Come on guys !! Very simple. This is all about Qatar-Turkey oil pipeline. Syria stands in the middle. Not about democracy or terrorism.
3
Turkey refused to stop the flow of potential terrorists into Syria and also refused logistic help to the US and now whines about incursions of Putins planes into their air space.
They should kick Turkey out of NATO and then the problem is Turkeys.
They should kick Turkey out of NATO and then the problem is Turkeys.
2
It's great. NATO doesn't know what to do expect come up with a couple of unsupported lies, like some of Russia's cruise missiles fell short into Iran. (Where's the sat evidence NATO?) They're like a bunch of old aunts not knowing what to do as they've been outsmarted yet again.
5
Nato does not need evidence when propaganda will do just fine.
Propaganda and lies are better, because they make for fantastic stories, on time, at demand, in whatever form you need them.
Propaganda and lies are better, because they make for fantastic stories, on time, at demand, in whatever form you need them.
1
NATO, the flightless Dodo Bird American wedge in Europe, "raises its guard and its tone" in Syria, its shrill arthritic shriek – the Paleolithic cold war remnant thinks itself the Phoenix instead. The only reason to even raise its head is to disband, it so long ago lost any reason for being other than uninvited US intrusion.
Is Syria in the North Atlantic? Is Russia threatening Europe, Canada, the US, or protecting its own regional interests from present interference of across the ocean intruders?
“A prudent question is one half of wisdom."
— SIR FRANCIS BACON
(1561 – 1626)
English philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, essayist and author
Is Syria in the North Atlantic? Is Russia threatening Europe, Canada, the US, or protecting its own regional interests from present interference of across the ocean intruders?
“A prudent question is one half of wisdom."
— SIR FRANCIS BACON
(1561 – 1626)
English philosopher, statesman, scientist, jurist, orator, essayist and author
8
Sad to see that NATO is as useless as the UN.
3
Is great Russian PLOT to regain control of Eastern Europe and Middle East. Vladimir ( Napoleon) Putin, will only be happy when he thinks he has restored Russia to the greatness it thought it had during the Cold War. Also, much of this is simply business. Russia needs to have customers for it's arms business so it can, like the U.S. earn export rubles to help pay it's bills.
2
Jens Soltenberg is alarmed by Russia's violations of Turkish airspace!!!!
Really? He finally woke up?
Turkey has been violating Greek airspace on a regular basis.
Both Greece and Turkey are members of NATO, yet Soltenberg is unable or unwilling to discipline Turkey.
What kind of an alliance is NATO? Greece is forced to spend billions to protect itself from Turkey....a NATO ally? Absurd.
Really? He finally woke up?
Turkey has been violating Greek airspace on a regular basis.
Both Greece and Turkey are members of NATO, yet Soltenberg is unable or unwilling to discipline Turkey.
What kind of an alliance is NATO? Greece is forced to spend billions to protect itself from Turkey....a NATO ally? Absurd.
4
It's time to fold it in for NATO the retirement home for cold war bureaucrats who are surplus relics of a past generation. These relics see their only hope for hanging on to a NATO pension is to search around the world for scare scenarios of Russian affairs to wave before the NATO funding sources. NATO is not being tested by Russia. It is being tested by time and found wanting.
5
Putin, Putin, Putin. Meanwhile. Gaza is burning again. What gives?
4
How easily a much smaller Russia force is performing in Syria. It should make us all aware that the past and present administration and its coalition has been misdirecting and tell us lies. Obama, like previous presidents has no intention of a war on terrorists. Instead our government, both Democrats and Republicans are supporting and using terrorists. There is no liberty, freedom, or democracy when it comes to our government's practices towards other countries. It is all lies out of greed. We have lost our Christian values and accuse other countries of being immoral when we should be looking in the mirror. It is time we stop doing what we are doing and throw them all, all out of office.
8
Former Sec of State Condoleezza Rice and former SecDef Robert gates wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post today. Among other things said was this excerpt:
"The fact is that Putin is playing a weak hand extraordinarily well because he knows exactly what he wants to do. He is not stabilizing the situation according to our definition of stability. He is defending Russia’s interests by keeping Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power. This is not about the Islamic State. Any insurgent group that opposes Russian interests is a terrorist organization to Moscow. We saw this behavior in Ukraine, and now we’re seeing it even more aggressively — with bombing runs and cruise missile strikes — in Syria. . . .
Moscow understands that diplomacy follows the facts on the ground, not the other way around. Russia and Iran are creating favorable facts. Once this military intervention has run its course, expect a peace proposal from Moscow that reflects its interests, including securing the Russian military base at Tartus.
We should not forget that Moscow’s definition of success is not the same as ours. "
I don't usually agree with Rice, but she and Gates are correct in their assessment and recommendations as to what the US should do.
Here is the link to the full article:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-counter-putin-in-syria/20...
"The fact is that Putin is playing a weak hand extraordinarily well because he knows exactly what he wants to do. He is not stabilizing the situation according to our definition of stability. He is defending Russia’s interests by keeping Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power. This is not about the Islamic State. Any insurgent group that opposes Russian interests is a terrorist organization to Moscow. We saw this behavior in Ukraine, and now we’re seeing it even more aggressively — with bombing runs and cruise missile strikes — in Syria. . . .
Moscow understands that diplomacy follows the facts on the ground, not the other way around. Russia and Iran are creating favorable facts. Once this military intervention has run its course, expect a peace proposal from Moscow that reflects its interests, including securing the Russian military base at Tartus.
We should not forget that Moscow’s definition of success is not the same as ours. "
I don't usually agree with Rice, but she and Gates are correct in their assessment and recommendations as to what the US should do.
Here is the link to the full article:https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-counter-putin-in-syria/20...
1
So...Putin is a reckless braggart and juvenile delinquent insensitive to the impact of his intrusions on NATO. He brazenly challenges limit setting as ALL adolescents do. He risks a broadening war in the service of bolstering his standing with the Russian people whom he and the oligarchs are willing to endanger in the name of nationalist pride. His desperation must signal something more ominous. What is it and how should it be addressed requires steely resolve, discerning judgment and the capacity to collaborate in nuanced ways all the while attuned to the potential for real catastrophe. Who amongst the current crop of presidential aspirants is up to this task?
1
Sounds like Bush Jr. That you are describing in your comment how ironic.
3
My "war propaganda alarm" went off when I read "weakened NATO."
"Weakened" by what? Record spending? US moving might into Europe? US not engaged on nonsensical war fronts?
Where is the "weakening." NATO is as prepared and poised as it has been in years.
Putin is like the little boy that you hold by the forehead while he wildly swings with his arms. Soon we will see photos of him leading a charge, bareback on a white stallion wielding a hockey stick. You have to be kidding if you think that his desperate move to Syria will end up anywhere other than the end of his reign as emperor...that would be the emperor with no clothes.
"Weakened" by what? Record spending? US moving might into Europe? US not engaged on nonsensical war fronts?
Where is the "weakening." NATO is as prepared and poised as it has been in years.
Putin is like the little boy that you hold by the forehead while he wildly swings with his arms. Soon we will see photos of him leading a charge, bareback on a white stallion wielding a hockey stick. You have to be kidding if you think that his desperate move to Syria will end up anywhere other than the end of his reign as emperor...that would be the emperor with no clothes.
4
Unfortunately, today's NATO is not the NATO of twenty years ago. Very few of the NATO countries have met their military budget spending goals of 2% of GDP. If they had. I suspect we wouldn't be hearing so much from Mr. Putin
The larger issue here is not Syria, but the difference in personality between Obama and Putin. We have seen what Putin has done in Moldovia, Georgia and Ukraine. There is a pattern and a purpose. Mr Putin is pushing the envelope the same way Nikita Khruschruv did in the Cuban Missile Crisis. Putin will not stop until Obama communicate in real terms JFK's steely response and resolve. The earlier the better. This way when it comes time to negotiate and settle we have less to give up.
It's NATO (a proxy for US influence in Europe) pushing up against Russia's borders which prompted Putin's defensive-turned-offensive posturing. Doesn't seem that the strategy of continuing to poke the bear in the eye, and hoping for positive results, is working too well....
2
This is all headed in the wrong direction.
It is utterly disgusting to read Ashton Carter's comments threatening Russian people with jihadist strikes inside Russia. Not suprising it is underreported here. Who they are going to be? Jihadists on the American taxpayer payroll or the same jihadists sponsored by Saudi Arabia's elite that attacked us mercilessly on 9/11!?
2
Putin sat back and watched the NATO countries empty their inventories over the last decade. Meanwhile he was developing new technology and a large stockpile of arms. What we now have is the final scene in the movie where one side is out of ammo and a new, heavily armed player enters the fray.
Bottom line: we never should have stepped into a contest where we did not understand the rules or the opponents. $3 trillion spent and the situation is worse than it ever was.
Bottom line: we never should have stepped into a contest where we did not understand the rules or the opponents. $3 trillion spent and the situation is worse than it ever was.
Obama policy in Syria aligns with the general view of most of the American public.
The people are not desirous of the US escalating the war with a greater US ground presence.
That caution is based upon fourteen years of observed political and military failure in the Middle East.
Americans are disinclined to restart the daily mortuary flights briningg dead troops back to Dover AFB.
We obviously have the skill to create a huge military establishment with high end technology but lack the aptitude to know how to use that force in limited war conflicts with insurgencies.
Also, the proxy armies that we hire, train and equip never seem to have the resolution and willpower of their opponents.
Obama to his credit has figured that out even if the hawks on the far right are clueless as well as feckless.
The people are not desirous of the US escalating the war with a greater US ground presence.
That caution is based upon fourteen years of observed political and military failure in the Middle East.
Americans are disinclined to restart the daily mortuary flights briningg dead troops back to Dover AFB.
We obviously have the skill to create a huge military establishment with high end technology but lack the aptitude to know how to use that force in limited war conflicts with insurgencies.
Also, the proxy armies that we hire, train and equip never seem to have the resolution and willpower of their opponents.
Obama to his credit has figured that out even if the hawks on the far right are clueless as well as feckless.
2
As long as NATO members depend on Russia for fossil fuels, these moves will be perceived as hollow gestures. Ultimately, economic dominance is the deciding factor in confrontations between countries and ideologies. NATO countries purchase large volumes of Russian Coal, Oil, and Natural Gas. Payment for those products enables Russia to fund its military adventures. Until Europe becomes independent of Russian Energy sources, they are politically in a tough spot to react effectively to Russia.
2
I am afraid that the obvious result of US policy in the ME is that time and again these countries are not ready for democracy or do not want it. Our mis-guided belief that if we weaken dictators and spend billions on arming moderate groups are that the people will rise up and overthrow the dictator and be filled with joy at the freedom of democracy. This has not happened and at best we have just helped one religious faction surplant another as the ruling despot du jour. Meanwhile our money and weapons change hands daily and are used against us more effectively than ever used by the group we gave them to. Let Russia play the bear in the ME and go bankrupt trying to establish order in the quicksand of greed, politics, and religion. Lets focus on maintaining stability in countries that are ready to sustain a government and where the majority are in agreement and willing to fight for what they want.
3
You know, the area is fairly important strategically for European cohesion and geographical dominance. Europe might want to mobilize a bit more effort.
I doubt Putin has the will or resources for a sustained fight. However, most Russian aggression is generally aimed at one of three goals: internal stability, border security, and/or economic ambition.
The last usually involves access to shipping lanes. Historically this means any body of water not frozen in ice. Look at a map and you'll understand the significance. I'll admit though, goals generally overlap.
I doubt Putin has the will or resources for a sustained fight. However, most Russian aggression is generally aimed at one of three goals: internal stability, border security, and/or economic ambition.
The last usually involves access to shipping lanes. Historically this means any body of water not frozen in ice. Look at a map and you'll understand the significance. I'll admit though, goals generally overlap.
1
I think we are in a new Cold War with Russia. Hot actions always swirled around our fundamental opposition to the old Soviet Union, including in Hungary in 1956, and, later Czechoslovakia, as well as in Cuba for several years in the early 1960s, bringing us almost to a nuclear confrontation. What is happening in the Ukraine and now Syria are relatively mild compared to these events. We aren't going to war with Russia over either of their recent interventions. It would be foolish and counterproductive.
1
Before one takes sides in the mess inside Syria it should be noted that those who are running away are also part of the problem. They most likely supported at least one of the anti-Assad groups as they were hoping that they could get more from them than from Assad. When they found out that wars are not such a good idea they then ran into hiding before realizing that what they helped put into motion in their country was irreversible until most paid the price for the war they supported in the first place. Their ignorance is part of the mess and maybe they need to go back and give their own lives in the names of their brothers who have already died. Died for what I do not know but those running away are as big a part of this problem as the Assad group is.
2
That's quite an opinion there. Let's blame the refugees! Im sure you're voting for Trump and support walls between us and the rest of the world also, including Canada-- eh?!
I don't understand the logic of annoying Russia and giving them more cause to behave as they are, by embarking on provocative maneuvers in Eastern and Northern Europe, when the real issue is with Russian activities in Syria. It should be patently obvious that the motivation for shoring up Assad is to protect the spoils of their many billions of military contracting, and if Assad were to leave office who knows what will be subsequently uncovered - so clearly, this military intervention is very purposeful and it will persist. Only if the regime were removed would the raison d'etre of this intervention be undercut and the hardware goes home. But President Obama has rightly decided there will be no proxy war with Russia, so there will need to be other ways to make this happen, as clearly most Syrians want that regime deposed. Meanwhile Assad hangs on to a wreck and the scale and intensity of the refugee crisis will only grow - quite massively. This will reinforce the self-interest of the Western world to help cure this problem at its root cause.
2
All fluff and bluster. As necessary as those forward headquarters being established may be to prepare for possibly larger forces to be deployed as needed, the fact remains that NATO countries have allowed their militaries to be run down to dangerous levels. And, even worse, absolutely none of them are trying to reverse that trend. Oh, they talk about it, but in reality, NATO countries that are not immediately threatened are not rearming but continue to cut their forces (including the United States).
Britain only has a few hundred tanks. Half of Germany's planes cannot fly due to lack of spare parts. As Libya showed, even a limited air campaign by France and Britain was completely unsustainable without American logistic support, and now we may be moving in the same direction. The NATO Patriot missile batteries from from ourselves and the Germans and both have been scheduled to be removed as they are needed elsewhere. Yet with Russia testing Turkey's air capabilities, we cannot.
At the end of the day, Putin's threatening actions towards Turkey are meant as a warning so as to leave him a free hand in Syria. He has no intention of attacking it, his intention is to intimidate so as to prevent help being provided to the rebel forces it is attacking. He is saying that it is unacceptable to him for Western nations to seek to overthrow Assad, and he will fight to prevent it, challenging us to say the same. Which we won't and shouldn't.
Britain only has a few hundred tanks. Half of Germany's planes cannot fly due to lack of spare parts. As Libya showed, even a limited air campaign by France and Britain was completely unsustainable without American logistic support, and now we may be moving in the same direction. The NATO Patriot missile batteries from from ourselves and the Germans and both have been scheduled to be removed as they are needed elsewhere. Yet with Russia testing Turkey's air capabilities, we cannot.
At the end of the day, Putin's threatening actions towards Turkey are meant as a warning so as to leave him a free hand in Syria. He has no intention of attacking it, his intention is to intimidate so as to prevent help being provided to the rebel forces it is attacking. He is saying that it is unacceptable to him for Western nations to seek to overthrow Assad, and he will fight to prevent it, challenging us to say the same. Which we won't and shouldn't.
1
This is all nonsense, Putin is being Putin, a little reckless, perhaps. Yet the strength emanating from his bold moves is establishing his own reputation at home and abroad. The European leaders are not even able to protect their own countries from marauding migrants let alone the Russian War Machine.
We are at a pivotal historic point,Russia and yes the World are all that point together. It is as though the stars themselves aligned to cause this tsunami of despair and helplessness.
The Europeans and the North Americans are waiting for their economies to gain a strong foothold after the long years of ecomomic depression, no one wants to make waves, therefore no unified response to Russia.So Putin takes what he wants and the World stares and cringes. NO amount of sanctions will stop the Russian Bear - only steel or vodka. It is time to have a serious talk, our leaders should work together-with Russia, and stop all this quarreling especially over things that are a fact accompli.Move on.
We are at a pivotal historic point,Russia and yes the World are all that point together. It is as though the stars themselves aligned to cause this tsunami of despair and helplessness.
The Europeans and the North Americans are waiting for their economies to gain a strong foothold after the long years of ecomomic depression, no one wants to make waves, therefore no unified response to Russia.So Putin takes what he wants and the World stares and cringes. NO amount of sanctions will stop the Russian Bear - only steel or vodka. It is time to have a serious talk, our leaders should work together-with Russia, and stop all this quarreling especially over things that are a fact accompli.Move on.
2
"It is hard to tell what Putin is thinking" - The question remains as to whether or not Putin knows what he is thinking!
2
He is a very smart man and I like him and what he does. I can't say the same for US leadership.
