameron might have shown skill in getting the British Parliament to agree to his wish to bomb Syria. The debate in Parliament, however, was very narrow and many of the various threads in the situation never got a mention in the debate. They will all rear their heads in the future though and some will come back to bite the UK.

The big unknown is whether the Chinese will get involved in Syria. Following the attitudes which the USA has been showing China recently, the Chinese navy and Russian navy held joint exercises in the Mediterranean earlier this year. It is unheard of for the Chinese navy to venture so far from home for exercises. There has been a Chinese naval vessel (not their aircraft carrier) stationed off the coast of Syria for some months now. It must be there for a reason.

The Second World War started off as a number of separate disputes in different parts of the world but which then became joined up when different countries entered into alliances with each other and which then escalated. There is a similar pattern in the world today with the pivot point being Syria. One of the potential flashpoints will be the Russian Federation preventing the collapse of the Syrian state by protecting the Syrian Army from western attempts to destroy it. That will be a red line for President Putin. When his red lines get crossed, he does usually take decisive action and the military resources at his disposal are more than a match for NATO.

[sidthelamp]

President Putin told the western powers two years ago that if they were successful in bringing down the Syrian Government, there was a risk that the resulting power vacuum would allow extremists to take over and that the whole region would implode into anarchy.

They ignored him and the western created chaos made it possible for IS to take hold. IS have subsequently spread out beyond Iraq and Syria.

The problem that the world now has with IS and their affiliates is such that the best that can be achieved from bombing will be some containment of the IS problem. Bombing alone will not solve all of the existing problem and will likely cause new larger problems in its wake.

The only real positive in the situation is that President Putin and Sergei Lavrov are now very active and have called the bluff of all the western nations who were happy to have IS in Syria as additional opponents of the Assad regime as long as IS did not get too strong. They have also called the bluff of the Turkish Government that has allowed free movement of IS people and IS money over the border with Syria and who have allowed IS to sell oil through Turkey, hoping that this will help IS to contain or inflict destruction upon the Kurds as well as destroy the Assad regime.

The situation in Syria and Iraq and Turkey is likely to get a whole lot worse than it is today. There is severe risk of Turkey collapsing into chaos in due course.

The funding of terrorist opposition groups by the British Government as it followed its foreign policy of regime change in Syria helped to create the civil war there and helped to create the environment in which IS could take hold. British Government policy of not respecting the sovereignty of other nations and of going for regime change when it suits has contributed to breaking completely the sovereign nations of Iraq, Libya, Syria and Ukraine in this new 21st century. The UK is one of the countries that most undermines world peace through its foreign policy and as a permanent member of the UN Security Council undermines the integrity of the UN through its actions.

The British are in Iraq at the invitation of the Iraqi Government. They will not be in Syria at the invitation of the Syrian Government and are likely to bomb the Syrian army as well as IS. This will cause resentment amongst what remains of the Syrian population within Syria and will be a grievance that gets carried forward through many generations. It will also cause further resentment amongst the Syrian refugees fleeing to Europe. In the unlikely event that the British help to topple the Assad regime, it is difficult to see how David Cameron will then bring political stability to a broken country. It will be Iraq and Libya all over again.

The western powers have been bombing IS in Iraq for over a year now with little success. They had the fire power in the air to inflict critical damage on IS when it first started and chose not to use it fully. Intelligent thinking people ask the question why did they not take out IS when they could.

Some of the western powers have been bombing in Syria also. The Russians have reported regular convoys of IS oil tanker trucks several kilometres long travelling from Syria over into Turkey. Intelligent thinking people ask the question why did the western powers not bomb the oil tankers and cut off this key source of finance for IS? Why did they not stop Turkey, a member of NATO, supporting IS in these ways?

British bombing in Syria is likely to be more show than substance. The show will be politically and diplomatically orientated towards NATO and the USA, to show that Britain is doing its bit and is one of the boys.

The situation in Syria is very complicated with many different threads coming together in one geographical area. Any country genuinely interested in peace in Syria will need to identify these different threads separately and do the problem solving on each thread separately. It is difficult to who would actually have the inclination to do this apart from the Russians. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of Syria being the front line in the conflict between the Sunni and Shiite branches of Islam. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of countries like Saudi Arabia funding and providing arms to terrorist groups in Syria. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of the USA doing whatever it can to prevent Syria and Iran joining the new Eurasian Economic Community as it did when it sponsored regime change in Ukraine to prevent that country becoming part of the EAEC. Bombing in Syria will not solve the issue of a Kurdish homeland. Bombing in Syria will not solve the aggression from parts of the Islamic community towards the Yezedi. Bombing in Syria will not solve the problem of the various fallouts from the illegal invasion of Iraq. And so on.

David Cameron might have shown skill in getting the British Parliament to agree to his wish to bomb Syria. The debate in Parliament, however, was very narrow and many of the various threads in the situation never got a mention in the debate. They will all rear their heads in the future though and some will come back to bite the UK.

The big unknown is whether the Chinese will get involved in Syria. Following the attitudes which the USA has been showing China recently, the Chinese navy and Russian navy held joint exercises in the Mediterranean earlier this year. It is unheard of for the Chinese navy to venture so far from home for exercises. There has been a Chinese naval vessel (not their aircraft carrier) stationed off the coast of Syria for some months now. It must be there for a reason.

The Second World War started off as a number of separate disputes in different parts of the world but which then became joined up when different countries entered into alliances with each other and which then escalated. There is a similar pattern in the world today with the pivot point being Syria. One of the potential flashpoints will be the Russian Federation preventing the collapse of the Syrian state by protecting the Syrian Army from western attempts to destroy it. That will be a red line for President Putin. When his red lines get crossed, he does usually take decisive action and the military resources at his disposal are more than a match for NATO.

i might just add to your excellent post that another country has been flexing its mussels this week, that is north korea with its continued testing of the s/k forces who are heavily backed by nato , north korea announced yesterday that it now has the h, bomb although treated with contempt by the west, it is clear they do have n bombs the step to a h bomb although technically difficult is not beyond there means especially with there allies technical help, it is not a coincidence that they have announced this upgrade this week,