Oh Syria the victory is coming

Salaam

Another update

Trump: Saudis need to pay if they want US troops to stay in Syria

Trump reiterates necessity for US troops to leave Syria unless Riyadh pays for continuation of US presence there.

US President Donald Trump has said that Saudi Arabia might have to pay if it wants continuing US presence in Syria.

"We've almost completed that task [of defeating ISIL] and we'll be making a determination very quickly, in coordination with others in the area, as to what we'll do," said Trump on Tuesday during a White House press conference with leaders from three Baltic nations.

"Saudi Arabia is very interested in our decision, and I said, 'Well, you know, you want us to stay, maybe you're going to have to pay'."

Trump spoke on Monday with the King of Saudi Arabia, Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud, over the phone to discuss a range of regional issues, including a peace plan between Israelis and Palestinians and opportunities to strengthen the American-Saudi strategic partnership.

But the White House statement of the call, released on Tuesday, did not mention any discussion about Saudi Arabia's boosting funding for US military efforts in Syria.

Similarly, a White House readout of his March 20 meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman made no mention of US military efforts in the region.

'I want to get out'

Trump's remarks appeared to contradict the rhetoric on Syria from other top US officials. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis and former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson had pledged an enduring presence in Syria last year.

But Trump reiterated calls to end US presence in the region, after he made similar statements at an event in Ohio last week.

"I want to get out. I want to bring our troops back home," Trump said.

"We do a lot of things in this country, we do them for a lot of reasons, but it is very costly for our country, and it helps other countries a hell of a lot more than it helps us," he added.

Trump also railed against ongoing US intervention in the Middle East and its growing cost.

"Think of it, $7 trillion over a 17-year period. We have nothing. Nothing except death and destruction. It's a horrible thing. So it is time. It is time," he said at the White House press conference.

"We were very successful against ISIL. We'll be successful against anybody militarily. But sometimes it is time to come back home. And we're thinking about that very seriously."

The Obama administration launched a war in 2014 against the ISIL after the group flourished in the chaos of the Syrian civil war and then surged over the Iraq border in a bid to overtake Baghdad.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/04/trump-saudis-pay-troops-stay-syria-180404061302069.html

Salaam

Like to share.

Blurb

Amazing story of Abu Hamada, a 63 year old man who spent 25 years in Assad’s torture prison. He tells us about why he fights the regime from the front lines and what it was like to have his first child at 58 years old.

US Commander: ‘US Troops Prepared to Die for Israel’ in War against Syria, Hezbollah

Operation Juniper Cobra is not a routine exercise; it is a portent of a potentially devastating war against Syria, Hezbollah and Gaza for which Israel is actively preparing — a war likely to erupt within the coming months.




TEL AVIV, ISRAEL – Last Sunday, the largest joint military exercise between the United States and Israel began with little fanfare. The war game, dubbed “Operation Juniper Cobra,” has been a regular occurrence for years, though it has consistently grown in size and scope. Now, however, this year’s 12-day exercise brings a portent of conflict unlike those of its predecessors.


Previous reports on the operation suggested that, like prior incarnations of the same exercise, the focus would be on improving Israeli defenses. “Juniper Cobra 2018 is another step in improving the readiness of the IDF [Israeli Defense Forces] and the IAF [Israeli Air Force] in particular to enhance their operational capabilities in facing the threat posed by high-trajectory missiles,” Brig. Gen. Zvika Haimovitch, the IDF’s Aerial Defense Division head, told the Jerusalem Post.


However, this year’s “Juniper Cobra” is unique for several reasons. The Post reported on Thursday that the drill, set to end on March 15, was not only the largest joint U.S.-Israeli air defense exercise to ever happen but it was also simulating a battle “on three fronts.” In other words, Israel and the U.S. are jointly simulating a war with Lebanon, Syria, and Palestine – namely, the Gaza strip – simultaneously.


What makes this last part so concerning are Israel’s recent statements and other preparations for war with all three nations, making “Juniper Cobra” anything but a “routine” drill. It is instead yet another preparation for a massive regional conflict, suggesting that such a conflict could be only a matter of months away.

more at : https://www.mintpressnews.com/israel...bollah/238768/

Salaam

Another viewpoint on why this war is happening.

Why don't Gulf States want Assad to remain in power in Syria?

All what you read about gas pipelines and so forth is a conspiracy theory poppycock that’s not worth its efforts to write or read. The issue of Gulf States with Assad is substantially much deeper than this superficial assumption.

I will try to be short:

The Middle East mainly consists of 3 main powers distinguished and represented by culture, mass population and geographical extend:

• The first is the Arabian Muslim Sunni power. This power has the most mass and momentum in the Middle East. It’s mainly represented by most Arab countries.
• The second is the Persian Muslim Shiite power. This is mainly represented by Iran, a small part of the Arab Shiite populations and Shite Muslims in east and north Iran (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Azerbaijan, etc).
• The third is the Turkish Muslim Sunni power. This power is obviously known.

These 3 powers are in a constant competition on wealth and dominance in the Middle East ever since the collapse of Ottoman Empire in early 20th century. Each one of them uses every cultural and material means to gain more power over the other.