2
What is USA/NATO doing in Syria in the first place without a UN permission. Nevertheless, USA/NATO is bombing this country destroying people's homes and forcing 50% of the population to flee Syria. First the surroundng nations and now Europe is flooded by millions of migrants. Prof. Kelly Greenhill (Stamford) calls it ' Weapons of MASS Migration' caused by US doctrine to remove its President Assad from office . And Europe is now presented the bill of US/NATO bombing with millions of migrants which include al Qaeda extremists -80% of the migrants are males and younger than 30 years - rapes in Germany and Netherlands have been already reported.
Like before in Iraq (Hussein) and Libya (Gaddafi) these nations entered into turmoil and civil wars killing thousands of civilians, women and children. And EU has to pay the bill for this American doctrine = to remove Assad from office.
Finally, USA and NATO question the presence of Russian troops in Syria. My question is: By what authority gives USA/NATO the legal right to bomb a sovereign nation like Syria? Russia has a legal invitation to assist Assad in his fight against a US/NATO supported, armed and financed opposition and indirectly ISIS. US foreign policies of bringing 'US democracy in the world' only consists of CIA financing destabilization and open destruction of these sovereign countries. I can also quote former US president G.W. Bush with his doctrine: Either you're with us or against us. This is what USA stands for!
Like before in Iraq (Hussein) and Libya (Gaddafi) these nations entered into turmoil and civil wars killing thousands of civilians, women and children. And EU has to pay the bill for this American doctrine = to remove Assad from office.
Finally, USA and NATO question the presence of Russian troops in Syria. My question is: By what authority gives USA/NATO the legal right to bomb a sovereign nation like Syria? Russia has a legal invitation to assist Assad in his fight against a US/NATO supported, armed and financed opposition and indirectly ISIS. US foreign policies of bringing 'US democracy in the world' only consists of CIA financing destabilization and open destruction of these sovereign countries. I can also quote former US president G.W. Bush with his doctrine: Either you're with us or against us. This is what USA stands for!
7
Please, people are fleeing Assad and ISIS, not the U.S. and NATO. Have you lost your mind?
Why is it that the US and NATO cannot reach out to Russia and join forces against IS and seek a solution in Syria? Because of President Assad's warcrimes? Surely the US has backed and is backing worse dictators than Mr. Assad. The western coalitions most certainly have more lives on our collective conscience in Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan. One of the aims of the Iran Nuclear deal was to boost the fighting power of the Shia alliance in Iraq and Syria. We had no qualms about getting into bed with Iran and Hezb'ollah. Do we fear implications for Ukraine? Or are we simply galled that the Russians are making NATO look fumbling and indecisive? Do interests differ that much - surely not if we take Turkeys and Mr. Erdogans shortsighted aims out of the equation. When we have remembered that there are only political solutions to military enigmas, let us then start discussing how we deal with the structural dilemma of the Sunni discontent for which IS is the grim outlet.
3
The U.S. should instruct the moderate rebels to disengage and go home, removing the buffer between ISIS and Assad. Then let Bashir and Vlad deal directly with the fanatics. Let's see how that plays out.
5
Good idea, but they have no homes to go to. But maybe they could get Putin to ferry them to Norway. Through Russia. Like the other 400 did yesterday.
Who is scamming who(m) here?
Who is scamming who(m) here?
Good thing George W Bush looked in Putin's eye.
More sanctions are needed on Russia the kind of game being played now is not a good idea.
More sanctions are needed on Russia the kind of game being played now is not a good idea.
2
The article is full of lie and propaganda.
Syrian president Bashar al-Assad has been elected by people of Syria.
So Putin supports Syrian democracy (and choice of people of Syria) by supporting Bashar al-Assad and fighting terrorists.
USA tries to ruin democracy in Syria, by trying to shift Bashar al-Assad and supporting terrorists, thus ignoring choice of people of Syria.
Syrian president Bashar al-Assad has been elected by people of Syria.
So Putin supports Syrian democracy (and choice of people of Syria) by supporting Bashar al-Assad and fighting terrorists.
USA tries to ruin democracy in Syria, by trying to shift Bashar al-Assad and supporting terrorists, thus ignoring choice of people of Syria.
2
I'm sure that the 250,000 dead voted for Assad. Unreal.
De facto, Russia will fight against the interests of United States (in Syria).
Many ISIS combatants were trained or/and armed by the Americans. Caricatures:
1. http://cdn.topwar.ru/uploads/images/2015/374/lljk839.jpg
2. http://politrussia.com.images.1c-bitrix-cdn.ru/upload/iblock/00f/00fe67f...
As in war 08/08/08 - main part of russian and syrian opponents were trained, equipped and armed by the US.
Many ISIS combatants were trained or/and armed by the Americans. Caricatures:
1. http://cdn.topwar.ru/uploads/images/2015/374/lljk839.jpg
2. http://politrussia.com.images.1c-bitrix-cdn.ru/upload/iblock/00f/00fe67f...
As in war 08/08/08 - main part of russian and syrian opponents were trained, equipped and armed by the US.
1
Is NATO raising in an issue with Moscow or weakening the encounter against ISIS?
1
Putin is more vulnerable in Mid East rather than in Europe for one very simple reason:
If Nato keeps expanding its military activities next to Russia's border it will only face the resoluteness and determination from 99% of Russians as they will have to fight an aggressor who is threatening their Mother Russia . Putin's red lines for his own country are much more rigid and non pasaran .
The above is not so much the case in Mid East .
If Nato keeps expanding its military activities next to Russia's border it will only face the resoluteness and determination from 99% of Russians as they will have to fight an aggressor who is threatening their Mother Russia . Putin's red lines for his own country are much more rigid and non pasaran .
The above is not so much the case in Mid East .
1
Wow! 80 soldiers sent to Slovakia - sure to send a message to Putin. So what that doesn't begin to compare to the number of cops NYC sends to keep order at its annual Caribbean parade. But its a beginning and a recognition by Europe's leaders that a Bear is roaming its borders. For too long Europe has depended on the US for its military defenses; while grossly neglecting investment in its own.
Whether planned or simply evolved Obama's non-actions confronting Putin, plus Putin's vow to restore "Russian Greatness" has raised the concern from Berlin to London. Comments such as "we know Russia won't invade Europe" mask deep naïveté. We actually don't know what Putin will do; and Europe has plenty of vulnerabilities Putin can probe and exploit, affecting Europe both economically and politically.
Good to see that Europe's leaders have awaken to the treat; now if they would only start realistic investment of military capabilities Putin might begin to check his swaggering.
Whether planned or simply evolved Obama's non-actions confronting Putin, plus Putin's vow to restore "Russian Greatness" has raised the concern from Berlin to London. Comments such as "we know Russia won't invade Europe" mask deep naïveté. We actually don't know what Putin will do; and Europe has plenty of vulnerabilities Putin can probe and exploit, affecting Europe both economically and politically.
Good to see that Europe's leaders have awaken to the treat; now if they would only start realistic investment of military capabilities Putin might begin to check his swaggering.
Long-term outcome of the Russian military involvement in Syria is difficult to predict. It is likely to strengthen the position of Damascus regime and weaken ISIS. It is hard to say anything about the future of anti-regime opposition attacked by Russians as they are divided and affiliated with different outside groups whose interests are often conflicting. After ISIS defeat in Syria its fighters and leaders will seek other places to run Jihad (just like Al-Qaeda after Sudan was forced to ask them to leave). Russia may become one of their targets, given a large Muslim population living there.
Current NATO response is not surprising but still rather symbolic (in numbers) regarding its military presence in Central and Eastern Europe.
Cruise attack launched from the Caspian Sea is surprising given a type of missiles and vessels from which they were launched. This gives NATO analysts much to think and should trigger changes in the military strategy.
Current NATO response is not surprising but still rather symbolic (in numbers) regarding its military presence in Central and Eastern Europe.
Cruise attack launched from the Caspian Sea is surprising given a type of missiles and vessels from which they were launched. This gives NATO analysts much to think and should trigger changes in the military strategy.
1
Diplomacy of peace Russa and Europe
1
The lack of strong US leadership and its reluctance and indecision about acting is obviously spilling over into NATO, which is no surprise as the US is the backbone of NATO. Putin is clearly exploiting the vacuum this has created, and it is wishful thinking to believe that he is going to fail, if we just wait him out.
Let's be clear about it. We are enabling Putin's plans to rebuild the old Soviet Union, and, even if he is only partially successful, this will have long term implications as the balance of world power shifts and nations realign their relationships as a result.
Doing nothing will bring us back to a Cold War environment. Dealing with the issues in a meaningful way will allow us move forward and away from that possibility.
Let's be clear about it. We are enabling Putin's plans to rebuild the old Soviet Union, and, even if he is only partially successful, this will have long term implications as the balance of world power shifts and nations realign their relationships as a result.
Doing nothing will bring us back to a Cold War environment. Dealing with the issues in a meaningful way will allow us move forward and away from that possibility.
3
Two points. Now the US is ricking confrontation with the Russians to punish them for their intervention in Syria? This is CRAZY, not to mention extremely counterproductive!
Second, like the map of Syria accompanying this article, which inflates the areas held by the Daesh, compared to the ones we saw in earlier articles. The NY Times wouldn't be doing their war propaganda number, like they do with each and every Israeli war, would they?
Second, like the map of Syria accompanying this article, which inflates the areas held by the Daesh, compared to the ones we saw in earlier articles. The NY Times wouldn't be doing their war propaganda number, like they do with each and every Israeli war, would they?
3
If we had actually defended Obama's "red lines", our enemies would have deterrence and our allies would have faith. Instead, we flail and wait and hope, while thugs build their military and project power around the globe.
Time to go home. Let Putin own this mess.
4
Would someone explain the relationship between "Russia kills terrorists in the Middle East" and "Russia is going to kill Estonians." The only apparent connections are NATO paranoia and the need for NATO to make Russia look dangerous.
In fact, Russia has never threatened any of the Baltic nations and has no conceivable reason to do so. The movements by NATO seem to be only a way to make NATO, an otherwise useless organization, look relevant in a Europe that is not at war.
In fact, Russia has never threatened any of the Baltic nations and has no conceivable reason to do so. The movements by NATO seem to be only a way to make NATO, an otherwise useless organization, look relevant in a Europe that is not at war.
2
Putin is a bad dude..Obama was naive to think he can play nice with him.
NATO is international gangster , it has violated Syria air space 7000 times since 2014 and its is worried with Russia single air space violation , bloody hypocrisy .
NATO (turkey base) has violated Syrian air space since 2014 and took 7000 flights and bombed Syria and Iraq 0ver 7000 times and destroyed much of Syria infrastructure , it's a legal where as Russia once for five minutes was in turkey air space
NATO (turkey base) has violated Syrian air space since 2014 and took 7000 flights and bombed Syria and Iraq 0ver 7000 times and destroyed much of Syria infrastructure , it's a legal where as Russia once for five minutes was in turkey air space
2
Here is my interpretation from all the headlines, Russia steps into a civil war it had no interest in since annexing part of Ukraine. It's a logistical, strategic move to establish a military zone within the Middle East, if Assad is placed in power, to curtail NATO member Turkey? Russia is clearly defining NATO as a threat or enemy of the state by it's provocations in the last few years, Europe, Ukraine, Balkans, Turkey, Air and Sea Violations, etc. I think Putin is testing, and looking for a war, it's clearly written on the wall. How long before NATO see's this, well time will tell, clearly something has to be done with Russia before spirals out of control like the past World Wars.
1
This "jayvee team" thing sure has escalated into a World Series in a hurry.
3
This is warmongering propaganda and despicable. Like we've all been unconscious the last four years? or 14yrs? or 50?
What would be informative is why Saudi Arabia is so thoroughly influencing our foreign policy; how we couldn't take out ISIS, actually armed AlQueda in Syria as moderates to take out the Alawite Assad as SA wanted and now are fulminating at Putin for aiding his ally.
Without war, apparently, we're nothing. Tell us about these things, and how the military keeps blazing along with war rhetoric when we should be trying to work together with Putin to stop ISIS and the immigration crisis. There's obviously more to it all than we're told and this ratcheting up has neocon written all over it.
What would be informative is why Saudi Arabia is so thoroughly influencing our foreign policy; how we couldn't take out ISIS, actually armed AlQueda in Syria as moderates to take out the Alawite Assad as SA wanted and now are fulminating at Putin for aiding his ally.
Without war, apparently, we're nothing. Tell us about these things, and how the military keeps blazing along with war rhetoric when we should be trying to work together with Putin to stop ISIS and the immigration crisis. There's obviously more to it all than we're told and this ratcheting up has neocon written all over it.
3
The NATO leaders shown in that photo seems like a bunch of gangsters ready to loot the world. NATO lost its credibility by being self-indulgent, principle-free, imperialistic and narcissist.
Time to wake up and do some good things and build good friends.
Time to wake up and do some good things and build good friends.
4
Not since NATO was founded in 1949 has there been a Soviet or Russian leader who was this willing to test the Alliance's mutual defense obligations so stupidly and carelessly. Unless he's thoroughly convinced that we will never do anything, Putin's actions make zero sense. But it's almost as foolish to deliberately take him on. He's hoisted himself by his own petard right into the cesspool and pretty soon the giant sucking sound you hear will be the Assad quagmire dragging him deeper into it. It's likelier he'll drown himself in the process than save Assad from what he has coming to him. Fools rush in...
1
Apart from this blustering, rhetoric and less than symbolic steps, what exactly NATO is going to do that can change Putin' s mind. Only way Putin will get the message is to confront him Militarily and NATO is neither going to do it nor it seems prudent to start WW III over Syria, Putin knows it and NATO knows it, that is why Putin is not afraid to flex his muscles as he did in Ukraine.
What next the US and NATO arm and fund ISIS to fight the Russians.
1
"We have ourselves to blame, when we let Putin take Crimea without firing a shot...."
Well, maybe if we hadn't helped a bunch of Ukrainian thugs engineer a coup, leaving the Ukraine with no legitimate government and persuading Russia to take advantage of the chaos by pressing for a referendum in which Crimean residents overwhelmingly voted to rejoin Russia rather than stay with the Ukraine...
Just saying.
Well, maybe if we hadn't helped a bunch of Ukrainian thugs engineer a coup, leaving the Ukraine with no legitimate government and persuading Russia to take advantage of the chaos by pressing for a referendum in which Crimean residents overwhelmingly voted to rejoin Russia rather than stay with the Ukraine...
Just saying.
1
Alarmed by the speed and scale of the Russian intervention in Syria? Didn't the Ukraine campaign teach US and NATO commanders anything? Our civilian and military leaders are astonishing aloof to reality.
1
“All of this sends a message to NATO citizens: NATO will defend you, NATO is on the ground, NATO is ready.”
Does anyone really believe NATO when it makes such statements?
In the same article we read about missile batteries stationed in Turkey to prevent potential missiles emanating from Syria, and which were scheduled to be removed from Turkey later this year. One would think that at the very least NATO would rethink the removal of such batteries given the situation in Syria, but NATO officials will not even entertain such a possibility.
What is the point of this alliance other than empty bluster?
Does anyone really believe NATO when it makes such statements?
In the same article we read about missile batteries stationed in Turkey to prevent potential missiles emanating from Syria, and which were scheduled to be removed from Turkey later this year. One would think that at the very least NATO would rethink the removal of such batteries given the situation in Syria, but NATO officials will not even entertain such a possibility.
What is the point of this alliance other than empty bluster?
It seems we have accidentallly stumbled into a war in Syria. Where was the debate on whether or not we should be militarily in another country's fight? I remember protests about both Afghanistan and Iraq, why none over Syria?
I think we ought to get out of Syria, and the rest of the Middle East.
I think we ought to get out of Syria, and the rest of the Middle East.
3
With a sudden and dramatic escalation of crisis in Syria by Russia and its Shiite allies, the decision to shore up defenses in Europe and the Middle East by the NATO is all right but beyond that NATO should avoid coming into direct confrontation with the adversary. For, Syria currently appears to have developed into a dangerous flash point though, Putin is no way in position to sustain his initial military advantage for long. Sooner or later he's bound to negotiate with the West his way out of the crisis. It's time to give diplomacy a chance and avoid military option that would simply prolong the crisis with greater humanitarian cost.
7
As a professor can you explain why Obama after almost 7 years in power haven't learned a thing from Georgia, the Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, Iran, or Afghanistan, or why Putin understands Clausewitz's insight that "War Is Merely the Continuation of Policy by Other Means" and Obama the wise does not.
There is no negotiation with tyrants from a position of weakness. I prefer peace-but these ultra-violent people don't respect people who won't stand up to them. Neither do many people whom they represent. A vicious circle? Kennedy vs. Kruschev said otherwise.
Stanley Zaffos, if war could be continuation of politics by other means, the opposite could also be true. Obama's wisdom perhaps suggests him the latter course. And rightly so after several futile foreign wars by the US. Thanks.
Glad to see we have long memories:
"While I cringe at the Times churning out these propaganda pieces, I take comfort reading the comments from others. During the Times' embarrassing Iraq propaganda debacle..."
For the record, the Times took an editorial position at the last minute against the Iraq war, which struck me then (and now) as having been just "for the record" since the Times had spent the preceding year or so fanning the flames of war. Some pro-war columnists (Tom Friedman, for example) stuck with their pro-war position, and so one must credit them for consistency (not much more -- but consistency). Other pro-war publications, such as the Washington Post, had been practically salivating for war with Iraq, and so they had little choice but to endorse the war. Frankly, I thought the Times had little choice either, given their articles leading up to the war, but they imagined themselves to have enough wiggle room to come out -- formally, at least -- against it.
