What were the US goals in Syria?

[rupol2000]

The following is not entirely clear: the US enemies Al-Qaeda and the Taliban fought against the Assad regime. So they must have been Assad's allies. However, the US did not support the Assad regime in the same way. What then did they really want?

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

The following is not entirely clear: the US enemies Al-Qaeda and the Taliban fought against the Assad regime. So they must have been Assad's allies. However, the US did not support the Assad regime in the same way. What then did they really want?

Bear-Baiting

Their nostalgia for the Cold War hatred of Russia, Assad's ally.

 

[rupol2000]

Bear-Baiting

Their nostalgia for the Cold War hatred of Russia, Assad's ally.

Just emotion? Without political goals?

 

[RoccoR]

RE: What were the US goals in Syria?
SUBTOPIC: Objectives
※→ rupol2000, The Sage of Main Street, et al,

The following is not entirely clear: the US enemies Al-Qaeda and the Taliban fought against the Assad regime. So they must have been Assad's allies. However, the US did not support the Assad regime in the same way. What then did they really want?

Bear-Baiting

Their nostalgia for the Cold War hatred of Russia, Assad's ally.

Just emotion? Without political goals?

(COMMENT)

I am not sure that there ever was a political or military intent specifically for US Forces in Syria. It appeared to be mission creep. I think it was a case of hot pursuit, by Special Forces, training and equipping friendly forces, along the way, to form resistance movements to seek out and engage DAESH (The Islamic State operating in Iraq and the Levant). The hope being to attrite and deteriorate DAESH to the point that it was beyond restoration by the same radical leadership that swept through Iraq.

It was (apparently in my eyes as a layman) one of those mystically generated actions → with an underdeveloped and unfinished operational intent that rolled over from one administration to another → incomplete before the transition and not understood by the new administration.

Just My Thoughts,

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Just emotion? Without political goals?

The Great Game's Players Are Over the Hill But Refuse to Retire

Containment is the cage; the Chickenhawks have to invent a beast to put in it.

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

RE: What were the US goals in Syria?
SUBTOPIC: Objectives
※→ rupol2000, The Sage of Main Street, et al,




(COMMENT)

I am not sure that there ever was a political or military intent specifically for US Forces in Syria. It appeared to be mission creep. I think it was a case of hot pursuit, by Special Forces, training and equipping friendly forces, along the way, to form resistance movements to seek out and engage DAESH (The Islamic State operating in Iraq and the Levant). The hope being to attrite and deteriorate DAESH to the point that it was beyond restoration by the same radical leadership that swept through Iraq.

It was (apparently in my eyes as a layman) one of those mystically generated actions → with an underdeveloped and unfinished operational intent that rolled over from one administration to another → incomplete before the transition and not understood by the new administration.

Just My Thoughts,

Most Respectfully,
R

Lesson Not Learned: The South Vietnamese Were Cowards, Crooks, and Collaborators

I was responding to the demonizing of Assad, not to the American extermination of ISIS, which I support. Being multicultie, Obama believed that the worthless Iraqis could handle any jihadis. So he didn't respond with air power until the Arab rabble had proved he was dead wrong.

 

[AMart]

Pipeline war.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: What were the US goals in Syria?
SUBTOPIC: Objectives
※→ The Sage of Main Street, et al,

I concur. But that is the problem of most incoming administrations.

I was responding to the demonizing of Assad,

(COMMENT)

The reputation of President Assad with the various populations in that Levant Region is not really swayed, one way or the other, by American political views. Oh, at one time, the American opinion carried weight. But not now. The US is no longer the leader of the free world. Wen the US war an industrial power that could rapidly crank up a driving military force without being dependent on foreign-manufactured components, the US would still carry some influence. But the Big Stick Diplomacy (as in "speak softly but carry a big stick")(President Teddy Roosevelt a Rough Riders and veteran of San Juan Hill) is completely out of American reach. If America wants Allied, we will get them through bribery and not because any nation particularly thinks we are in the right.

