Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Syria'.
Putting aside the probable near-term massacre of the Kurds for the moment, a question of intelligence gathering. Do we need a significant presence on the ground in Syria to have deep intelligence on ISIS? (And I don't know how many people a "significance presence" would require.)
Your failed Messiah negotiated an "agreement" with Syria and Russia, post Red Line, for Syria to remove and/or destroy all of its WMD chemical weapons. Russia was supposed to monitor and verify these actions by the Syrians and Assad and assure us and the UN that Assad was complying. Even this January, the Obama Admin. Liar in Chief was assuring us that all the WMD was gone and Obama had done a great thing...without firing a shot. As we all know now, that was not the case. Either the Obama Admin. was extremely naïve to believe the Russians and the Syrians or the Obama Admin. was actually complicit in getting a "piece of paper" signed and lying to the American people to CTA. The "Agreement" that Obama made with Iran is much the same kind of set up with Iran promising to stop working on its Nuclear Bomb efforts and the Russians promising to monitor and verify Iranian efforts to stop developing WMD. We even gave them their money back which Carter froze after they took our Embassy personnel hostage. In cash and in various foreign denominations. So, fool us once shame on you, fool us twice shame on us??? Do you believe Iran and Russia are holding to their part of the "Agreement" with the Obama Admin. and should the Queen of Lies come out and tell us that all is as it should be in this case??? In light of what just happened in Syria, do you still trust the Obama Admin. on Iran??
About that recent raid in which a Master Sergeant was killed. Thirty advisors for a force of 40 local special forces (I've read they were Iraqi and I've read they were Kurds) sounds like an awful lot of advisors for a 40-man force. If the mission was as urgent as described, the 40 ought not to be novices, even well-trained novices, who needed all that handholding. They wouldn't have been hearing gunfire for the first time. (Is there anyone between the Mediterranean and Sichuan who hasn't heard gunfire by now?) It sounds, to my amateur's ear, more like a mixed force of 70. Or a 40-man local force with a 30-man US backup. How many advisors would you expect for an elite ally unit of 40? It's possible too that a lot of Americans there were for intelligence collection, but for the time being I'll deal with the story as it is described.
General Odierno, who has been the Army's senior officer the past several years, is retiring. He testified in Congress within the day or so, and a summary is up on the Military dot com website; it may also be on Army dot mil (the "Syrian Electronic Army" crashed that site but it was up as of a few hours ago.) It's worth a look. In brief, he opposes the re-introduction of ground combat units, would be OK with JTACs and/or advisers, and feels that the Iraqis squandered the opportunity that we bought them, with so much effort, to build a better society. In his view, the al-Maliki government was unwilling to put aside the joy it took in sectarian vendetta. I have read opinions here that Obama undid the great victory that Bush had won. If you feel that way, you won't like Odierno's take.