I just hope the Times' formal "against" position on the Iraq war isn't taken seriously by its readers. Up until its eve-of-war editorial, the Times was foaming at the mouth as much as the Washington Post. It just had figured out how to foam at the mouth without being quite so obvious about it.
"While I cringe at the Times churning out these propaganda pieces, I take comfort reading the comments from others. During the Times' embarrassing Iraq propaganda debacle..."
For the record, the Times took an editorial position at the last minute against the Iraq war, which struck me then (and now) as having been just "for the record" since the Times had spent the preceding year or so fanning the flames of war. Some pro-war columnists (Tom Friedman, for example) stuck with their pro-war position, and so one must credit them for consistency (not much more -- but consistency). Other pro-war publications, such as the Washington Post, had been practically salivating for war with Iraq, and so they had little choice but to endorse the war. Frankly, I thought the Times had little choice either, given their articles leading up to the war, but they imagined themselves to have enough wiggle room to come out -- formally, at least -- against it.
I just hope the Times' formal "against" position on the Iraq war isn't taken seriously by its readers. Up until its eve-of-war editorial, the Times was foaming at the mouth as much as the Washington Post. It just had figured out how to foam at the mouth without being quite so obvious about it.
11
Obviously the incursion into Turkish air space is just one more Putin move to test NATO's reaction. How far is Putin willing to go to "earn" a place in Russian history? One thing is sure. He knows he must get there before Obama leaves office. Neither John McCain nor Mitt Romney, had either been elected, would have allowed the situation to get as far as it has with the dangerous passivity characteristic of our sitting President.
4
McCain and Romney wont be able to stop Putin either unless they are prepared to let the US be turned into a pile of nuclear ash. The only way forward is to sit down and talk and let the whole world become more democratic rather than the US trying to dictate to the rest of the world.
John McCain sneaked into Syria about 5 years back meeting with the opposition alliances against Bashar Assad like Free Syrian Army etc. mainly to topple the elected leader of a country. By the way If McCain can enter Syria without a visa only to destroy their country by giving the arms and ammunition and other logistical support to the groups which splintered into Nusra Front and also I.S.I.S. etc, what is wrong with the millions of people who entered this country and other western countries of Europe after escaping brutal regimes and extremely harsh economic conditions created mainly by the western alliances ? They're just trying to make a living in extremely harsh conditions . We should always go by the famous saying ,"What is good for the geese is good for the gander." And we as a nation which is defined by Martin Luther King jr , should treat everybody equally. And not by the color of their skin . And also not by the language they speak or their cultural heritage or the God they preach to. We've to change ourselves and become perfect before we try to change the world . And then only we should try to be this world's policemen..........tkb.
This American President has indeed been passive but mainly in allowing his State Department to run amok. The hubris hangover from the end of the cold war has convinced the State Department and others that the USA can walk on water. If the USA were not so determined to bring about REgime Change in Syria the long suffering Syrian people might now have some peace. They now flood Europe soon to be joined, perhaps, by a similar flood from Ukraine due to the Civil War provoked there by the USA instigated Regime Change.
"So, Bin-Laden has the last laugh after all."
Fair point. The situation reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode, The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street, in which aliens sow seeds of suspicion among neighbors on Maple Street and then sit back, sip their alien drinks, and watch as the neighbors turn on one another.
Fair point. The situation reminds me of the Twilight Zone episode, The Monsters Are Due On Maple Street, in which aliens sow seeds of suspicion among neighbors on Maple Street and then sit back, sip their alien drinks, and watch as the neighbors turn on one another.
4
I do hope out geniuses in charge have a serious no questions asked bounty out for Russian missile parts from unexploded ordinance.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if the failure is from the same overseas suppliers that we buy from.
Wouldn't it be a hoot if the failure is from the same overseas suppliers that we buy from.
Your reporters appear concerned that NATO must "shore up its credibility" in the face of "Russian actions" in Syria.
Mr. Obama could also use similar "shoring up" of his own credibility in this regard.
Mr. Obama could also use similar "shoring up" of his own credibility in this regard.
12
Obama's doing fine. No US soldiers should die for Syria.
Feel free to parachute in, if it's so important to you.
Feel free to parachute in, if it's so important to you.
2
Saw somewhere they want to start Cold War Nuclear drills.
My gracious. Putin and Iran are just doing the Saudi in Yemen thing. Iraq is just doing the Iraq someone else fight for me thing. Putin is not going to attack Europe. The Sky is falling though. Instead of a no fly zone he and Assad will probably consider a free passage out corridor with a smirk on their faces. Let him have it.
My gracious. Putin and Iran are just doing the Saudi in Yemen thing. Iraq is just doing the Iraq someone else fight for me thing. Putin is not going to attack Europe. The Sky is falling though. Instead of a no fly zone he and Assad will probably consider a free passage out corridor with a smirk on their faces. Let him have it.
4
"It is clear that Russia intends to stimulate additional migrant flow into Europe..."
I've heard all sorts of motives ascribed to Russia's actions. My hunch is that it's a bit more straightforward: This war has dragged on for over four years, with great suffering for the Syrian people. Nobody else seems inclined to step in, and Assad asked Russia to help. So Russia did.
Straightforward, eh? If Russia benefits from stepping in, that's fine with me.
I've heard all sorts of motives ascribed to Russia's actions. My hunch is that it's a bit more straightforward: This war has dragged on for over four years, with great suffering for the Syrian people. Nobody else seems inclined to step in, and Assad asked Russia to help. So Russia did.
Straightforward, eh? If Russia benefits from stepping in, that's fine with me.
17
Assad already killed hundreds of thousands in Syria, of course, with Russia's help.
Did you know that from when Russia started their operations in Syria, Isis terrorists begin to flee the battlefield dressed as women ?
It's not from Russia Today, it's from The Jerusalem Post: :-)
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/ISIS-fighters-dress-as-women-in-despera...
It's not from Russia Today, it's from The Jerusalem Post: :-)
http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/ISIS-fighters-dress-as-women-in-despera...
7
The article to which you posted a link is dated from March 2015, and refers to ISIS fighters fleeing Tikrit when Iraq retook it. As scary as the Russians may be, I somehow doubt they were fleeing from them more than six months in advance.
As Putin has shown his mercurial character, it is prudent for NATO to wake up, and defend itself shaking off the cobwebs of lethargy that has engulfed it through its complacency. Putin's Blitzkrieg took over the Crimea while the rest of the world blinked and yawned apathetically. When he marched into eastern Ukraine, Europe sat up and took notice, imposing sanctions. Now his rapid deployment of an army into Syria and the firing of cruise missiles from 900 miles away from the safety of the Caspian Sea has Europe and all of NATO rattled.
His incursion into the air space of Turkey is nothing new. He has done it to the United States several times on the West Coast around Alaska, has done it to Great Britain just last May who quickly scrambled Typhoon fighters to intercept the Russian Bear bombers, which are capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The reason for these deliberate violations is obvious: He is testing our response time, our reaction, and defenses, pushing the envelop of tolerance.
Putin is the most dangerous man alive, supported with largest arsenal of nuclear weapons anywhere. He has been flexing his military muscle in not only eastern Europe, but now in the Middle East as well. And, so far has gone unchallenged with only a verbal rebuke that has served to only further emboldened him.
This is no longer just about Syria, but a megalomaniac gradually chewing up territory tactically positioning himself.
His incursion into the air space of Turkey is nothing new. He has done it to the United States several times on the West Coast around Alaska, has done it to Great Britain just last May who quickly scrambled Typhoon fighters to intercept the Russian Bear bombers, which are capable of carrying nuclear weapons. The reason for these deliberate violations is obvious: He is testing our response time, our reaction, and defenses, pushing the envelop of tolerance.
Putin is the most dangerous man alive, supported with largest arsenal of nuclear weapons anywhere. He has been flexing his military muscle in not only eastern Europe, but now in the Middle East as well. And, so far has gone unchallenged with only a verbal rebuke that has served to only further emboldened him.
This is no longer just about Syria, but a megalomaniac gradually chewing up territory tactically positioning himself.
6
Best I've seen today.
“All of this sends a message to NATO citizens: NATO will defend you, NATO is on the ground, NATO is ready.”
That is utterly ridiculous. Ready for what? Russian invasion of Europe? Can anyone take such a possibility seriously? Why on earth would Russia attack NATO? And what does it have to do with Syria? I guess, stupidity cannot contain itself to one issue. The West's policy on Syria is so stupid because it is developed by stupid people. Could we really expect any sense and reason from them on other issues?
That is utterly ridiculous. Ready for what? Russian invasion of Europe? Can anyone take such a possibility seriously? Why on earth would Russia attack NATO? And what does it have to do with Syria? I guess, stupidity cannot contain itself to one issue. The West's policy on Syria is so stupid because it is developed by stupid people. Could we really expect any sense and reason from them on other issues?
18
Seriously? People, Russia has already attacked Europe almost two years ago. Ukraine, the largest country in Europe, and the olny nation in the world giving away nuclear weapons for the sake of peace, now being invaded by Putin 'peace hordes'. And all we talk is 'sanctions' to whick Putin orders to burn European food and flowers. Remember Russia's MH17 veto.
7
In case you didn't notice "Russia's warplanes violated Turkish airspace" and Turkey is a NATO member. Putin is getting too cocky and contemptuous and needs a reality check. He's already invaded Ukraine and would have advanced into other East European countries if NATO hadn't made a move against his actions.
1
And the EU sanctions against Russia have turned out to be more a case of the EU shooting itself in the feet with both barrels with latest reports that they have cost Russia 20 billion and cost the EU 100 billion!
As a long-ago retired military officer, I can tell you that there is no way to tell when NATO is awake. The Brass have been sitting in Brussels for so long doing very little, or nothing, that they must all now be covered with moss. The "old days" when I was in Europe and NATO flexed, and had, muscles, are long gone. It should be closed down and something new created............
7
You must have missed the last two years of NATO taking the lead in correctly calling out Russia's dual invasion of Ukraine while European politicians in general vacillated in bouts of political expediency and ethical timidity. It's time to turn Russia's propaganda into reality and do what NATO leaders like Anders Fogh Rasmussen have come around to do: send serious quantities of troops and equipment to shore up Ukraine's defense and to help welcome that country into the common defense network against Russian neo-fascism. Putin cries about NATO "encircling" him. Let's make that a reality since now he is the dangerous dictator that we should fear and contain.
NATO is as only as good as the USA ... And it isn't NATO that needs "shoring up" ... It's the USA that needs a "shoring up" - In fact it is the USA that needs an "Overhaul" - as far its Global posture is concerned ... And that is not likely to happen as long as Obama is in the White House...
The likely Agenda will be " Global Warming" during the Next Century...
I just hope the World can make it through the next 15 Months ...
The likely Agenda will be " Global Warming" during the Next Century...
I just hope the World can make it through the next 15 Months ...
1
Why do you want American soldiers to be killed for Syrian?
1
What a lot of hot air: Bush et.al. have done more to discredit America than Obama. I have real problems with his passivity, but he is no Chamberlain.
Taking an arm chair approach:
Russia sends a dangerous message with its airstrikes in Syria.
The opening move took place.
Russia bombs the Syrian rebels and not ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Syrian force. We are not happy with these unforeseen events.
Assad breathes a sigh of relief and Putin's game shifts from chess to checkers.
Our strategic moves now may well be:
Encourage Syrian rebels to stand down and take refuge in safe zones in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.
This is known as a strategic retreat or live to fight another day.
Many Syrian refugees may choose to leave the EU and move to welcome and join the rebels in the camps.
We send all types of aid to the camps.
We, other parties, and NATO retire to a negotiating table, deliberate, and send a "here we are" note to Putin/Assad.
Then we wait.
ISIS/Al Qaeda turn their attention on Assad and his forces and have at it.
Putin must now engage these hostile forces aligned against Assad and decide how to defeat them - all on his own.
He is forced to encourage and/or put boots on the ground to assist Assad. Home front Russia, with their past Afghanistan disaster and other current national problems, now says - Maybe we should talk this over, Comrade Putin.
We signal Putin from the negotiating table and send positive, helpful, and welcoming remarks.
The good news: Obama is President, not some hot-headed Republican war monger.
Hope Congress and NATO keep a cool head.
Above scenario may lack vital detail. Do add to it.
Russia sends a dangerous message with its airstrikes in Syria.
The opening move took place.
Russia bombs the Syrian rebels and not ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Syrian force. We are not happy with these unforeseen events.
Assad breathes a sigh of relief and Putin's game shifts from chess to checkers.
Our strategic moves now may well be:
Encourage Syrian rebels to stand down and take refuge in safe zones in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.
This is known as a strategic retreat or live to fight another day.
Many Syrian refugees may choose to leave the EU and move to welcome and join the rebels in the camps.
We send all types of aid to the camps.
We, other parties, and NATO retire to a negotiating table, deliberate, and send a "here we are" note to Putin/Assad.
Then we wait.
ISIS/Al Qaeda turn their attention on Assad and his forces and have at it.
Putin must now engage these hostile forces aligned against Assad and decide how to defeat them - all on his own.
He is forced to encourage and/or put boots on the ground to assist Assad. Home front Russia, with their past Afghanistan disaster and other current national problems, now says - Maybe we should talk this over, Comrade Putin.
We signal Putin from the negotiating table and send positive, helpful, and welcoming remarks.
The good news: Obama is President, not some hot-headed Republican war monger.
Hope Congress and NATO keep a cool head.
Above scenario may lack vital detail. Do add to it.
4
You sound a little peeved that your 'moderate friendly' heart/liver eating be-headers and drivers of explosive-laden cars into markets are getting vaporized.
While I cringe at the Times churning out these propaganda pieces, I take comfort reading the comments from others. During the Times' embarrassing Iraq propaganda debacle, I estimate about a third of the readers expressed skeptical or disbelief, now the comments are overwhelmingly skeptical and dismissive of the Times' warmongering propaganda articles. It is reassuring that the military industrial complex and their media allies only get to fool the U.S. population once in a generation.
19
Elsewhere, The Times reports that Russian cruise missiles crashed in Iran. No word yet as to whether they hit any hospitals.
5
Will never happen while 44 is in the White House.
Just wait until there is a confrontation in the air between Israel and Russia as Putin has threatened if Israel goes after Hezbollah or Iranian fortifications and advanced weaponry in Syria. Last time that happened in '73 war, Soviet assets came out the loser. Similarly invasion of NATO member Turkey's airspace presents a clear threat that must be challenged. This is a dangerous game with Putin imitating the Neocon blunders in Iraq but he is propping up the wrong guy for sure.
8
"Russia is never going to invade one of the NATO members. It is not stupid.
NATO does not represent the world."
You're almost certainly correct, though one never knows if NATO keeps lowering the bar. Let's hope at least that its membership net is never cast as widely as its field of operations. Its last few operations have been in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and the Ukraine – far enough afield that one might forget that "NATO" stands for "North Atlantic Treaty Organization."
NATO does not represent the world."
You're almost certainly correct, though one never knows if NATO keeps lowering the bar. Let's hope at least that its membership net is never cast as widely as its field of operations. Its last few operations have been in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and the Ukraine – far enough afield that one might forget that "NATO" stands for "North Atlantic Treaty Organization."
1
"Another thing, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has declared that the Free Syrian Army has vanished, and cannot be found. The "moderate opposition forces" seems to exist today only in some spokesperson's imagination. ... Does the FSA even exist? Did they ever?"
It's been a long, long time since the FSA has reportedly won any victory on its own – not fighting under the command of the al Nusra Front (al Qaeda).
Ask yourself this question:
When was the last time you saw a photograph of men who were said to be members of the "Free Syrian Army" that included more than 3 or 4 men?
It's been a long, long time since the FSA has reportedly won any victory on its own – not fighting under the command of the al Nusra Front (al Qaeda).
Ask yourself this question:
When was the last time you saw a photograph of men who were said to be members of the "Free Syrian Army" that included more than 3 or 4 men?
12
Ah, here's the answer!
The US argues that Russia should focus its attacks solely on ISIS. Russia replies that a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist, and that it can't effectively fight ISIS until it eliminates the non-ISIS terrorists.
Rather than complain that Russia is dropping too few bombs on ISIS, why doesn't the US drop a few bombs of its own on ISIS? If it does, and whups ISIS while Russia is busy bombing non-ISIS terrorists, the US' argument that Russia doesn't really care about defeating ISIS will become much stronger.
The US argues that Russia should focus its attacks solely on ISIS. Russia replies that a terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist, and that it can't effectively fight ISIS until it eliminates the non-ISIS terrorists.
Rather than complain that Russia is dropping too few bombs on ISIS, why doesn't the US drop a few bombs of its own on ISIS? If it does, and whups ISIS while Russia is busy bombing non-ISIS terrorists, the US' argument that Russia doesn't really care about defeating ISIS will become much stronger.
2
Maybe we need to send some of the commentators here to Syria so they can experience Putin's help while Syrian refugees will take their cozy spots here in the U.S.