Examples:

• Iran dreams to topple off all Gulf States regimes and lift ‘Al Hussain’ flags above Al Qaba (the pilgrim destination of Muslims). For that it uses the dramatical and emotional believe system that distinguishes Shiite Muslims who want to take revenge of those who killed Al Hussain, one of Shiite holy personalities killed by one Muslim Khalifat 1350 years ago! Of course Iran aims at power and dominance using this believe system of Shite.
• Turkey wants to convince Sunni Muslim Arabs that their only way to build their civilization “again” is to be united under its leadership so that they can together build an autocracy (dubbed Islamic democracy).
• Gulf States (the heart of Sunny Muslim Arabs’s world) wish for Iran to be defeated and Turkey to shut up so things can keep the way they are without to compromise the wealth they enjoy.

Now we come to the problem of Gulf States with Assad:

Assad belongs to one of the Arab Shite minorities (Alawaite) that align with Iran and serve its agendas in the Middle East. He and his father have been always in favor of Iran in all kind of conflicts between Iran and the Gulf States. And since the rulers of the Gulf States know very well that Iran wants them off the power (Iran is very explicit about this), they can’t afford to let go for any opportunity to topple off Assad regime and get back Syria to the Muslim Sunni camp like it was before Assad family military coup in 1970. In other words: Gulf States want Assad down for their own security, not for any gas pipelines he rejected to build.

If you’re reading until here you must now have understood the seriousness of freeing Syria from Assad and Iranian militias in the eyes of Gulf States rulers.

https://www.quora.com/Why-dont-Gulf-States-want-Assad-to-remain-in-power-in-Syria

There is another power in the Middle East that we need to worry about, and that is Russia

What is Vladimir Putin's long-term strategy in the Middle-East? It is to make puppet states out of both Iran and Syria, even if this means creating a massive conflict in the region.

Every time there is a chemical weapons attack in Syria, it conveniently proves to Iran and Syria that "Russian protection" is needed, and that means Putin gets to station troops within the borders of these nations, gets economic and material concessions, and access to ports in the Mediterranean. As Iran becomes a pariah state with no allies, it opens up the opportunity for Putin to force them to allow a Russian naval base to be built in the Strait of Hormuz.

That will then lead to a convenient situation where the Iranian people rise up against their corrupt puppet state, and Putin has to roll in his tanks to "take control" of the situation. Hundreds of thousands of Russian soldiers will pour into that nation to essentially seize control of it. Putin will then completely control the Strait of Hormuz and the entrance to the Persian Gulf. He will conduct a naval blockade, driving the price of oil to $500 a barrel and with his new Iranian reserves, he will corner the world's oil market.

This is how Russia operates: capitalize on civil discord and ethnic conflict within countries (such as the Ukraine or South Ossetia), and use these situations to roll in his troops and take control.

The US typically likes to control nations through shadowy agreements with their leaders, or economic dominance. Russia will control nations by outright invading them.

The Persians are fools for allowing this dime-store dictator to influence their foreign policy and wrap his tentacles around their nation.

Iran and Syria's relationship with Russia is a disgrace. Especially in the case of Iran, that nation should be independent and worry about its own internal affairs, instead of engaging in international intrigues, proxy wars with Saudi Arabia in Yemen, etc. It will only isolate itself further until its people will finally rise up, and the would-be-theocrats will be overthrown.

As for Syria, there isn't a good solution there. If Assad is ultimately overthrown, someone even worse could take power, or the entire country could descend into anarchy. Putin would us it as an opportunity to annex parts of the nation, and turn the rest of it into a puppet-state. Israel would probably attack regions in the south, and strengthen its grip on the Golan Heights.

format_quote Originally Posted by JustTime

This is a post that is filled with nothing but support for Assad, this excuse of "stability" and someone "worse" are the most pathetic excuses on Earth for this spawn of Satan, you should be embrassed making excuses for him and Iran.

I am not making excuses for Assad or Iran --I am merely being pragmatic.

Who is going to replace Assad exactly? ISIS? Do we need more beheadings slave markets, which were a disgrace to Islam and an international embarrassment?

I would be happy to support a Muslim leader in Syria who could turn that country around, but where is he?

Salaam

Brother I understand this is an emotive issue but we have to stay calm. I have a different opinion from Silas but I appreciate his contribution, we wont learn if we just hear what we want to hear.

I do NOT support Assad

I am merely pointing out that if you are to overthrow him, you better not put someone even worse in charge, or simply throw the entire country into chaos and anarchy

Salaam

As stated earlier

https://www.islamicboard.com/world-affairs/134349774-uk-france-strike-syria.html

Trump has launched airstrikes on Syria . Could it be symbolic? Or is it a harbinger of much worse to come.

A wider perspective on what is going on.

What Price for Collapse of the Empire?

The truth is that Russia would never be a credible threat to the AngloZionist Hegemony if it was not for the innumerable self-inflicted disasters the Empire has been absorbing year after year after year. In reality, Russia is no threat to anybody at all. And even China would not be a threat to the Empire if the latter was not so arrogant, so over-stretched, so ignorant, reckless and incompetent in its actions.

