Syria

[Sandydragon]

Here you go Kamber, there's plent more of these on a week by week basis.

You'll note that the proportion of Russian targets aren't in ISIL territory. As I wrote below.

. http://www.rightsidenews.com/wp-conte ... JAN-01.png

Here's what you actually said.

"Have you seen that a ceasefire has been agreed? Not sure how effective it will be given that the Russians seem intent on continuing their bombing of anyone other than Isis"

You seem to be saying that you doubt that the ceasefire will work because the Russians want to continue bombing anyone except ISIS. Whereas I showed that they are willing to target ISIS.

How do you expect ISIS to be defeated without the help of ground troops?

On your last point, they won't.

[Zhivago]

Here you go Kamber, there's plent more of these on a week by week basis.

You'll note that the proportion of Russian targets aren't in ISIL territory. As I wrote below.

. http://www.rightsidenews.com/wp-conte ... JAN-01.png

Here's what you actually said.

"Have you seen that a ceasefire has been agreed? Not sure how effective it will be given that the Russians seem intent on continuing their bombing of anyone other than Isis"

You seem to be saying that you doubt that the ceasefire will work because the Russians want to continue bombing anyone except ISIS. Whereas I showed that they are willing to target ISIS.

How do you expect ISIS to be defeated without the help of ground troops?

Willing to target Isis, less than 10% of the time. The main weight if effort is agains other rebel groups. By a huge margin. Efforts against ISIL are pathetic in comparison. So yes, a flippant comment that Russians aren't bothering with ISIL isn't that far from the mark. Russia is only interested in keeping Assad in power. They are leaving the main effort against Isis to western forces.

I doubt the ceasefire will hold if the Russians continue bombing.

I don't dispute that Russia's war aims are to support the Syrian government. Our war aims are to topple the Syrian government. It's a proxy war.

Regarding bombing of rebels. One such group normally grouped in these rebels is Jabhat Al-Nusra. Will you also decry Russia for bombing them?

[Zhivago]

Here you go Kamber, there's plent more of these on a week by week basis.

You'll note that the proportion of Russian targets aren't in ISIL territory. As I wrote below.

. http://www.rightsidenews.com/wp-conte ... JAN-01.png

Here's what you actually said.

"Have you seen that a ceasefire has been agreed? Not sure how effective it will be given that the Russians seem intent on continuing their bombing of anyone other than Isis"

You seem to be saying that you doubt that the ceasefire will work because the Russians want to continue bombing anyone except ISIS. Whereas I showed that they are willing to target ISIS.

How do you expect ISIS to be defeated without the help of ground troops?

On your last point, they won't.

So what ground troops will those be? Kurds that Turkey is bombing? Saudi army? Jabhat Al-Nusra or Islamic Front or other slightly more moderate islamist rebel groups?

[Sandydragon]

Here's what you actually said.

"Have you seen that a ceasefire has been agreed? Not sure how effective it will be given that the Russians seem intent on continuing their bombing of anyone other than Isis"

You seem to be saying that you doubt that the ceasefire will work because the Russians want to continue bombing anyone except ISIS. Whereas I showed that they are willing to target ISIS.

How do you expect ISIS to be defeated without the help of ground troops?

On your last point, they won't.

So what ground troops will those be? Kurds that Turkey is bombing? Saudi army? Jabhat Al-Nusra or Islamic Front or other slightly more moderate islamist rebel groups?

Good question. Kurds won't do it. There is no individual player who everyone will back. Russia is keeping its support to air strikes and training, but if the Syrian government troops can't defeat the variety of forces against them, then I can see the taking a more active ground role.

The west isn't interested in fighting on the ground, but any ground commitment that we would undertake is more likely to be in Iraq, supporting that government.

[Sandydragon]

Here's what you actually said.

"Have you seen that a ceasefire has been agreed? Not sure how effective it will be given that the Russians seem intent on continuing their bombing of anyone other than Isis"

You seem to be saying that you doubt that the ceasefire will work because the Russians want to continue bombing anyone except ISIS. Whereas I showed that they are willing to target ISIS.