4
"A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist", not really. One man's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter. The difficulty in Syria is that there are so many different religious groups, all vying for power and control of the country. In the end there has to be some agreement if Syria is to remain whole, otherwise a dictator will assume power and squelch all opposition. Putin is backing Assad, his ally, who will protect Russia's naval ports in the Mediterranean and allow Putin to have influence in the Middle East. The US has a different policy and is not joining Russia.
NATO, GCC, Israel & Turkey are directly arming, funneling jihadist, and financially supporting al-Qaeda in northern & southern Syria and the Golan Heights. The majority of the American people know this fact; still, major publications seem to be sticking to their fairytale propaganda and continuing to advocate for the support of the al-Qaeda and its minions. I wonder why!?!
7
After the 9/11 US back Al Quaeda in Syria only because there they use a different name. There are no words for such a behavior.
7
Oh, I forgot: thay say there was not any trace of the bombings US said they had performed on Isis.
OK... nobody believes nobody.
But this means from BOTH sides :-)
OK... nobody believes nobody.
But this means from BOTH sides :-)
A good strategy by the Russians. Destroy all non ISIS opposition and then demand support for Assad as the only bulwark against them. Defeat ISIS, make Assad the hero, and salvage an important client state. Or something like that. The scenario has a better chance of success than the recent US/Western fiascos. By the way, I am no fan of Putin or his Russia but the hypocrisy coming out of NATO after all the recent Western interventions, some of them against iinternational law and the desire of the governments involved, is incredible. Time for a true world governing authority with power and wisdom which you is not beholden to the nation states of the world!
6
Russia's actions in Syria do not touch on any matter that should be of any concern of NATO. The fact that Russia entered the war in Syria at the invitation of Syria which has the right to invite and host any nation it wants, is not a matter that NATO has any say in, nor does it effect it in any way.
And this most certainly is not about the Russian incursion into Turkish airspace in that NATO sees that as a threat to invade the Baltic states.
In fact it has nothing at all to do with NATO.
This is the leaders of the NATO nations acting like children and throwing a tantrum over the fact that they do not have the power to order Russia what it may or may not do. So placing token troops in the Baltic and keeping the Patriot in Turkey is their way of demonstrating their collective strength and power to counter Russia.
If only these leaders would stop and realize how pathetic this show of force actually is. Do they think Russia is intimidated by units of "up to 150 personnel" in former eastern block countries. Do they think that anyone in the world has any doubt that if Russia so desired to invade Latvia that NATO will actually stand up and send in 100,000 troops, instead of 150.
In fact this "show of force" is actually allot more embarrassing than being upstaged by Putin and being rendered irrelevant by him.
And this most certainly is not about the Russian incursion into Turkish airspace in that NATO sees that as a threat to invade the Baltic states.
In fact it has nothing at all to do with NATO.
This is the leaders of the NATO nations acting like children and throwing a tantrum over the fact that they do not have the power to order Russia what it may or may not do. So placing token troops in the Baltic and keeping the Patriot in Turkey is their way of demonstrating their collective strength and power to counter Russia.
If only these leaders would stop and realize how pathetic this show of force actually is. Do they think Russia is intimidated by units of "up to 150 personnel" in former eastern block countries. Do they think that anyone in the world has any doubt that if Russia so desired to invade Latvia that NATO will actually stand up and send in 100,000 troops, instead of 150.
In fact this "show of force" is actually allot more embarrassing than being upstaged by Putin and being rendered irrelevant by him.
2
I am sometimes wonder USA is a democratic country. It is much more worse than an autocratic country, with a puppet president working for corporates and monarchs in the middle east. Al Queda killed 3000 innocent civilians in 9/11 and 15 years later we arm them again and call them moderates. I didnt even forget an NYtimes article says Al queda is better than ISIS.
1
Obama the Incompetent has been totally schooled, humiliated, and emasculated by Putin. Obama has displayed historic weapons-grade incompetence
4
President Obama is a pacifist. One of the weakest presidents we've ever had.
Putin and Xi have his number... and they will push ever harder. I think they know he will ever respond in a fight. I even fear he would not push "The Button" and retaliate to a limited nuclear strike. This is the central dogma of MAD, and leaves us very vulnerable to an "accidental" nuclear detonation over an American or European city (Kiev?). Plus, Putin may not be as mentally stable as most people think. He's certainly unpredictable.
Putin and Xi have his number... and they will push ever harder. I think they know he will ever respond in a fight. I even fear he would not push "The Button" and retaliate to a limited nuclear strike. This is the central dogma of MAD, and leaves us very vulnerable to an "accidental" nuclear detonation over an American or European city (Kiev?). Plus, Putin may not be as mentally stable as most people think. He's certainly unpredictable.
1
Well it's about time Nato woke up to the reality, that Russia is controlled by a Bolshevik with aspirations of a greater Russia.We have ourselves to blame, when we let Putin take Crimea without firing a shot, Putin realized that Nato didn't have the stomach for confronting him, aside from sanctions that was merely a slap on the wrist, Putin demonstrated his military power in Syria, & sent a message to the west that his missiles can hit any place in Europe, & North America. Europe was waiting for America to take the lead, but Obama
seems to be biding his time until he leaves office, & who can blame him. I don't think this will turn into a World War, I really don't think that Putin wants that, but as long as we don;t draw a line in the sand, Putin will do whatever he wants to.
seems to be biding his time until he leaves office, & who can blame him. I don't think this will turn into a World War, I really don't think that Putin wants that, but as long as we don;t draw a line in the sand, Putin will do whatever he wants to.
The prize that Putin receives for "outwitting" NATO?
He gets to become entangled in Syria's Civil War. Yep, he sure is clever.
He gets to become entangled in Syria's Civil War. Yep, he sure is clever.
2
NATO: This is not the biggest threat you have faced since WWII. How have you handled Ukraine? Sadly, Syria and elsewhere are a total loss for their people due to the deranged illness that pervades - maniacs destroying their own heritage - bombed back to 600 AD (apologies to Domini). The USA has NOTHING to gain by being there. No face saving necessary. USA get out. NATO get out. Leave Russia to deal with the mess with no win for anyone.
5
Syria and Russia have been allies for decades. This alliance is tangible and valuable to Russia; Turkey and NATO should know that to kick Russia out of Syria through proxy Islamist jihadist will be challenged by Russia. Russia has made a statement here; it is ready to defend its position with Russian blood. The multi-trillion dollar question here is are Turkey and NATO ready to shed their blood to kick Russia out?
3
It is clear that Russia intends to stimulate additional migrant flow into Europe as a means of ''getting back'' (emposition of sanctions over Ukraine) at the West for spoiling the party Putin and his rich friends have been having at the expense of the Russian people and their economy.
Sometimes human nature is so easy to assess.
One can always start with what happens on an elementary school playground and build out from there as to why grown individuals behave like they do.
Sometimes human nature is so easy to assess.
One can always start with what happens on an elementary school playground and build out from there as to why grown individuals behave like they do.
1
It's a big mess vetting bigger ,I feel bad for the people caught in the middle.
The world we live now - NATO standing up for Al Queda. Wow. Just wow.
8
Does anybody believe this? Obama has might as well have been castrated by Putin he's been so badly humiliated. Putin sent a Russian General to the U.S. Embassy in Iraq to tell Obama to stay out of his way. Guess What? That's what Obama has been doing. Putin has intentionally invaded Turkey's / NATO's airspace and what has been Obama's reaction? NOTHING, or dithering but that is really NOTHING, or worse than NOTHING. NATO is sure rising to the challenge though. Britain is sending 25 more people to the Ukraine, and they will be sending some units, probably 1, of up to 150 people to the Baltic States, Poland and Hungary. Well Putin must be shaking in his boots with that kind of response? My bet is Putin's next step is with the Baltic States, and so far nobody has done anything that he needs to take seriously for even a single second. Also the U.S. usually leads in these responses, but he knows the USA is stuck with the worst, weakest, most inept, INCOMPETENT President in our history. So he knows there is no leadership in NATO to do anything. If I were living in Baltic States or Poland I think I'd be thinking of moving further WEST, unless of course I wanted to learn to Speak Russian and live under Putin.
You chew up the rebels first with Daesh help, and after the appetizer go to the main course.
With the Bear on top of her and below her Turkey will have to support cutting off Daesh, or may face active Russian support for a greater Kurdistan.
NATO will not go to war over an internal Turkish Muslim nation problem.
Turkey didn't do so well with overflights over Syria.
They would do even worse over Russia.
With the Bear on top of her and below her Turkey will have to support cutting off Daesh, or may face active Russian support for a greater Kurdistan.
NATO will not go to war over an internal Turkish Muslim nation problem.
Turkey didn't do so well with overflights over Syria.
They would do even worse over Russia.
6
Turkey should leave NATO already.
If the EU don't want Turkey to join EU, why should Turkey commit its military strenght to NATO who is mostly composed of EU members.
If the EU don't want Turkey to join EU, why should Turkey commit its military strenght to NATO who is mostly composed of EU members.
Although, it's easy to get caught in the "What should NATO do?" discussion. I believe it's pretty easy to see that Putin's actions are going to polarize the region and make it much easier to pick out the sides. By supporting Assad and hitting all his enemies, Putin is focusing all the far flung enmities on Russia. It sounds like this is the anti-Christian/western Jihad ISIL has been looking for. They wish it was the US, but the nutty Christian nationalists from Russia will do nicely. They have a record for getting stuck in sticky situations and this will keep them busy as well as wear them down for quite a while. NATO shouldn't relax, but they needn't panic either.
6
I am heartened by the number of NY Times readers who discern the Saudi hand in American foreign policy in Syria and how outrageous it is for NATO to stick its nose there after NATO’s debacle in Libya.
Readers will take note, but not the mainstream media, of the fact that the US government is arming al Qaeda in Syria (Qaeda is part of the umbrella group “Army of Conquest”) and the US is actually objecting to Russia attacking the Army of Conquest. As other readers have noted, this is treason. Does no one remember 9/11?
Can anything other than willful blindness explain the fact that readers can discern this dreadful and the Establishment in general has little to report and editorialize concerning such blatant treason? There’s hidden hand controlling the news and that’s not a conspiracy theory because for anyone who has eyes to see, the hand is no longer quite so hidden.
Readers will take note, but not the mainstream media, of the fact that the US government is arming al Qaeda in Syria (Qaeda is part of the umbrella group “Army of Conquest”) and the US is actually objecting to Russia attacking the Army of Conquest. As other readers have noted, this is treason. Does no one remember 9/11?
Can anything other than willful blindness explain the fact that readers can discern this dreadful and the Establishment in general has little to report and editorialize concerning such blatant treason? There’s hidden hand controlling the news and that’s not a conspiracy theory because for anyone who has eyes to see, the hand is no longer quite so hidden.
44
Even the FBI never had evidence connecting OBL to 911. What organization in the world could have known that on 9/11, the US would be running 26 drills, the most on one day EVER, about terror attacks, so many drills that the FAA was completely confused
exactly right Michael
' .. readers who discern the Saudi hand in American foreign policy in Syria '
I, for one, had not guessed that there was a Saudi hand in our foreign policy. At least, I would not have thought that they had a strong hand.
Like many, I have always assumed that our foreign policy, especially in the ME, was basically driven by Israel.
I, for one, had not guessed that there was a Saudi hand in our foreign policy. At least, I would not have thought that they had a strong hand.
Like many, I have always assumed that our foreign policy, especially in the ME, was basically driven by Israel.
3
The meeting of the fools in Brussels: Russia is not going to invade Europe; hundreds of thousand of migrants are, and soon it will over 1 million, right as Winter sets in central Europe.
Most are young males, used to violence, don't speak anything but Arabic, are uneducated or near illiterate, and don't even know our alphabet.
The icing on the cake was the revelation in the NYT yesterday that the CIA has given TOW missiles to the Syrian rebels who fight on the side of Al Qaeda.
Are we really fighting terrorism or is it like the Sitkrieg of 1939-40?
Most are young males, used to violence, don't speak anything but Arabic, are uneducated or near illiterate, and don't even know our alphabet.
The icing on the cake was the revelation in the NYT yesterday that the CIA has given TOW missiles to the Syrian rebels who fight on the side of Al Qaeda.
Are we really fighting terrorism or is it like the Sitkrieg of 1939-40?
28
How quickly bigots and xenophobes in the U.S. forget that this country was founded by 'migrants'. On a side note, why Syrian refugees are not taking refuge in 'brotherly Russisa'? Not a single one!
Migrants are now arriving from Russia into Norway, and Norway is NOT happy. Winter is approaching and Norway is hoping that bad weather will stop the migration. Greece, Italy, Germany and Norway - thousands of migrants, soon to be millions. This is an unfolding scenario.
"the CIA has given TOW missiles to the Syrian rebels who fight on the side of Al Qaeda"
Sounds like Afghanistan all over again :)
Sounds like Afghanistan all over again :)
Two things.
1. What has NATO been preparing for for the last 65 years if there isn't a rapid and prepared plan in place already?
2. Who stands to gain from the higher prices it would seem are so easily minipulated by causing havoc in the middle east again, even on perception?
Iran and Russia.
1. What has NATO been preparing for for the last 65 years if there isn't a rapid and prepared plan in place already?
2. Who stands to gain from the higher prices it would seem are so easily minipulated by causing havoc in the middle east again, even on perception?
Iran and Russia.
4
NATO has been preparing for nothing. They have no money. But the member nations do have single payer health care.
They will need it when the Russian tanks run over their toes.
They will need it when the Russian tanks run over their toes.
2
I wonder if Putin has directed Comrade Snowden to hack NATO's computers? Or maybe Turkey's? The sooner Snowden and the US Atty General hammer out the details of his incarceration -- it's been weeks of dickering -- the safer NATO's computers will be.
Wake up people...smell the coffee..look at the reported bomb and missile strikes....Russia is not targeting Daesh....they are targeting rebel opposition to Assad...the odd pot shot they have taken on known Daesh positions is just a bit of smoke and mirrors...its a diversion....ITS A LIE....Its what Russia does best....RUSSIA TELLS LIES ....They do not know how to work with truth....never have and never will...Fortunately Russian lies really only really work on Russian people because the Russian population has been brainwashed with propaganda since the revolution in 1917...it the only thing they know.
Any non Russian who honestly thinks that Russia's action in Syria are anything more honest than protecting self interest and diverting attention aay from their other disruptions in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, are either naive or in the pay of the troll propaganda factories of Moscow and St Petersberg
Any non Russian who honestly thinks that Russia's action in Syria are anything more honest than protecting self interest and diverting attention aay from their other disruptions in Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia, are either naive or in the pay of the troll propaganda factories of Moscow and St Petersberg
7
And what's so wrong with protecting self-interests isn't it in human nature? If you have something to say you say it, we had our word to Saddam and we said it why don't others can do the same? When we supported Iranian Shah it was OK, when Russians support Assad it is not. Don't you see any logical conflict here? Or is it "what is allowed to Jupiter not allowed to bull" kind of thing?
Finally, an honest assessment of Russia. Right from the horse's mouth! Right from Ukraine!
Hello, anybody home? Assad is the only one who can and does fight ISIS on the ground. Whoever fights him is a de facto ISIS ally and must be eliminated if we are to destroy ISIS. It is simple logic. If the "moderates" do not want to get bombed, they should stop fighting Assad and start fighting ISIS. As simple as that.
1
Obama has not lifted a finger to help our allies in Syria fight Russian aggression!
5
Obama hasn't lifted a finger anywhere. He's done nothing but dither about Crimea and Eastern Ukraine, he's openly appeased Iran, he's ran out of Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Yemen as fast as our folks could get to the airport even leaving their cars running to be stolen as they flew away. China does as it pleases in the South China Sea and the Russians ordered Obama to stay out of their way in Syria and that's exactly what he is doing. Well to be sure Obama has hammered and betrayed Israel. He has lifted a finger to slap them in the face an he's left Egypt high and dry also.
And that is a very good thing, because your dear Obama calls alQueda's people our allies.
Your president is arming the same people who attacked us in 9/11.
How about he stops doing that? It's treason.
Your president is arming the same people who attacked us in 9/11.
How about he stops doing that? It's treason.
you mean our allies Al-Nusra which is the Syrian branch of Al-Qaeda?
This is so stupid, one does not know where to start. Is this for real? Judging from the photograph these guys need to get real jobs, of course, trying to avoid that is why they come up with this baloney. "Test the credibility" like they mean, give us more money, that is the test of our (the USA's) credibility.
8
In California, as homebuilding has expanded on the borders of wilderness areas, there has been an increase in encounters with bears. No surprise there. In Europe, as NATO has expanded, they're seeing increased encounters with the other bear. Why is NATO surprised?
7
On our trip to (north) Lake Tahoe last week (220 mi.), the sprawl from Livermore to Tracey on 580, and then north to Sacramento on 99/I-5, was amazing. Farmland paved over for freeway-fed shopping malls. But it brings jobs, and ratables for the tax man, and fewer crops to water.
4
Jens Stoltenberg, NATO chief said: “All of this sends a message to NATO citizens: NATO will defend you, NATO is on the ground, NATO is ready.” I doubt if a threat from Russia is immanent on the borders between the Baltic states and their former tormentor. Yet NATO and its allies have been stepping up of defence units there, prompting Dmitry S. Peskov, Putin's spokesman to warn that it would be a "regrettable" action.