Assad's reputation will stand on its own merit in the eyes of the Syrian people that can affect the government. Not because America has any say in the matter. Yes, the US is in the top five countries when looking at Global Fire Power (GFP), but rankings do not win wars.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[surada]

RE: What were the US goals in Syria?
SUBTOPIC: Objectives
※→ rupol2000, The Sage of Main Street, et al,




(COMMENT)

I am not sure that there ever was a political or military intent specifically for US Forces in Syria. It appeared to be mission creep. I think it was a case of hot pursuit, by Special Forces, training and equipping friendly forces, along the way, to form resistance movements to seek out and engage DAESH (The Islamic State operating in Iraq and the Levant). The hope being to attrite and deteriorate DAESH to the point that it was beyond restoration by the same radical leadership that swept through Iraq.

It was (apparently in my eyes as a layman) one of those mystically generated actions → with an underdeveloped and unfinished operational intent that rolled over from one administration to another → incomplete before the transition and not understood by the new administration.

Just My Thoughts,

Most Respectfully,
R

Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

How drought, foreign meddling, and long-festering religious tensions created the tragically splintered Syria we know today.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[surada]

The following is not entirely clear: the US enemies Al-Qaeda and the Taliban fought against the Assad regime. So they must have been Assad's allies. However, the US did not support the Assad regime in the same way. What then did they really want?

Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

How drought, foreign meddling, and long-festering religious tensions created the tragically splintered Syria we know today.

www.theatlantic.com

 

[rupol2000]

Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

How drought, foreign meddling, and long-festering religious tensions created the tragically splintered Syria we know today.

www.theatlantic.com

"Soon after that, he was recruited from a teaching position at Harvard to work on the State Department’s Policy Planning staff in the Kennedy administration."

This suggests that it is a lie. I don't believe a single word of the left, so I won't read this.

 

[Oddball]

"Soon after that, he was recruited from a teaching position at Harvard to work on the State Department’s Policy Planning staff in the Kennedy administration."

This suggests that it is a lie. I don't believe a single word of the left, so I won't read this.

The Atlantic = State agitprop.

 

[surada]

"Soon after that, he was recruited from a teaching position at Harvard to work on the State Department’s Policy Planning staff in the Kennedy administration."

This suggests that it is a lie. I don't believe a single word of the left, so I won't read this.

The author loves Syria has been going there for 50 years. Of course you won't read it. You think you know all about Syria without going to Syria or studying it's history. It's very obvious you don't know. Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

 

[surada]

The Atlantic = State agitprop.

Highly respected for more than a 100 years. It's not Gateway Pundit. Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

 

[surada]

The big problem for Americans is ignorance. They don't even bother with anything more in-depth than Gateway Pundit.

 

[rupol2000]

Highly respected for more than a 100 years. It's not Gateway Pundit. Understanding Syria: From Pre-Civil War to Post-Assad

I'm trying to draw conclusions based on the alignment of forces. The leftists secretly support the Wahhabis, help the Pashtuns destroy the Northern Alliance, all these forces apparently were on the side of ISIS. I wouldn't be surprised if I found out that they were secretly funding ISIS. Many experts believe that ISIS is working in the interests of the Wahhabis.
In Iran, they had a similar policy: they supported the Islamic revolution.

If this were not the case, they would have supported Assad.

 

[surada]

I'm trying to draw conclusions based on the alignment of forces. The leftists secretly support the Wahhabis, help the Pashtuns destroy the Northern Alliance, all these forces apparently were on the side of ISIS. I wouldn't be surprised if I found out that they were secretly funding ISIS. Many experts believe that ISIS is working in the interests of the Wahhabis.
In Iran, they had a similar policy: they supported the Islamic revolution.

If this were not the case, they would have supported Assad.

I lived with wahhabis. You a very ordinary idiot.

 

[rupol2000]

surada
In general, the very idea of a totalitarian Islamic state is close to the left. The left will support any regime that leads to totalitarianism. It does not matter under what gods it will be implemented, the Caliphate, the Inquisition or communism, it is important that this is the maximum control over society

 

[BackAgain]

What were the US goals in Syria?​

Striker kicks the ball and it bends and sails just past the Syrian goalie’s outstretched hands, into the net.

GOOOOOOOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLLLLLLL !

 

[rupol2000]

I lived with wahhabis. You a very ordinary idiot.

What difference does it make who you live with? They claim control over the Middle East, and in general for maximum control in Asia through their religious proteges