How do you expect ISIS to be defeated without the help of ground troops?

Willing to target Isis, less than 10% of the time. The main weight if effort is agains other rebel groups. By a huge margin. Efforts against ISIL are pathetic in comparison. So yes, a flippant comment that Russians aren't bothering with ISIL isn't that far from the mark. Russia is only interested in keeping Assad in power. They are leaving the main effort against Isis to western forces.

I doubt the ceasefire will hold if the Russians continue bombing.

I don't dispute that Russia's war aims are to support the Syrian government. Our war aims are to topple the Syrian government. It's a proxy war.

Regarding bombing of rebels. One such group normally grouped in these rebels is Jabhat Al-Nusra. Will you also decry Russia for bombing them?

No, thre are plenty of crazies associated in the other groups. But any vaguely moderate opposition is being caught up in the general attack. Not that there are too many operates left after years of civil war, but some are definitely better than others.

I would have prefers that the Russians agreed to put pressure on Assad to step down into exile, whilst ensuring that any replacement government was friendly towards Moscow but equally was acceptable to the anti-Assad faction.

Instead, th civil war is continuing as Saudi et al support other factions. Once Assad defeats them, he still has ISIL to contend with, assuming he can defeat those rebels closest to his capital.

[Zhivago]

On your last point, they won't.

So what ground troops will those be? Kurds that Turkey is bombing? Saudi army? Jabhat Al-Nusra or Islamic Front or other slightly more moderate islamist rebel groups?

Good question. Kurds won't do it. There is no individual player who everyone will back. Russia is keeping its support to air strikes and training, but if the Syrian government troops can't defeat the variety of forces against them, then I can see the taking a more active ground role.

The west isn't interested in fighting on the ground, but any ground commitment that we would undertake is more likely to be in Iraq, supporting that government.

I don't understand what you see in the rebels though. The majority of the rebel powerbrokers are either part of Jabhat Al-Nusra or allied to them.
Source: http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/d ... uide_0.pdf

[Sandydragon]

So what ground troops will those be? Kurds that Turkey is bombing? Saudi army? Jabhat Al-Nusra or Islamic Front or other slightly more moderate islamist rebel groups?

Good question. Kurds won't do it. There is no individual player who everyone will back. Russia is keeping its support to air strikes and training, but if the Syrian government troops can't defeat the variety of forces against them, then I can see the taking a more active ground role.

The west isn't interested in fighting on the ground, but any ground commitment that we would undertake is more likely to be in Iraq, supporting that government.

I don't understand what you see in the rebels though. The majority of the rebel powerbrokers are either part of Jabhat Al-Nusra or allied to them.
Source: http://www.understandingwar.org/sites/d ... uide_0.pdf

As I suggest below, the majority of th moderates aren't there any more. I suspect that there are enough leaders out there who could help form amor reasonable government, not that the standard is too high.

Id be careful about the allied status to Al-Nusra. When faced with certain death at the hands of the Syrian government, allying yourself to capable extremists is possible the least worse option,

[Sandydragon]

As the report in the link you cited points out

As Russian airstrikes intensify, Syrian opposition factions will likely seek the protection of a strong partner in the fight against the regime and its allies. The majority of the groups that may seek protection already cooperate militarily with Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra out of necessity, and this trend is likely to increase as rebels come under greater duress. The pressure of a reinvigorated air campaign in support of the Syrian regime may drive these groups closer to Jabhat al-Nusra and potentially hardline Islamist Ahrar al- Sham in the absence of alternative sources of robust military assistance from countries opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, between October 2 and October 4, two rebel groups merged separately under Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham in Hama and Aleppo provinces respectively. This trend damages not only the U.S. anti-ISIS mission, but also the implicit mission to counter al-Qaeda’s influence in Syria. It is therefore vital to observe changes in the behaviors and affiliations of Syrian rebels in response to ground events.