But one never knows whether Russia would take advantage of the headlines in Syria to stealthily encroach on its former satellite states' territories. Putin has shown that he is a master of surprise.
But one never knows whether Russia would take advantage of the headlines in Syria to stealthily encroach on its former satellite states' territories. Putin has shown that he is a master of surprise.
8
To induce those countries to join NATO, we had to put some lead in our pencil. Show me the money, NATO. A precursor for 20 years to today's Baltic provocations has been junky Russian subs getting stuck in Swedish fjords, the subs that did catch fire and sink at sea, that is.
1
In reality, the root problem here is the continued existence of NATO after the Warsaw Pact was disbanded in 1991. Anyone with a basic grasp of history knows that NATO was formed in 1951 as a countervailing force to what the Warsaw Pact represented.
In reality what actually took place was, under the auspices of the US, a metastatic growth of an organization that had no reason or rational to exist after the fall of the Soviet Union. After 1991 the US viewed NATO as a way to get around Russia's veto power of any military excursions in the United Nations by the various Security Counsel members,. NATO essentially acts as the US's "private army" in any situation throughout the world where military force is deemed a requirement. NATO acts as a fig leaf in order to provide what it does with international "coalition status. This fact has been a bone in the craw of Russia since 1992, culminating in what we have going on in Syria today.
To add insult to injury, the US is currently picking up over 75% of the NATO operating costs (with some members actually paying nothing). The economics just don't support the idea of a "mutually beneficial alliance".
In reality what actually took place was, under the auspices of the US, a metastatic growth of an organization that had no reason or rational to exist after the fall of the Soviet Union. After 1991 the US viewed NATO as a way to get around Russia's veto power of any military excursions in the United Nations by the various Security Counsel members,. NATO essentially acts as the US's "private army" in any situation throughout the world where military force is deemed a requirement. NATO acts as a fig leaf in order to provide what it does with international "coalition status. This fact has been a bone in the craw of Russia since 1992, culminating in what we have going on in Syria today.
To add insult to injury, the US is currently picking up over 75% of the NATO operating costs (with some members actually paying nothing). The economics just don't support the idea of a "mutually beneficial alliance".
18
Taking an arm chair approach:
Russia sends a dangerous message - its airstrikes in Syria.
The opening moves take place.
Russia bombs the Syrian rebels and not ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Syrian force.
We are not happy with these unforeseen events.
Assad breathes a sigh of relief and Putin's game shifts from chess to checkers.
Our strategic moves now may well be:
Encourage Syrian rebels to stand down and take refuge in safe zones in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.
This is known as a strategic retreat or live to fight another day.
Many Syrian refugees may choose to leave the EU and move to welcome and join the rebels in the camps.
We send all aids to the camps.
We and other interested parties retire to a negotiating table, deliberate, and send a "here we are" note to Putin/Assad.
Then we wait.
ISIS/Al Qaeda turn their attention on Assad and his forces and have at it.
Putin must now engage these hostile forces aligned against Assad and decide how to defeat them - all on his own.
He is forced to encourage and/or put boots on the ground to assist Assad.
Home front Russia, with their past Afghanistan disaster and other current national problems, now says - Maybe we should talk this over, Comrade Putin.
We signal Putin from the negotiating table and send positive, helpful, and welcoming remarks.
The good news:
Obama is President, not some hot-headed Republican war monger.
Hope Congress and NATO keep a cool head.
Above scenario may lack vital detail. Do add to it.
Russia sends a dangerous message - its airstrikes in Syria.
The opening moves take place.
Russia bombs the Syrian rebels and not ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Syrian force.
We are not happy with these unforeseen events.
Assad breathes a sigh of relief and Putin's game shifts from chess to checkers.
Our strategic moves now may well be:
Encourage Syrian rebels to stand down and take refuge in safe zones in Turkey, Jordan, and Lebanon.
This is known as a strategic retreat or live to fight another day.
Many Syrian refugees may choose to leave the EU and move to welcome and join the rebels in the camps.
We send all aids to the camps.
We and other interested parties retire to a negotiating table, deliberate, and send a "here we are" note to Putin/Assad.
Then we wait.
ISIS/Al Qaeda turn their attention on Assad and his forces and have at it.
Putin must now engage these hostile forces aligned against Assad and decide how to defeat them - all on his own.
He is forced to encourage and/or put boots on the ground to assist Assad.
Home front Russia, with their past Afghanistan disaster and other current national problems, now says - Maybe we should talk this over, Comrade Putin.
We signal Putin from the negotiating table and send positive, helpful, and welcoming remarks.
The good news:
Obama is President, not some hot-headed Republican war monger.
Hope Congress and NATO keep a cool head.
Above scenario may lack vital detail. Do add to it.
6
Obama, the Congress, and NATO remain cool while Russia and Iran team up to sweep the field in The Middle East. A record number of Europeans freeze to death this coming winter as the price of oil hits $200.00 a barrel and Russia cuts off The Ukraine and several Euro countries. President Obama leaves office in January 2017, after being voted "the worst president ever."
In response to Russian aggression, Britain sends in an additional 25 troops. That's really scary.
4
How exactly is Russia attacking Islamist radicals in Syria a challenge for NATO? Was NATO created to defend Islamist radicals? During event like this (just like in the days before Iraq war) it becomes all too obvious that the "freedom of press" exists only in theory and not in real life.
40
If NATO has not noticed yet, symbolic gestures of increasing defenses have done nothing to deter Russia from being an unstable actor in European and global affairs.
If NATO wants to send a message of true deterrence while showing NATO's commitment to collective defense is unshakable - It is time to give up on the symbolic gestures and create a real military deterrence to ensure the security of its members by deterring a confrontation from ever happening.
Full military NATO bases in eastern member states would be the place to start.
If NATO wants to send a message of true deterrence while showing NATO's commitment to collective defense is unshakable - It is time to give up on the symbolic gestures and create a real military deterrence to ensure the security of its members by deterring a confrontation from ever happening.
Full military NATO bases in eastern member states would be the place to start.
7
The Russian operation in Syria is not an invasion, like the U.S. operation in Iraq was. Russia is cooperating with Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and Iraq. ISIS has had support from the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey (Israel perhaps also?).
So it's not a quagmire like Vietnam, but the expected pushback to U.S. long, wide and very costly military attacks during the last 15 years at least, overt and covert, in person and by proxy, all over the Middle East and Central Asia: from Lybia, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan to Syria and beyond.
There are reports in other media, not the NYT, about Iranian forces already on the ground to do the mop up operations, eliminating the need for Russian troops. Iraqi troops will do the same on their side of the border. And other reports point to the involvement of China, with the presence of Chinese navy already in the vincinity. Could the NY Times check this out for us readers? You know, to get a more complete picture of what's at stake here, rather than talk about a missile battery in Poland?
Another thing, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has declared that the Free Syrian Army has vanished, and cannot be found. The "moderate opposition forces" seems to exist today only in some spokesperson's imagination. Again, NY Times, can you check that out for us? Independently and not embedded? Where is the great journalism of the Vietnam era? Does the FSA even exist? Did they ever?
So it's not a quagmire like Vietnam, but the expected pushback to U.S. long, wide and very costly military attacks during the last 15 years at least, overt and covert, in person and by proxy, all over the Middle East and Central Asia: from Lybia, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan to Syria and beyond.
There are reports in other media, not the NYT, about Iranian forces already on the ground to do the mop up operations, eliminating the need for Russian troops. Iraqi troops will do the same on their side of the border. And other reports point to the involvement of China, with the presence of Chinese navy already in the vincinity. Could the NY Times check this out for us readers? You know, to get a more complete picture of what's at stake here, rather than talk about a missile battery in Poland?
Another thing, Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has declared that the Free Syrian Army has vanished, and cannot be found. The "moderate opposition forces" seems to exist today only in some spokesperson's imagination. Again, NY Times, can you check that out for us? Independently and not embedded? Where is the great journalism of the Vietnam era? Does the FSA even exist? Did they ever?
35
'Could the NY Times check this out for us readers? You know, to get a more complete picture of what's at stake here, rather than talk about a missile battery in Poland?'
Don't fret. We shall hear from the NYT editorial board soon, with complete and unbiased information on the situation in Syria. Again.
Don't fret. We shall hear from the NYT editorial board soon, with complete and unbiased information on the situation in Syria. Again.
Obviously the Iraqi government is cooperating with Russia here. Cruise missiles can't get from the Caspian Sea to Syrian targets without passing over Iraqi (or Turkish) airspace, and the US government would be squawking right now if the Iraqi government hasn't given overflight rights to the Russians.
Most likely the Iraqi government tried to extract some reciprocal promise from the Russians to concentrate on ISIS, but the Russians replied: "Thanks for the advice, but we can figure out how to fight this war on our own. Now, how about those overflight rights?"
Iraq apparently concluded it was better off letting Russia fly its cruise missiles (and planes) over Iraq, confident that Russia would get around to fighting ISIS when Russia decided to fight ISIS. In the meantime, if Russia wanted to kick around some non-ISIS Sunni nut cases in other parts of Syria, that's something the Iraqi government (being dominated by Shiites, after all) could live with – even if the US was pressuring Iraq to tell Putin he had to concentrate on ISIS.
Iraq did what I'd have done. In the longer run, Iraq may change its mind, though. Russia/Assad presumably will wipe out the non-ISIS rebels, and then keep ISIS ought of the Assad-controlled portions of Syria. At that point, unless ISIS wants to lose its zeal – on which it depends to recruit young fighters from all over the world – it will need an alternate focus. The obvious "candidates" for that are (1) Iraq; and (2) the Kurds.
Most likely the Iraqi government tried to extract some reciprocal promise from the Russians to concentrate on ISIS, but the Russians replied: "Thanks for the advice, but we can figure out how to fight this war on our own. Now, how about those overflight rights?"
Iraq apparently concluded it was better off letting Russia fly its cruise missiles (and planes) over Iraq, confident that Russia would get around to fighting ISIS when Russia decided to fight ISIS. In the meantime, if Russia wanted to kick around some non-ISIS Sunni nut cases in other parts of Syria, that's something the Iraqi government (being dominated by Shiites, after all) could live with – even if the US was pressuring Iraq to tell Putin he had to concentrate on ISIS.
Iraq did what I'd have done. In the longer run, Iraq may change its mind, though. Russia/Assad presumably will wipe out the non-ISIS rebels, and then keep ISIS ought of the Assad-controlled portions of Syria. At that point, unless ISIS wants to lose its zeal – on which it depends to recruit young fighters from all over the world – it will need an alternate focus. The obvious "candidates" for that are (1) Iraq; and (2) the Kurds.
2
For better or worst, we can't blame the Russians for trying to get the job done while we and our allies pussyfoot around. They're just trying undo the damage we've done by putting the pieces back together the way it was and not the way it should. How long has this crisis in Syria been going on? Maybe Russia finally got sick and tired of all the chaos caused by our attempts at regime change from Ukraine to Iraq. When Russia go in, they go in with guns blazing. None of the girly stuff. It's better if we don't get in their way. We had our chance and ISIL is still standing.
10
Except we're not doing the same job.
While the U.S.-led coalition attacks ISIL, Russia is attacking Syrians in a bid to prop up Assad, the Butcher of Damascus, who has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Syrians on his hands.
While the U.S.-led coalition attacks ISIL, Russia is attacking Syrians in a bid to prop up Assad, the Butcher of Damascus, who has the blood of hundreds of thousands of Syrians on his hands.
6
Thanks for the enlightenment, Mikhail.
Meantime your president gives anti tank weapons to alQueda.
1
Hold on a second...this cannot be happening!
Remember, President Obama was given a Nobel Peace Prize on "Hope" and "Change."
Exactly, he was given the Nobel Peace Prize because "the world is not a bad place and if, only if, you can sit with those you disagree and have an open, effective dialogue positive change will be the result."
My suggestion would be for the European pacifists and Obama administration to get their fine china, bordeaux/burgundy wines, and intellectuals together - set the table - invite Putin, Assad, and the Ayatollah for sit down and explain to them the predicament that has been created through this very unfriendly approach based on lack of dialogue and meanness. Really...can't we talk about it!
Remember, President Obama was given a Nobel Peace Prize on "Hope" and "Change."
Exactly, he was given the Nobel Peace Prize because "the world is not a bad place and if, only if, you can sit with those you disagree and have an open, effective dialogue positive change will be the result."
My suggestion would be for the European pacifists and Obama administration to get their fine china, bordeaux/burgundy wines, and intellectuals together - set the table - invite Putin, Assad, and the Ayatollah for sit down and explain to them the predicament that has been created through this very unfriendly approach based on lack of dialogue and meanness. Really...can't we talk about it!
16
As Congresswoman Ros-Lehtinen revealed during the initial Benghazi hearings, the Clinton State Dept. budget had "$5 million for glassware," and "$1 million for Embassy security." Save the glassware!
5
What Credibility Nato lost that a long time ago. With the European countries not spending the money on their defense need leave us to fund and provide the manpower and the lead, but hamstrung waiting on the Euro trash to make a decision with has only got worst Since the Euro can't agree on anything and worry about their own self interest instead of the common good of the ground.
Let the Russian have Syria it not our problem. WHY are we concern about this place when it never been an allied so it comes down to saving Israel again.
Enough let the muslims be mad at the russian for a change.
Let the Russian have Syria it not our problem. WHY are we concern about this place when it never been an allied so it comes down to saving Israel again.
Enough let the muslims be mad at the russian for a change.
1
Israel is no concern of mine, nor should it concern any American.
1
You get to vote but your vote has no effect on the US Military Criminal Industrial complex and its lust for War, any war at all, that they think they can win. Although the last war they won was Grenada. Wow, what a victory that was!
3
There is a common misconception that hanging onto Russia's sole naval base on the Mediterranean ( Tartus , Syria ) is one of the factors driving Putin's intervention . In fact , the resupply base is tiny , manned by a dozen or so men and incapable of servicing the majority of the ships in the Russian navy . One of its two small floating docks is often non-operational . Discussions with Assad to expand the leased base in the past have essentially gone nowhere .
Putin is playing to the voters and party apparatchiks at home with his moves into Ukraine , Syria , Georgia , etc . The longer he stays in power the richer he becomes . He is rumored to be the richest president in the world , having skimmed off tens of billions since his ascension to power .
Putin is playing to the voters and party apparatchiks at home with his moves into Ukraine , Syria , Georgia , etc . The longer he stays in power the richer he becomes . He is rumored to be the richest president in the world , having skimmed off tens of billions since his ascension to power .
1
The media pushes war. It sells papers. The government also pushes war. It sells arms. Few seems to be pushing peace - aside from the commentators here.
21
Putin is playing the disoriented West like a true Maestro. He has no intention of getting bogged down in Syria or anywhere else. He will use close in air support and long range naval bombardment to provide enough firepower for indigenous combatants to 1st stabilize the Assad regime. He will then then roll back the ISIS threat by utilizing Iranian and Iraqi troops.....and he will finally achieve both diplomatic & economic dominance in the region by forming a Shiite Crescent beholden to the Russian Bear.
His long term goal is to completely unravel NATO by undercutting American credibility. His timing... what with the huge influx of refugees into Europe... positions Russia as the Continent's savior. Plus his control of both Russian gas and the Middle East oil will form an economic stranglehold on Europe for the foreseeable future.
The events of the last ten days have changed the strategic landscape enormously and minor tweaks by NATO are going to do little to alter the long term plans of Mr. Putin.
His long term goal is to completely unravel NATO by undercutting American credibility. His timing... what with the huge influx of refugees into Europe... positions Russia as the Continent's savior. Plus his control of both Russian gas and the Middle East oil will form an economic stranglehold on Europe for the foreseeable future.
The events of the last ten days have changed the strategic landscape enormously and minor tweaks by NATO are going to do little to alter the long term plans of Mr. Putin.
6
It's time to cut and run from Syria (which is just a post-Colonial construct of a bunch of different tribes: Alawite, Suni Sh'ia, Christian, Kurd, Druze........) and fund and arm everyone who wants to fight there, with the exception of Assad and his band of Alawite thugs. Putin, for some reason admired by wingnuts as a "strong" leader when he's simply a textbook neo-fascist authoritarian, is hurtling down the same old one-way street of "....the economy is bad, time for war" and the end for him and for Russia will not be pretty. Everyone else should be wary and taking every step imaginable to not be pulled into his wake of willful destruction.
3
I read one of these propaganda pieces in the LA Times. The readership almost to a head DESTROYED the article in the comments section. Looks like the E coast has some catchin' to do. HEADLINE: Russia Cuts ISIS in half in two weeks after a year and a half of US "operations." Yeah, operations like ARMING ISIS! Of course they're "concerned." NYT: I can't believe half of what I read in this article. Among NATO's concerns: Russian jets destroying ISIS, Russian cruise missiles destroying ISIS, and a Russian jet that may have flown within 5 miles of Turkeys recently-expanded airspace. NYT: aren't you embarrassed publishing such idiocy?
27
Citation?
1
I guess someone at NATO answered when the 1980's called, wanting their Cold War foreign policy back.
Worth revisiting Romney's response to Obama's now infamous line:
"Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe...and Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin.”
Worth revisiting Romney's response to Obama's now infamous line:
"Russia, I indicated, is a geopolitical foe...and Russia does continue to battle us in the U.N. time and time again. I have clear eyes on this. I’m not going to wear rose-colored glasses when it comes to Russia or Mr. Putin.”