Let me just give one simple, but stark, example: not only does the US not have anything remotely resembling a consistent foreign policy, it does not even have any ministry of foreign affairs. The Department of State does not deal with diplomacy simply because the US leaders don’t believe in diplomacy as a concept. All the DoS does is issue threats, sanctions, ultimatums, make demands, deliver score-cards (on human rights and the like, of all things!) and explain to the public why the US is almost constantly at war with somebody. That is not “diplomacy” and the likes of Nikki Haley are not diplomats. In fact, the US has no use for International Law either, hence the self-same Nikki Haley openly declaring at a UNSC meeting that the US is willing to ignore the decisions of the UNSC and act in complete violation of the UN Charter. Simply put: thugs have no need for any diplomacy. They don’t understand the concept.

Just like their Israeli masters and mentors, the Americans have convinced themselves that all they need to be successful on the international scene is to either threaten the use of force or actually use force. This works great (or so it seems) in Gaza or Grenada, but when dealing with China, Russia or Iran, this monomaniacal approach rapidly shows its limitations, especially when your force is really limited to shooting missiles from afar or murdering civilians (neither the US nor Israel nor, for that matter, the KSA has a credible “boots on the ground” capability, hence their reliance on proxies).

The Empire is failing, fast, and for all the talk about “Animal Assad” or “Rocket Man” being in need of AngloZionist punishment, the stakes are the survival of Hegemony imposed upon mankind at the end of WWII and, again, at the end of the Cold War, and the future of our planet. There cannot be one World Hegemon and a multipolar world order regulated by international law. It’s an either-or situation. And in that sense, this is all much bigger than Syria or even Russia.

There is still a chance that the AngloZionists will decide to strike Syria symbolically, as they did last year following the previous chemical false flag in Khan Sheikhoun (Trump has now probably tweeted himself into a corner which makes some kind of attack almost inevitable). Should that happen though, we should not celebrate too soon as this will just be a minor course change, the 21st-century anti-Russia Crusade will continue, most likely in the form of a Ukronazi attack on the Donbass.

http://www.unz.com/tsaker/what-price-for-collapse-of-the-empire/

And another

Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld take on the situation.

A Thirty Years’ War?

With so many interests, native and foreign, involved, a way out does not seem in sight. Nor can the outcome be foreseen any more than that of the Thirty Years’ War could be four years after the beginning of the conflict, i.e. 1622. In fact there is good reason to believe that the hostilities have just begun. Additional players such as Lebanon and Jordan may well be drawn in. That in turn will almost certainly bring in Israel as well. Some right-wing Israelis, including several ministers, actually dream of such a scenario. They hope that the fall of the Hashemite Dynasty and the disintegration of Jordan will provide them with an opportunity to repeat the events of 1948 by throwing the Palestinians out of the West Bank and into Jordan.

That, however, is Zukunftmusik, future music as the Germans say. As of the present, the greatest losers are going to be Syria and Iraq. Neither really exists any longer as organized entities, and neither seems to have a future as such an entity. The greatest winner is going to be Iran. Playing the role once reserved for Richelieu, the great 17th century French statesman, the Mullahs are watching the entire vast area from the Persian Gulf to Latakia on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean turn into a maelstrom of conflicting interests they can play with. Nor are they at all sorry to see Turks and Kurds kill each other to their hearts’ contents.

http://www.martin-van-creveld.com/a-thirty-years-war-2/

format_quote Originally Posted by Misbah-Abd

These strikes won't change anything and is most likely a lame attempt that the Western Allies won't stand for chemical weapons attacks. First, they let the Russians and Syrians know what they are going to target so they can get all their weapons and personnel out of the way. If they really wanted to send a message, you go after Assad's palaces and his hiding spots that I am sure the Intelligence Community knows where they are located. It's all staged.

Even though I was completely against the strikes, they did do one thing:

They showed that "Russian protection" against the US in the Middle East is a sham --Putin didn't lift a finger to stop the attacks, and instead pulled his ships out of port and his troops away from the combat zone.

If the Iranian leadership had half a brain, they would realize that Putin's partnership gains them nothing. Not protection, not strength at the bargaining table, and not legitimacy. Choose your friends badly, and bad things will happen to you.

I speak with Iranians who think that Putin and Assad are widely admired throughout the world, and that only the US dislikes them --that is just nonsense. These people are blinded by state propaganda.

Salaam

Putin was probably forewarned about this, you don't want to accidentally start the next World War. this is my take but I don't think Trump was keen on this but the deep state twisted his arm. The strikes were limited, I think there are no deaths from this strike.

Putin wants to protect his access to the sea, protect his only ally in the region and block the globalists agenda in Syria, among many other things.

I'm sure Iran knows this there interests overlap but I think they would rather have Russians as an ally in this instance rather than Western powers, given the history.

Strange didnt Assad get rid of his chemical weapons a couple of years back?

Salaam

format_quote Originally Posted by Misbah-Abd

Let the kuffar get into a major war with each other. The Ummah will be better off for it.

I doubt that, We'd all be dragged into it.



And even if we could escape it, it would be a callous thing to wish for