[Zhivago]

As the report in the link you cited points out

As Russian airstrikes intensify, Syrian opposition factions will likely seek the protection of a strong partner in the fight against the regime and its allies. The majority of the groups that may seek protection already cooperate militarily with Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra out of necessity, and this trend is likely to increase as rebels come under greater duress. The pressure of a reinvigorated air campaign in support of the Syrian regime may drive these groups closer to Jabhat al-Nusra and potentially hardline Islamist Ahrar al- Sham in the absence of alternative sources of robust military assistance from countries opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, between October 2 and October 4, two rebel groups merged separately under Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham in Hama and Aleppo provinces respectively. This trend damages not only the U.S. anti-ISIS mission, but also the implicit mission to counter al-Qaeda’s influence in Syria. It is therefore vital to observe changes in the behaviors and affiliations of Syrian rebels in response to ground events.

Wouldn't it make more sense to destroy Jabhat Al-Nusra? They are almost as bad as ISIS.

[Sandydragon]

As the report in the link you cited points out

As Russian airstrikes intensify, Syrian opposition factions will likely seek the protection of a strong partner in the fight against the regime and its allies. The majority of the groups that may seek protection already cooperate militarily with Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra out of necessity, and this trend is likely to increase as rebels come under greater duress. The pressure of a reinvigorated air campaign in support of the Syrian regime may drive these groups closer to Jabhat al-Nusra and potentially hardline Islamist Ahrar al- Sham in the absence of alternative sources of robust military assistance from countries opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, between October 2 and October 4, two rebel groups merged separately under Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham in Hama and Aleppo provinces respectively. This trend damages not only the U.S. anti-ISIS mission, but also the implicit mission to counter al-Qaeda’s influence in Syria. It is therefore vital to observe changes in the behaviors and affiliations of Syrian rebels in response to ground events.

Wouldn't it make more sense to destroy Jabhat Al-Nusra? They are almost as bad as ISIS.

I'd rather not attack them directly and try to get the mor moderate factions to disengage, the hit the extremists.

That won't happen without a trusted and capable peacekeeping force. Which I don't see turning up any time soon. Diplomatic action could perhaps have worked to achieve this, but I can't see that working now either.

[Zhivago]

As the report in the link you cited points out

As Russian airstrikes intensify, Syrian opposition factions will likely seek the protection of a strong partner in the fight against the regime and its allies. The majority of the groups that may seek protection already cooperate militarily with Syrian al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra out of necessity, and this trend is likely to increase as rebels come under greater duress. The pressure of a reinvigorated air campaign in support of the Syrian regime may drive these groups closer to Jabhat al-Nusra and potentially hardline Islamist Ahrar al- Sham in the absence of alternative sources of robust military assistance from countries opposed to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. In fact, between October 2 and October 4, two rebel groups merged separately under Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al-Sham in Hama and Aleppo provinces respectively. This trend damages not only the U.S. anti-ISIS mission, but also the implicit mission to counter al-Qaeda’s influence in Syria. It is therefore vital to observe changes in the behaviors and affiliations of Syrian rebels in response to ground events.

Wouldn't it make more sense to destroy Jabhat Al-Nusra? They are almost as bad as ISIS.

I'd rather not attack them directly and try to get the mor moderate factions to disengage, the hit the extremists.

That won't happen without a trusted and capable peacekeeping force. Which I don't see turning up any time soon. Diplomatic action could perhaps have worked to achieve this, but I can't see that working now either.

It seems to me that the most viable ground force is the Syrian gov then...

[Stones of granite]

[cashead]

Looks like things are getting rather Syria-s now.

[Zhivago]

Looks like things are getting rather Syria-s now.

Yes, it's pretty Deir

[Billyfish]

I-raq my brains for a shitter pun.

[Zhivago]

Completely contradicts Sandy

[Stones of granite]

Should have also posted the accompanying text.