9
Why do Western leaders constantly call on Putin to "cooperate?" Putin is not on their side. This is not some kind of misunderstanding. Western leaders, behind Obama, want some kind of non-ISIS, non-Assad, regime in Syria, (which is a pipe dream.) That goal is directly opposed to Russia's interests, which Putin sees best served by maintaining long-time ally and client Assad in power.
Putin is not out to do the West a favor. Putin is looking to preserve Russia's geo-political interests.
I suppose Western leaders have to come up with some rhetoric for domestic consumption, but even as domestic propaganda this is pretty weak stuff.
Putin is not out to do the West a favor. Putin is looking to preserve Russia's geo-political interests.
I suppose Western leaders have to come up with some rhetoric for domestic consumption, but even as domestic propaganda this is pretty weak stuff.
2
If NATO can create problems for Putin in Ukraine, Putin can create problems for NATO in Syria!
1
Putin's been rattling the Russian saber in Scandinavia and the Baltic States, with submarines and unannounced nuke-bomber flights all the way down to the North Sea, for several years now.
One intrepid NATO member, Italy, was said "at the weekend" to be re-thinking its previous offer to provide unarmed Tornado fighters for.... photo recon in Syria/Iraq. As soon as its government approves the Italian Air Force (yes, they have one) has decided to ARM the planes. Such bravery is rarely seen anymore on the Continent!
The sad truth is our push behind the "Arab Spring" has created havoc and death for millions of people caught in the cross-fire.
There is an argument to be made that the previous stronger. tyrannical autocratic regimes were in general less deadly to the general population than the chaotic struggles going on now.
The region was probably not ready for spring, and we've plunged it backward into a long cold winter.
There is an argument to be made that the previous stronger. tyrannical autocratic regimes were in general less deadly to the general population than the chaotic struggles going on now.
The region was probably not ready for spring, and we've plunged it backward into a long cold winter.
8
"Kaliningrad ... sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland ... is vital to the Northern Fleet for winter operations when Murmansk is iced over."
Shhhh -- whatever you do, don't tell the Russians that their port at St. Petersburg, far south of Murmansk, doesn't freeze over in the winter!
Shhhh -- whatever you do, don't tell the Russians that their port at St. Petersburg, far south of Murmansk, doesn't freeze over in the winter!
1
"Really I don't see the point to be so alarmed. A couple of Russian jets just briefly invading the Turkish sky is not any thing that can be seriously considered a threat. That's just ridiculous."
Exactly. Decades ago, a high school friend stationed with the US military in northern Alaska, told me that several times a month, US military planes flew into Russian airspace and Russian military planes flew into US airspace. He said it got pretty boring up there and this added some spice to their dull lives. Every now and then, he said, one government or the other would complain to the other government, and then the "fun" would stop for a few weeks. But nobody ever thought -- much less intended -- that it would lead to war, and, needless to say, it never has.
Russian jets shouldn't stray into Turkish airspace -- I think we all agree on that. But if it happens every once in a while, it's hardly reason to go to war. And guess what? The US ain't going to war with Russia, so get over it. Think about it: Since World War II ended, what's the toughest country the US has ever gone to war with? North Korea, maybe? North Vietnam? Iraq?
Exactly. Decades ago, a high school friend stationed with the US military in northern Alaska, told me that several times a month, US military planes flew into Russian airspace and Russian military planes flew into US airspace. He said it got pretty boring up there and this added some spice to their dull lives. Every now and then, he said, one government or the other would complain to the other government, and then the "fun" would stop for a few weeks. But nobody ever thought -- much less intended -- that it would lead to war, and, needless to say, it never has.
Russian jets shouldn't stray into Turkish airspace -- I think we all agree on that. But if it happens every once in a while, it's hardly reason to go to war. And guess what? The US ain't going to war with Russia, so get over it. Think about it: Since World War II ended, what's the toughest country the US has ever gone to war with? North Korea, maybe? North Vietnam? Iraq?
3
NATO is an anachronism people by politicians with their hands out reaching for U.S. funds while they look around for delicate Russian situations which they can exploit as excuses for more largesse from the U.S.
NATO seems to be another giant bureaucracy like the NSA and CIA which appear to have solved the challenge of perpetual motion in keeping themselves alive with self-generated crises that get out of hand except as justification for huge shares of the National resources.
It is time to give NATO a place in the historical archives of bureaucracy.
NATO seems to be another giant bureaucracy like the NSA and CIA which appear to have solved the challenge of perpetual motion in keeping themselves alive with self-generated crises that get out of hand except as justification for huge shares of the National resources.
It is time to give NATO a place in the historical archives of bureaucracy.
1
"There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the enemy." - George Washington
2
"But does anyone think NATO will do anything of substance here?"
Not I. Nor do I think NATO (or the US) should.
We had a chance to take the lead in fighting ISIS. We have a chance now to follow the Russians' lead. What's the third choice in that old military mantra?
"Get out of the way." That's what we should do.
Frankly, this is working out just fine. Let the Russians spend their blood and treasure over there, not us. I've never felt Assad is worse for the US than some Islamist nut cases. We've been fed this "moderate rebel" claptrap for years, and now it's clear that's all it's been. The so-called "moderate rebels" never accomplish anything unless they're fighting alongside the al Nusra Front (al Qaeda), which means that whenever we help the "moderate rebels," we help al Qaeda. That may make good sense to some, but not to me.
The choices are (1) Assad; or (2) ISIS – with al Qaeda (al Nusra Front) a distant number 3. What's to debate when those are the choices? You go with Assad, and if the Russians want to do the heavy lifting for us, I'm all for it. If Russia gains some additional influence in Syria as a result, I can live with that.
Not I. Nor do I think NATO (or the US) should.
We had a chance to take the lead in fighting ISIS. We have a chance now to follow the Russians' lead. What's the third choice in that old military mantra?
"Get out of the way." That's what we should do.
Frankly, this is working out just fine. Let the Russians spend their blood and treasure over there, not us. I've never felt Assad is worse for the US than some Islamist nut cases. We've been fed this "moderate rebel" claptrap for years, and now it's clear that's all it's been. The so-called "moderate rebels" never accomplish anything unless they're fighting alongside the al Nusra Front (al Qaeda), which means that whenever we help the "moderate rebels," we help al Qaeda. That may make good sense to some, but not to me.
The choices are (1) Assad; or (2) ISIS – with al Qaeda (al Nusra Front) a distant number 3. What's to debate when those are the choices? You go with Assad, and if the Russians want to do the heavy lifting for us, I'm all for it. If Russia gains some additional influence in Syria as a result, I can live with that.
13
This is a Sunni-Shia religious war. The Sunnis are supported by the Saudis and Turks, and Shias are supported by Iran, Iraq and Hezbollah. The varying and somehow conflicting interests of other groups/countries that form loose sub-alliances do not change the nature of the main conflict.
The Turks(Erdogan) started this war in the mistaken belief that the new Syria would be an Ottoman-era province of Turkey.
With direct Russian participation on the Shia side, the US and NATO are increasingly, and uncomfortably, siding with the Sunnis.
It is a fascinating conflict to watch.
Above all, the US needs to stay above the fray, and be an advocate for a solution that will uphold democratic participation, secularism, and gender equality in Syria.
The Turks(Erdogan) started this war in the mistaken belief that the new Syria would be an Ottoman-era province of Turkey.
With direct Russian participation on the Shia side, the US and NATO are increasingly, and uncomfortably, siding with the Sunnis.
It is a fascinating conflict to watch.
Above all, the US needs to stay above the fray, and be an advocate for a solution that will uphold democratic participation, secularism, and gender equality in Syria.
5
Had NATO and the US actually done something instead of doing NOTHING over these past couple of years they wouldn't find themselves in this position.
Russia ACTED, they didn't.
Russia ACTED, they didn't.
2
Yeah, NATO's response is mostly symbolic. So why isn't the US pressuring Iraq to stop letting Russia fly its cruise missiles and supplies over Iraq to Assad?
3
"So why isn't the US pressuring Iraq to stop letting Russia fly its cruise missiles and supplies over Iraq to Assad?"
I'd be amazed to learn the US isn't doing just that. Apparently Iraq is saying "no" to the US and "yes" to Russia.
It's a fair bet that if Iraq were NOT granting overflight rights to Russia, we'd have heard that by now. Undoubtedly that's embarrassing for the US, but it's pretty clear that's what's happened.
I'd be amazed to learn the US isn't doing just that. Apparently Iraq is saying "no" to the US and "yes" to Russia.
It's a fair bet that if Iraq were NOT granting overflight rights to Russia, we'd have heard that by now. Undoubtedly that's embarrassing for the US, but it's pretty clear that's what's happened.
I doubt it would do much good to pressure Iraq because even if the damage to IS is only collateral as Russia targets everyone opposed to Assad, the Iraqis are happy for any assistance against IS they can get.
3
We tried that, Kerry made a special effort in Baghdad about it, and the cowed Iraqis refused in deference to their Iranian masters. Of course Russian and Iran continued trading, etc., despite the UN sanctions. Iraq is over.
Really I don't see the point to be so alarmed. A couple of Russian jets just briefly invading the Turkish sky is not any thing that can be seriously considered a threat. That's just ridiculous. If it is true that in less than a week the russians have destroyed 40% of the offensive capabilities of ISIS in Siria, then the question is what our people have done for 18 months over there ? Nothing ? Actually less than nothing. That explains the irritation of NATO and US military/politics.
52
40%? Just where do you get that figure? From the Kremlin? Ludicrous.
Russia will not defeat ISIS. Russia apparently isn't generally attacking ISIS.
Putin's actions are primarily for home consumption in Russia, no more.
Russia will not defeat ISIS. Russia apparently isn't generally attacking ISIS.
Putin's actions are primarily for home consumption in Russia, no more.
What's your source for the Russian destruction of 40% of ISIS' offensive capabilities? The Syrian ambassador to Russia? No doubt an impartial source. The only question is whether you are aware of your role as a shill for the Russian regime.
I'd like to see a citation for your statement that Russia has "destroyed 40% of the offensive capabilities of ISIS in Siria (sic)". That would be shocking considering they have hardly lifted a finger in fighting ISIS. Please provide...
I'm going to guess that information comes either from RT or some bullet point given to you by your boss this morning at the troll factory.
I'm going to guess that information comes either from RT or some bullet point given to you by your boss this morning at the troll factory.
2
According to the article "Western officials have been alarmed by the speed and scale of Moscow’s intervention in Syria." Well, of course they are.
NATO is an organization with 28 members, Russia is an autocracy with Mr. Putin calling the shots.
Since the annexation of Crimea Russia has violated not only the airspace of NATO countries, it has also - if we accept the Estonian version of events - crossed the border into Estonia to kidnap Mr. Eston Kohver.
All of that with only finger wagging and "don't do that again" from NATO.
Today NATO is like the EU, too many members and too heterogenous to be effective.
NATO is an organization with 28 members, Russia is an autocracy with Mr. Putin calling the shots.
Since the annexation of Crimea Russia has violated not only the airspace of NATO countries, it has also - if we accept the Estonian version of events - crossed the border into Estonia to kidnap Mr. Eston Kohver.
All of that with only finger wagging and "don't do that again" from NATO.
Today NATO is like the EU, too many members and too heterogenous to be effective.
10
► Didnt we invade Iraq and knock off Kadafi with only finger wagging from Russia?
THE US wanted to maintain the health of its Military Industrial Complex post Cold War and justify maintaining NATO as the guarantor of Europe et al.
SO they had to come up with a new Enemy, Bad Big Russia.
First the US broke its promise of not expanding NATO, then the used Iran's Ballistic Missile Program as an excuse to build Missile Defense System in Europe and topped it up by the Coup in Ukraine.
NOW they are "Delighted" that they have identified a second Enemy, China!
THE rest follows the same script, look for events to justify more Military Spending.
NOTHING new here.
SO they had to come up with a new Enemy, Bad Big Russia.
First the US broke its promise of not expanding NATO, then the used Iran's Ballistic Missile Program as an excuse to build Missile Defense System in Europe and topped it up by the Coup in Ukraine.
NOW they are "Delighted" that they have identified a second Enemy, China!
THE rest follows the same script, look for events to justify more Military Spending.
NOTHING new here.
18
I don't think NATO will shore up its credibility with more hollow rhetoric and symbolic gestures. Then again, I don't think these displays are for Putin, but rather for domestic consumption within NATO countries.
1
Germany condemned Russia’s operations in Syria in unusually pointed terms.
----------------------
And sent the Russian ambassador to his room for a timeout. Jawohl!
----------------------
And sent the Russian ambassador to his room for a timeout. Jawohl!
3
Please tough guys begin boarding your boats today. Bring your entire family so you can head to the awesome playground that is the Middle East to start your "tough guy" war.
I guess you don't realize that we are so hated because you would hate people that came into our country and shot up your town and killed your family members.
Let them resolve their own issues. Since the Crusades people have been meddling over there.
I guess you don't realize that we are so hated because you would hate people that came into our country and shot up your town and killed your family members.
Let them resolve their own issues. Since the Crusades people have been meddling over there.
13
Since the Crusades people have been meddling over there.
-------------------
Way over 1000 years before that is when the meddling started. Check "Egypt, history of."
-------------------
Way over 1000 years before that is when the meddling started. Check "Egypt, history of."
Some info on Russian TV:
President Putin has asked "all our foreign partners" (primary the USA) to give information who are the "moderate opposition" and how to contact with them not to bomb them. No answer yet.
He has proposed to contact with them to ask "moderate opposition" to join the governmental Syrian army to fight the ISIS together. It he said would give precondition for future political reconciliation in Syria.
Also he said if NATO which bombed Syria during a year knows better the targets where to bomb the ISIS please share the info with us. No answer.
President Putin has asked "all our foreign partners" (primary the USA) to give information who are the "moderate opposition" and how to contact with them not to bomb them. No answer yet.
He has proposed to contact with them to ask "moderate opposition" to join the governmental Syrian army to fight the ISIS together. It he said would give precondition for future political reconciliation in Syria.
Also he said if NATO which bombed Syria during a year knows better the targets where to bomb the ISIS please share the info with us. No answer.
36
Putin knows exactly who is who and where they are in Syria. The Syrian regime can provide that information. Putin is interested in only two things in Syria-
1) Propping up Assad at all costs, even if it means attacking "moderate" opposition which Putin is currently doing. This will only prolong the war.
2) Burnishing his "macho" image in Russia, given Russia's long history of affection for authoritarian rulers.
1) Propping up Assad at all costs, even if it means attacking "moderate" opposition which Putin is currently doing. This will only prolong the war.
2) Burnishing his "macho" image in Russia, given Russia's long history of affection for authoritarian rulers.
2
"He has proposed to contact with them to ask "moderate opposition" to join the governmental Syrian army to fight the ISIS together. It he said would give precondition for future political reconciliation in Syria."
Your Putin is proposing something he KNOWS is not possible, deliberately so that he can use this impossibility as justification for further meddling in something that really is none of his business.
Your Putin is proposing something he KNOWS is not possible, deliberately so that he can use this impossibility as justification for further meddling in something that really is none of his business.
2
Did Putin "share the info" with "all his foreign partners" about the planned military capture of Crimea?
Did Putin "share the info" about the routes of passage of Russian tanks, missile launchers, ammunition, and brigades of "volunteers" and military advisers into Ukraine?
In this world, you don't get something for nothing.
Did Putin "share the info" about the routes of passage of Russian tanks, missile launchers, ammunition, and brigades of "volunteers" and military advisers into Ukraine?
In this world, you don't get something for nothing.
1
The article presumes NATO had any credibility or influence in the first place. A quick study of how Japan single-handedly broke up the League of Nations should be a lesson that these organizations are doomed to fail.
1
I'll preface this by saying that I hope the US stays as far away from the Syria quagmire as possible (it should be quite obvious that Putin is walking into a Vietnam-type scenario, or Afghanistan II, if you will).
But does anyone think NATO will do anything of substance here? As much as elements within the US government want to stick their noses in Syria (a national reflex, I suppose), I don't think the WH is looking for a stand-off with the Russians right now. And we know the Europeans are not going to do a thing (I wonder if they'd actually be roused into action if the Russians actually invaded a EU country - I kinda doubt it).
Why not just disband NATO already? It's little more than a charade.
But does anyone think NATO will do anything of substance here? As much as elements within the US government want to stick their noses in Syria (a national reflex, I suppose), I don't think the WH is looking for a stand-off with the Russians right now. And we know the Europeans are not going to do a thing (I wonder if they'd actually be roused into action if the Russians actually invaded a EU country - I kinda doubt it).
Why not just disband NATO already? It's little more than a charade.
6
Obama laughed in Mitt Romney's face when Romney said Russia was our geopolitical for two years ago. Putin has been doing all the laughing at Obama since then.
4
Putin is broke, because the price of oil has fallen; his military is not the power house you think it is; it is starved for money. If Putin had to fight a real war, he would come up short. He knows that, and we know that. He is defending Assad because Syria is on his doorstep; Syria is not anywhere near our doorstep, and Assad is not a threat to us: no navy, no air force, and no real government. Let's just watch Russia struggle to bring some stability to its ally, and hope it succeeds; we do not know which wingnut would replace Assad.
Do not talk,act!Shoot the Russians down if they violate turkish airspace.
1
Could you put thtn on hold, at least until Russian Military takes care of the ISIL terrorist situation?
The NYT pic accompanying this article brings to mind one word: feckless. What a leaderless, gutless group of defense secretaries. What's worse, even if the United States were to try to "lead" this herd of cats, we would end up having to do most or all of the heavy lifting. Beginning with the French in the 1960s, most NATO members have never been reliable partners. That now even includes the UK. Putin knows this, and is betting that the member states will not form a consensus sufficient to present a united front. And absent a full-on, direct attack upon a NATO member--which the Russians will not undertake--that consensus is unlikely. What we get is more muddling through, disarray, and instability. Which is just what Putin and the other bad guys want to see.
2
The French are the leading seller of armaments to the Middle East in the world. Why would they help us eradicate war over there? They love it.
Navy Vet: First, thank you for serving. My uncles were captains on carriers for 4 years in the Pacific. They stayed close to their men for years: births, deaths and funerals. It is possible Putin wants what Russia had. And, Russia was an ally in WWII - she kept the Eastern Front tied down, giving Britain a chance to regroup. Russia has legitimate interests in Eastern Europe and the Ukraine. If Europe wants to challenge those interests, they need to field an army. We have carried Europe, defensively. We carried her economically for years. She has now recovered, and she can defend herself; she can field a good military, as she did prior to WWII. I would like to see our infrastructure repaired; I would like to see our schools upgraded; I would like to see our students receive the same financial aid as students in Germany have; I would like to rebuild our inner cities. I would like to see my tax dollars spent at home on projects which last, i.e. the TVA. Remember that? I am sick of being the world's army; I am sick of carrying Europe and Japan. I am sick of listening to the constant requests for empty military bases. Carriers, yes. We need real jobs, real building projects which benefit all the citizens where they are placed. And, how much of that money goes to the military members who want to go for higher education? We owe them.
Wow the tide of war is really receding, from the Ukraine to Syria to Iraq to Libya to Yemen to the South China Sea. Russia, China, and Iran are in the strongest positions they've been in for twenty years.
This leading from behind and apologizing for the United States and withdrawing from our international commitments has worked brilliantly. What a genius our amateur president is!
This leading from behind and apologizing for the United States and withdrawing from our international commitments has worked brilliantly. What a genius our amateur president is!
1
See? What can our President do in the face of subversives? Wlhatever he proposes or does; he will be stabbed in the back by his own government. And that my friend is what has made us weak.
As compared to the two draft dodging geniuses, Cheney and Bush, who started a trillion dollar war with Iraq. I sure miss them; they would know who to bomb and attack next. Obama seems hesitant to bomb and attack Iran, for shame!
The cold war is over. Credible cooperation between NATO and Russia will do a lot of good for the world especially in Syria
17
Putin is not going to stop with a winning strategy in Syria. He will exploit his gains as much as possible. NATO under US and Obama's leadership is behind the eight ball already. They are reacting to every initiative Putin is taking with weak and ineffective responses. There is no strategy to take the initiative back. It will get worse.
5
You want credibility? Start calling the shots.
1. Get Georgia and Ukraine into NATO Putin style - denying everything and ignoring everyone.
2. Beef up the airforce in Europe both offensive and defensive. Maybe even station medium range nukes in Ukraine.
3. Make sure Russia gets bogged down in Syria: secure and clear Iraq while providing weapons to the rebels whoever they are in Syria, as long as the Russians are there.
And most importantly - stop talking!
1. Get Georgia and Ukraine into NATO Putin style - denying everything and ignoring everyone.
2. Beef up the airforce in Europe both offensive and defensive. Maybe even station medium range nukes in Ukraine.
3. Make sure Russia gets bogged down in Syria: secure and clear Iraq while providing weapons to the rebels whoever they are in Syria, as long as the Russians are there.
And most importantly - stop talking!
5
Oh no, they need to keep on talking, talking about everything in Putin's way, which is to suggest the impossible, deliberately mislead, lie, break the rules as they see fit, do as they please, regardless of the consequences.
Poor hapless European , need a map.The conflict is in the near east not eastern Europe. If Turkey values their airspace then they should shoot down or at least fire an ground to air missile. Russia is bombing troops that threaten their interest, the airbase and the port.Lets see if there they venture fare beyond. I suppose the planes and misslies from the black sea were also "VOLUNTEERS". Could we please hear from the crop of Presential, NEVER GONE A BEES, how much they admire Putin again , Trump you go first, always good with the short answer that one. Our best move is to sit and watch, the Lion wins not because she is on the field all day but knows when to pounce.
3
Please why don't you all board some boats along with your families and head right on over to the Middle East and its hellholes.
What's that? Oh, you don't want to go, you just want to send others over there for no good reason except to show you are "tough".
Please study some more so you can graduate high school.
What's that? Oh, you don't want to go, you just want to send others over there for no good reason except to show you are "tough".
Please study some more so you can graduate high school.
5
I went to high school and learned that you never should sail across the Atlantic Ocean between August and April. That gives my family plenty of time to plan and provision our trip, from Barnegat, NJ, casting off next Easter.
Americans need to ask themselves what would Nixon / JFK / Eisenhower do at this point or more importantly leading up to this point? The last real American Leaders.
Nixon opened the door to China. JFK stopped listening to the Neo-Cons of his day at the CIA / MIC / DoD. He and his Brother were an incredible team. Eisenhower said: "beware of the Military Industrial Complex" (MIC) -all had comparable messages in the end of their terms.
Trump calls obama a Puppet and Putin a Leader - that says it all.
Nixon opened the door to China. JFK stopped listening to the Neo-Cons of his day at the CIA / MIC / DoD. He and his Brother were an incredible team. Eisenhower said: "beware of the Military Industrial Complex" (MIC) -all had comparable messages in the end of their terms.
Trump calls obama a Puppet and Putin a Leader - that says it all.
6
It says the US congress will not support our President, no matter what.
1
Both Trump and Putin are small loud mouths. Obama doesn't need to react to either one of them, especially Trump. Obama might be the smartest President we have had since Clinton.
This ignores the 1.6 million Iraqi people that died during the decade-long US occupation alone. Rhetoric of bringing “stability” to these regions flies in the face of the fact that the US and NATO military-intelligence apparatus sponsors ISIS and other terror groups all over the Middle East and North Africa inside the allied nations of Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the rest of the GCC and NATO alliances. With US and NATO intervention the goal is instability , either by militarizing neo-colonial allies or conducting “humanitarian intervention” to justify overt invasion, as was the case in Libya and now again in Iraq and Syria.
34
True and as soon as they are done with you, you had better step down or wind up like Iraq. Saddam got too big for his britches. That's why he got invaded and killed.
Tragic is so few democratic countries have a leader with the intestinal fortitude of Mr. Putin.
Beyond disappointment, nothing but a Carnival of Clowns in the District of Criminals.
Beyond disappointment, nothing but a Carnival of Clowns in the District of Criminals.
15
Putin is a THUG. Fortitude is the courage to do the right thing in the face of failing. Putin is doing the wrong thing while never giving a hoot about the consequences.
Hemingway said courage was "grace under pressure." Thought I'd toss that in there.
Putin is an empty suit. Obama has the full force of the U.S. military; he also has the support of all Western democracies and Japan; he is working with China. He is working with Iran. He is everything Bush was not, e.g. intelligent and educated. Obama will not start WWII on your behalf, Beldar. Sorry about that.
I cannot understand how the NYTimes continues to not hold POTUS to the same standard as past presidents Republican or Democrat. For sure candidate Romney was correct in saying one of the emerging geopolitical challenges the US would have is with Russia. It may have been a guess but it was a right one. I do not believe the NYTimes has revisited that in a way it would have if the tables had been turned - i.e. POTUS has said it and the challenger mocked it. The fact is that it is admirable that POTUS does not go around bombing everyone and wants dialogue first, but on balance his international policy has been harmful to the US. The realization of that danger will only been seen in the future, but the seeds are planted now.
7
I hate to say it, but Mitt was right about that.
1
I must have been asleep. When did Russia attack the US? When has Russia blockade or declared sanctions on the US? Russia is not our greatest enemy; our greatest enemy is ignorance within. BTW: Putin says ISIS plans to enter US through southern border. We had better pay attention. Russia's intelligence has been spot on. Our intelligence is burdened with lies spin and messaging. Like: Russia is the greatest threat to America.
When a history professor who became a leading politician turned TV commentator said "Obama is the most dangerous president we've ever had" a few years ago, the critic was attacked for "having served his wife with divorce papers in her hospital bed." As if the man had first made his estranged wife ill, solely for the pleasure of giving her the divorce document in her hospital bed. (Yes, Liberals are real moralists, forgetting all about John Edwards, Jim McGreevey, Eliot Spitzer, et al.)
Was Newt Gingrich right about Obama? It's painfully obvious by now that he was, and Hillary and Biden will lose millions of votes because of this Administration's deep-seated weakness and refusal to act decisively, now worse than ever.
Was Newt Gingrich right about Obama? It's painfully obvious by now that he was, and Hillary and Biden will lose millions of votes because of this Administration's deep-seated weakness and refusal to act decisively, now worse than ever.
the weakling Putin will never be faced down with a spineless and weaker us president. What is needed is a president of strength, who will restore US credibility and strength. ONly such a president (i.e., Romney, McCain, Cruz) can restore the US ability to deter Putin.
Why do liberals not understand?
Why do liberals not understand?
2
If Brute force worked, people might support the idea.
But instead,history teaches us that bombing only causes more problems,more deaths, and more hate.
Unfortunately, a large number of our world leaders don't understand this idea and that is why humans are likely to be destined to knock each other senseless over and over again.......at least until artificial intelligence takes over and robots eliminates us from the equation.
But instead,history teaches us that bombing only causes more problems,more deaths, and more hate.
Unfortunately, a large number of our world leaders don't understand this idea and that is why humans are likely to be destined to knock each other senseless over and over again.......at least until artificial intelligence takes over and robots eliminates us from the equation.
4
No US President will ever declare war on Russia, ever.
Russia has never attacked the USA directly nor will ever do so.
We do not need a war monger telling us that waging war with Russia is a good idea, because it is not.
Russia has never attacked the USA directly nor will ever do so.
We do not need a war monger telling us that waging war with Russia is a good idea, because it is not.
57
George W. Bush at the Sloveniia Summit, 2001, re Putin:
""I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul. He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship"
What is it conservatives don't understand (pretty much everything)?
""I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue. I was able to get a sense of his soul. He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship"
What is it conservatives don't understand (pretty much everything)?
6
A serious situation, no doubt. But the article - implicit or otherwise - gives Putin too much credit. Putin is not being calculating. He's not employing some brilliant plan that has so far outwitted NATO. Putin is simply being reckless. He has no end game. Assad will never again control a united Syria. Putin is backing a failed leader now damaged beyond repair. Putin has long wanted to flex a little Russia muscle. He enjoyed the outcome in the Ukraine and is now using the chaos in Syria as his latest playground for bravado. The trouble for the Russian ``leader'' is that there is no answer to: What's next?
26
You could not be more wrong. In 6 months Assad will be back in full control as a dictator. Iran will take over Iraq. Bush and Obama are the two worst presidents in our history.
1
If someone wins one hand of poker, he might have gotten lucky. If someone takes the pot, he might have had a lucky night. If someone has taken the pot for several nights straight, you should consider the likelihood that the person is a good poker player.
Despite predictions by Western pundits that Putin will overreach any minute now, those predictions have yet to come true. The West should be careful not to underestimate Putin.
Despite predictions by Western pundits that Putin will overreach any minute now, those predictions have yet to come true. The West should be careful not to underestimate Putin.
5
Warren Harding was no peach, Tom.
If you look at the map it is easy to see what is happening and what Russian intentions are. They want to consolidate and protect the western third of the country under Assad, so they can keep their base. The western rebels against Assad are already ineffective against ISIS, and have not done much against Assad either. Removing them will not help ISIS very much but will help Assad a lot. Ultimately, Russia may regret its decision as the Iranians are building pro-Shiite political and religious infrastructure to cement their future control in the western third. Russia is unable to build any political or religious infrastructure that will help it to stay except at the sufferance of Iran. Iran is not strong enough yet to dictate to the Russians, but it is already dictating to Assad. As impossible as it is to conceive now, the USA may actually tilt toward ISIS in the future to make sure Iran and Russia do not extend control over the entirety of Syria after defeating the non-ISIS rebels. We always pick the weakest link, don't we.
4
'As impossible as it is to conceive now, the USA may actually tilt toward ISIS'
Unfortunately, it is not impossible, the CIA is arming alQueda and affiliates currently.
Unfortunately, it is not impossible, the CIA is arming alQueda and affiliates currently.
5
America is a weak state now, with weak leaders who think that they can talk their way out of being seen as weak. Those who can, act. Those who can't, complain. If we had leadership who actually valued American power instead of being ashamed of it, maybe we would be a better ally to those states who are feeling the real-world pressure from a Russia that is not beyond using force to expand its borders. But what can we do when a good bit of the American population has bought into the anti-American criticism of the US. The world can't abide a vacuum, if the US doesn't step up and lead someone else will call the shots and the US can follow, which is exactly what the anti-Americans want.
7
We are so weak that they are amassing at our borders to invade us. Please wake up.
No one wants to tangle with the U.S. However that doesn't give us the right to just bomb and invade any place we wish to. Why do you think we are so hated? Wouldn't you hate people who walked into your country and killed your family? Let these countries sort out their own issues instead of trying to control every little piece of the planet.
No one wants to tangle with the U.S. However that doesn't give us the right to just bomb and invade any place we wish to. Why do you think we are so hated? Wouldn't you hate people who walked into your country and killed your family? Let these countries sort out their own issues instead of trying to control every little piece of the planet.
3
Because 'American Power' has been so effective in Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.?
1
America is in a "weak state"? We have the biggest, best armed and most technologically proficient military in the world. We are not weak; we are too smart to be goaded into a feckless war we do not need. FYI: The only countries who want the U.S. to attack Iran are Israel and Saudi Arabia. Think about fighting a proxy war on behalf of Israel and Saudi Arabia. We have been there and done that for Israel: Iraq.
When you show weakness afar, e.g. failing to enforce your own red-lines in Syria, you are effectively asking for trouble at home.
I think Obama understands that now.
I think Obama understands that now.
5
Obama never admits to being wrong.
1
It's safe to assume that Mr. Putin has noticed that only 5 of 28 NATO member states meet the annual 2% of GDP requirement for military expenditure.
15
They dismantled their militaries in return for socialized welfare ("the dole") and health care. The UK's armed forces are a shadow of their former self, and their NHS hospitals are unclean, have mixed-gender wards (!), and antiquated facilities, according to exposes in The Daily Telegraph over the years.
To Charles - actually the NHS has one of the best patient outcomes in the world and beats in most cases privately run US hospitals. Incidentally the US spends more of a percentage GDP wise on health than the UK.
Credibility? You are joking. Right?
4
► Reading American news today is like reading Pravda in the 1950s
96
not sure you ever read pravda. Snarky soundbite, but a silly analogy.
Hilariously funny to watch these clowns at NATO with all their posturing.
The rest of the world is laughing their heads off as they scramble around trying to look important.
Russia is never going to invade one of the NATO members. It is not stupid.
NATO does not represent the world. It should keep it's nose out of other countries political issues. (The UN should be the only body with authority to decide on issues that violate international law.)
NATO is irrelevant.
The rest of the world is laughing their heads off as they scramble around trying to look important.
Russia is never going to invade one of the NATO members. It is not stupid.
NATO does not represent the world. It should keep it's nose out of other countries political issues. (The UN should be the only body with authority to decide on issues that violate international law.)
NATO is irrelevant.
66
NATO is irrelevant in what sense. NATO actually has armed forces. What the does UN have? If we have learned anything in this first decade and a half of the 21st century, from Iraq to Crimea, it is might makes right.
The UN is irrelevant.
The UN is irrelevant.
1
With Russia's veto power, the UN is a useless hot air balloon.
Obama's belief that his charisma could corral the world continues to be an embarrassment. We back down on missile installations in the Czech republic, whisper (on-air)to Medvedev to "Tell Vlad I can be more flexible after the election", fail to enforce a bold "red line" statement in Syria and make a one sided deal with Iran. The result ? Russian subs probing the Scandinavian territorial waters, China building islands in international waters, Russians marching into the Ukraine and our first line fighter pilots heading for base when a Russian plane comes within 20 kilometers in the mid-East, where, by-the-way, the Ayatollah is ruling out further US talks (lest we come o our senses).
Obama Perter principled out as an acorn organizer and Kerry should be working in a ketchup factory, for his wife.
Obama Perter principled out as an acorn organizer and Kerry should be working in a ketchup factory, for his wife.
5
It's about time Nato is waking up to the dangers of Putin's aggressive moves
to recreate the halcyon days of Soviet power.
How many aerial incursions will Nato tolerate to get to the tipping point of
retaliation? Nato had better show a little backbone if it is to remain relevant.
Ratcatcher Putin (as he was known in Saint Petersburg) is bent on pushing
on the irresolute Nato borders until stopped.
to recreate the halcyon days of Soviet power.