Russia’s four month long air campaign has set conditions for the encirclement of Aleppo. Pro-regime forces backed by heavy Russian airstrikes severed one of two opposition supply lines into Aleppo City from the Turkish border on February 3 when they pushed northwest of the city to reestablish a regime supply line to the besieged regime towns of Nubl and Zahra’a. Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps fighters and Iranian-backed Shi’a militia forces played a prominent role in the offensive, demonstrating the lethality of combined Russian air and Iranian ground operations against the opposition in Syria. Reports of Russian Spetnaz activity at unspecified locations in Aleppo Province likely indicate the involvement of these forces in the operation. The gains position pro-regime forces to encircle opposition-held portions of Aleppo City by severing the last remaining opposition supply line that runs east from the Turkish border into the city. The regime can sever this final supply line at two locations: an outer location northwest of Aleppo City on the road to the Turkish border that passes through the towns of Huraytan and Kafr Hamra, or an inner location in the city’s eastern sector controlled by the armed opposition, such as the Hanano District. Russia’s air campaign has consistently targeted the outer location for the past three months, indicating that this is where pro-regime forces intend to complete the encirclement. This section of the supply line runs through rural terrain that Russian airpower can easily target and Iranian-backed ground forces can ultimately seize, whereas the inner location is more difficult as the terrain includes both topographic and urban barriers to rapid ground offensives. Pro-regime forces are meanwhile taking steps to buffer their forward line of troops (FLOT) to the north of Aleppo to make it possible to sustain the encirclement. Pro-regime forces will likely complete the encirclement of Aleppo in coming weeks and besiege the opposition inside the city in order to force Turkey and Saudi Arabia to concede to a negotiated settlement or ceasefire.

[Zhivago]

That's why Turkey and Saudi are going to invade. They are losing their war.

[OptimisticJock]

Air strikes in ISIS held territory isn't the same as air strikes targeting ISIS.

[Zhivago]

This seems like a great resource for following what's happening in the syrian conflict:
http://syria.liveuamap.com/

[Zhivago]

Turkey shelling Kurds by Menagh airbase, and Syrian Gov territory just north of Latakia.
Saudi troops and F-16s have been deployed to Adana, prior to launching ground offensive.

Now looks possible that Syrian gov will cut off ISIS supply line at Al Tabqah, as there is already news that Syrian army have reached the airport.
ISIS would have no access to area east of Aleppo and Turkish border. Kurds already cut off the northern route.

[cashead]

ISIS collapsing is pretty much a matter of time, and to be honest, they're probably the biggest set of dickheads out of the lot of them. Probably. But christ almighty, what a godawful mess.

With a severely weakened Syrian government (who were a bunch of shits to begin with), and the various interests traipsing about, I'd hate to see what sort of squabble will emerge out of this.

[Stones of granite]

Russian and/or Syrian airforces now targetting hospitals. MSF report that in the most recent attack, their hospital in Ma’arat Al Numan was hit in two seperate attacks, a fairly clear indication that it was a deliberate objective. That's the third hospital this week.

http://www.msf.org/article/syria-least- ... tack-idlib

[Sandydragon]

Turkey shelling Kurds by Menagh airbase, and Syrian Gov territory just north of Latakia.
Saudi troops and F-16s have been deployed to Adana, prior to launching ground offensive.

Now looks possible that Syrian gov will cut off ISIS supply line at Al Tabqah, as there is already news that Syrian army have reached the airport.
ISIS would have no access to area east of Aleppo and Turkish border. Kurds already cut off the northern route.

I think the US needs to have a harsh word with Turkey. The situation is confusing and dangerous enough without them:
a. trying to pick a fight with Russia
b. attacking the one organization that is both reasonable (ish) and has actually made an impact against ISIS in Iraq.

[Sandydragon]

Completely contradicts Sandy

Look at the date. The weeks previous have been no where near that balanced in their attacks. Maybe this is a shift, but given the Syrian governments ground offensives against other Rebel groups in the West of the country, ISIS isn't a priority for Russia at the moment.