How many aerial incursions will Nato tolerate to get to the tipping point of
retaliation? Nato had better show a little backbone if it is to remain relevant.
Ratcatcher Putin (as he was known in Saint Petersburg) is bent on pushing
on the irresolute Nato borders until stopped.
5
'How many aerial incursions will Nato tolerate to get to the tipping point of
retaliation?'
All. They will never shoot at a Russian plane, ever.
retaliation?'
All. They will never shoot at a Russian plane, ever.
1
What does Nato think? Russia is going to walk into the West as if it were 1945. Its nothing more than fear hype. What the Russians are doing is cleaning up the mess created by USA which supplied arms to the rebels in Syria just like in Afghanistan after the Russian invasion? Instead of being appreciated and supported the West is going to try and create as many problems as it can. For those who haven't noticed Syria and Russia are on the same continent hence have more common interests for peace rather than the ever scared USA.
44
Please remind me precisely what NATO exists for? Oh, I remember. Isolate Russia and rekindle Cold War psychology...
64
NATO existed to protect Europe from the Soviets, now it's needed to protect against a hegemonic dictator who is a former Soviet operative.
1
Surely they jest with these puny steps that must make Putin laugh. Anyway, putting soldiers here or there is largely irrelevant as long as the principal NATO leader, Obama, is manifestly supine in the face of serious challenges around the world.
19
Well said. US is NATO's leader and Obama is US President. No hope for NATO at all.
2
"Puny steps" does not adequately describe what NATO has done by establishing several more 'headquarters" units. Far better to say that NATO is doing what it doe best: Establish bureaucracy. Write, don't fight. Write rules, write plans, write press releases. The paper tiger champing at the bit. Don't believe me, just compare the order of battle of today and thirty years ago. Where have all the Leopards gone? That's the question and Putin knows the answer.
Good Grief...And just What plan-of-action do you suppose Pres. Obama could propose that would meet approval and garner support by the 'dependably argumentative' far-right ideologues and not cost umpteen thousand U.S. military lives and umpteen trillion dollars - while at the same time; be successful checking Russian ambitions; rally greater participation from other NATO countries; instill (manifestly needed) mettle, skill, competency and cohesion in the various (uncoordinated and factious) factions fighting ISIL in Syria; carry through with deposing (US stated condition for peace) Assad, Putin's stated man in Syria, and NOT kick-off a major, and no-doubt escalating, shooting-war with Russia?
Tall order for any President without the backing of a Congress.
Tall order for any President without the backing of a Congress.
1
That picture says more than a 1000 words. NATO is incompetent.
28
There has to be a political solution to the very complex problems in the Middle East. Distance bombing by the confronting powers is a childish and a bygone era approach. Negotiations with all paries in a calm and friendly manner is the need of the hour.
2
A weakened NATO? Compared to what? NATO outspends Russia by a magnitude of 10. It has expanded and continues to grow, both in terms of member states and scope of mission. So, clearly, the solution is increased military spending and inclusion of more members, I suppose. NATO is a truly a dangerous clown show. It seems regime change (or rather the failure of such due to Russian intervention) is much more of a concern to them than the prospect of a failed state a la Libya and the further spread of militant Islam. Where is the UN in all this? The US, NATO and European leaders (not to mention Saudi Arabia and the Gulf countries) are all engaging in an international crime. Again!
19
And so continues the step by step escalation that can lead to war.
The truth is that this is probably the right thing to do. Doing nothing can embolden Putin even more. Doing too much could ignite a larger conflict.
Clearly the Cold War is back. This is no longer about Syria and ISIS: The proximity of fighting between two nuclear powers is a cause for deep concern. those that did not live through the Cold War can't quit appreciate the dangers.
Yes, it is a game of chess, one that we want to stop short of all-out brinksmanship.
The truth is that this is probably the right thing to do. Doing nothing can embolden Putin even more. Doing too much could ignite a larger conflict.
Clearly the Cold War is back. This is no longer about Syria and ISIS: The proximity of fighting between two nuclear powers is a cause for deep concern. those that did not live through the Cold War can't quit appreciate the dangers.
Yes, it is a game of chess, one that we want to stop short of all-out brinksmanship.
2
It has been a long time since those of us who were young at the time stood frozen listening to reports of battleships steaming towards Cuba. Nothing like the real fear of WWIII to wake up all the bloviators: put their money where their mouths are, and put their offspring's boots on the ground. Eisenhower came home and built the Interstate Highway System. This Congress has none who have served, and they build nothing.
2
NATO, and increasingly the US, don't have any credibility right now. We are letting Russia and Iran walk all over us. By the time we figure out what to say, Assad's regime will be in complete control again, and we will be shut out.
1
Having served with the USAF and deployed with NATO during the cold war and then after the end of the cold war, I can say that NATO has been a hollow shell for a very long time. Most of our deployments were 75% American and it was always clear that the EU was vastly under-investing in their military infrastructure on our backs. This has only accelerated in the last 20 years. For the UK to deploy 150 soldiers to Eastern Europe is a joke. Forget Syria--We are emboldening Putin to invade and retake Eastern European countries. He thinks that we would never risk nuclear war over Latvia and Estonia. Unfortunately we need to have a robust, cold war type response which would mean massive conventional reinforcements in Turkey and Eastern Europe. We need to assume he will test NATO in order to rebuild the Soviet Union and deploy enough forces to make sure he cannot.
1
Are you up for a draft? Shinsecky used the number of approx. 100,000 troops to occupy Iraq. We have a small, high tech, highly mobile military now. We no longer maintain a huge army to take and hold. That would require a draft. And where would the NATO countries come in? The Brits and Australians, maybe. The rest not so much.
1
NATO has always relied on the United States to carry the bulk of its military responsibilities. Obama has decided that the U.S. will no longer shoulder that burden. The result is a NATO as a paper tiger, and Putin knows it. Russia no longer fears any retaliatory measures for its military forays. Witness Crimea, Ukraine and now Syria. Watch for Putin to ratchet up the pressure. And watch for Obama to withdraw further and further into his coward's shell. The old Soviet Union will be back before you can say Vladimir Putin.
3
The Soviet Union is broke, financially. The price of oil has dropped and that was Putin's financial foundation. They cannot field some huge army and start a war. Putin's financial supporters are all hiding in London; he keeps a grip at home with pretend wars. Obama is quiet and smart; he waited and got Bin Laden in Pakistan, and then he came home. I am not willing to go broke fighting with Putin over Syria; he can have it with its warring tribes and poverty.
1
The incredible stupidity of the situation we are in is almost beyond comprehension. That Richard Noxon could open the door to China, Ronald Reagan could help " tear down this wall "with Mikhal Gorbachev but now we face the Russians with jets circling opposing adversaries and we have a great likelihood of inflaming and already over heated situation.
Since we were children Syria has been a client of first the Soviets and now Russia, this is not a surprise. Why would we meddle in the internal affairs of one of their client states, there is no up side here. Look at the Arab Spring results in different parts of the world, not too inspiring, in fact it was down right destabilizing.
Let us allow our passions to cool and consider carefully the next step we make as a nation and as a member of NATO.
Our Nation building status is far from unblemished, witness Iraq and Afghanistan as two primary examples.
Since we were children Syria has been a client of first the Soviets and now Russia, this is not a surprise. Why would we meddle in the internal affairs of one of their client states, there is no up side here. Look at the Arab Spring results in different parts of the world, not too inspiring, in fact it was down right destabilizing.
Let us allow our passions to cool and consider carefully the next step we make as a nation and as a member of NATO.
Our Nation building status is far from unblemished, witness Iraq and Afghanistan as two primary examples.
31
Look at Africa and Australia* and SE Asia and South America and the Mideast -- all failed or half-baked colonies of the Europeans; even tiny Holland and Portugal were premier colonizers. When the wars of national liberation began in the 1960s Africa fell apart, and the AIDS pandemic there today partly stemmed from all those corrupt, racist, Robert Mugabe-type dictators. While Europe retreated, and then was overrun by the colonized populations, esp. England and Germany. America's record is pristine by contrast. And 30% of Silicon Valley is of Asian lineage. Do you find a comparable ratio in the Euro Zones, of any ethnic group? No. Indeed, riots in London are not unknown by restive immigrants who have little opportunity in Little England. Same for Paris, esp. the Arab ghetto between Gare du Nord and Montmartre.
Immigrants tout la monde strive to bypass Europe, and go straight to America (and then straight to California.)
* only convicted criminals were allowed to live there, as the late Robert Hughes noted.
Immigrants tout la monde strive to bypass Europe, and go straight to America (and then straight to California.)
* only convicted criminals were allowed to live there, as the late Robert Hughes noted.
1
Majority of Syrian peple voted to have Assad leave, but Russia's dictators always backed their murdorous friends abroad.
When NATO did nothing to stop the invasion of Ukraine - that's when Putin knew he could do and get away with anything he wants to do. As if a blockade is going to stop Putin!
5
NATO is the U.S., and we chose not to go to war over the Ukraine. We chose not to go to war with Russia. The world is not a schoolyard. War involves nations and people. Millions of people die in big wars, Gabriela.
1
Putin 2 NATO 0
18
It is hard for open societies to think like Russians, but we need to, and quickly. Hungary, Czech, Poland, Latvia, etc. are like distant memories to the West but seem like yesterday to Putin and his ilk.
5
The headline says it all: NATO is engaged in a pointless chest-beating contest with Russia. It was ridiculous to expect Russia to stand by as a critical strategic ally in Syria was toppled by US-backed jihadis, leaving damaged and vulnerable, just as it was ridiculous to expect Russia to stand by and do nothing as Ukraine was stripped away from them by US-backed proxies.
Putin is handling both of these crises foisted on Russia with a degree of competence we dont see in American leaders anymore.
Finally, the US has created a strategic and humanitarian disaster in the Middle East, and should not meddle in the attempts of other parties to stabilize the region. The lack of Western credibility in the region os entirely the fault of the US, with two presidential administrations having created only chaos.
Putin is handling both of these crises foisted on Russia with a degree of competence we dont see in American leaders anymore.
Finally, the US has created a strategic and humanitarian disaster in the Middle East, and should not meddle in the attempts of other parties to stabilize the region. The lack of Western credibility in the region os entirely the fault of the US, with two presidential administrations having created only chaos.
89
with three presidential administrations having created chaos
2
"It was ridiculous to expect Russia to stand by as a critical strategic ally in Syria was toppled by US-backed jihadis, leaving damaged and vulnerable, just as it was ridiculous to expect Russia to stand by and do nothing as Ukraine was stripped away from them by US-backed proxies".
No, it was not at all ridiculous. It was quite logical to expect Russia to stand by, after it stood by when NATO bombed Yugoslavia, then Iraq, then Libya (there Russia even went along with giving that bombing an air of legitimacy via a UN resolution). So it was quite natural for US/NATO to assume that Russia would keep standing by in both Ukraine and Syria. But they miscalculated and went too far. Ukraine was too much for Russia, because after that only Russia itself remain and Putin had to take a stand. After Ukraine and all the sanctions Syria was an easy call. NATO leaders are just mad at Putin for not doing what was expected from him. It is like a bully being mad at his victim for fighting back.
No, it was not at all ridiculous. It was quite logical to expect Russia to stand by, after it stood by when NATO bombed Yugoslavia, then Iraq, then Libya (there Russia even went along with giving that bombing an air of legitimacy via a UN resolution). So it was quite natural for US/NATO to assume that Russia would keep standing by in both Ukraine and Syria. But they miscalculated and went too far. Ukraine was too much for Russia, because after that only Russia itself remain and Putin had to take a stand. After Ukraine and all the sanctions Syria was an easy call. NATO leaders are just mad at Putin for not doing what was expected from him. It is like a bully being mad at his victim for fighting back.
@CAF -"Ukraine was stripped away from them" .. what a ridiculous statement you make. Ukraine is a sovereign nation and doesn't need Russian meddling. The crisis in Ukraine was caused by Putin and his aggression in Ukraine.
If the U.S. and its allies did not learn from Crimea and the Ukraine, then its a bit late in the day to think that it's possible to make a difference now. Putin has already made his moves and will likely carry the day, and a great deal more besides, in Syria. And rest assured, He's not done yet. He has made it plain that there is no coherent plan to stop him that does not involve a dangerous escalation of hostilities. He is on his way to recovering the sphere of influence that the USSR gained in the aftermath of the Second World War. Ambivalence and insecurity are not going to be of any use. Putin is counting on that. Stay tuned.
4
"The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights" Number one it is not Syria based, it is in Coventry England, and it is one man. I see that they are still quoting this guy, who left Syria in 2000, has never returned, lives in Coventry England, and knows exactly what is happening on both sides of the battle field, knows exactly how many dead on both sides within minutes of a Russian Air strike, exactly how many terrorists ......er freedom fighters er.........rebels and or civilians, and knows exactly where all of the various terrorist organizations are and when they are being attacked. Jeez, what does the US need the CIA, and the alfabet soup of intelligence agencies for when they can just move this guy to Washington.
Not to put to fine a point on it, is this not the same kind of guy " Curveball" that knew all about what was happening in Iraq before the Neo Cons had it bombed back to the stone age, and in the process blew up the Middle East? The real question is why has the New York Times, the US paper of note, taken to quoting this guy?
Not to put to fine a point on it, is this not the same kind of guy " Curveball" that knew all about what was happening in Iraq before the Neo Cons had it bombed back to the stone age, and in the process blew up the Middle East? The real question is why has the New York Times, the US paper of note, taken to quoting this guy?
61
Thank you for the research.
1
According to the Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_Observatory_for_Human_Rights)
'The United Kingdom-based SOHR is run out of a two-bedroom terraced home in Coventry by one person, Rami Abdulrahman,[3] a Syrian Sunni Muslim who also runs a clothes shop. After three spells in prison in Syria, Abdulrahman came to Britain in 2000 fearing a longer, fourth jail term.[1] The New York Times in April 2013 described him being on the phone all day every day with contacts in Syria, and checking all information himself.[3] Born Osama Suleiman, he adopted a pseudonym during his years of activism in Syria, and has used it publicly ever since.'
'The United Kingdom-based SOHR is run out of a two-bedroom terraced home in Coventry by one person, Rami Abdulrahman,[3] a Syrian Sunni Muslim who also runs a clothes shop. After three spells in prison in Syria, Abdulrahman came to Britain in 2000 fearing a longer, fourth jail term.[1] The New York Times in April 2013 described him being on the phone all day every day with contacts in Syria, and checking all information himself.[3] Born Osama Suleiman, he adopted a pseudonym during his years of activism in Syria, and has used it publicly ever since.'
1
From a strictly geo-political point of view, Putin is exercising normal, even accepted, procedures of a major power. In fact his playbook in large measure replicates that of the U.S. By using military force to protect his country's allies and "interests," Putin also is building his political strength at home. Nothing like a little show of force and bald nationalism as liniment to the cuts and burns of a weak and corrupt economy. A little shock and awe goes a long way. Putin is probably amused as well, watching Western powers jump around like crazed chickens when they get a taste of their own medicine.
89
While I do understand and concede that the U.S. exercises military options at will, I don't think this is apples to apples. This is a people rising up against their own government.
If it was reprehensible for the US to do it, surely it is reprehensible for Russia to do the same. Or, perhaps, there is a double standard here?
6
Biggest military challenge since the cold war? Really? Not the invasion of Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan? The war mongers are at it again.
133
Warmongers run this Country. It ain't no democracy.
4
Although some NATO countries were part of the invasion of Iraq, NATO was not part of the invasion of Iraq.
1
The solution is simple and straight forward, inform Russia, and the world, that their planes will be shot down the next time they intrude on Turkey's airspace. Period.
5
What a joke.
Turkey knows they will be taken down by Russia in a matter of days if they shoot.
The whole world knows we the USA will launch a war on Russia, if Turkey is attacked.
And people still think Turkey will do anything about it?
Turkey knows they will be taken down by Russia in a matter of days if they shoot.
The whole world knows we the USA will launch a war on Russia, if Turkey is attacked.
And people still think Turkey will do anything about it?
Even more clear...would be - our rambos would bomb Moscow.
Reality is that Russia could violate and violate and violate Turkish airspace and no one will dare escalate. You are dealing with a very minor regional power remember?
Reality is that Russia could violate and violate and violate Turkish airspace and no one will dare escalate. You are dealing with a very minor regional power remember?
1
Russia is a very minor marginal regional power who will probably violate and violate turkey again and again.
1
"British officials said that units of up to 150 personnel would be regularly deployed to the Baltic countries, Poland and Ukraine " WOW! That should make Putin be very afraid!
38
It is a lot more than meets the eye. If you grab a map and look you will see that there is a Russian enclave, Kaliningrad, that is sandwiched between Lithuania and Poland with no land route to connect it to Russia. That enclave is vital to the Northern Fleet for winter operations when Murmansk is iced over. European ,military leaders see that as an incredibly tough situation for Putin.
US government has no option but choose to work with moderate Muslim Mujahideen (they are really islamic fundamentalist), letting Russia control a vast area with their allies controlling 55% oil reserve (Iran, Iraq, Russia, Venezuela, Khaskstan) is like throwing a dart to someone heart debilitating him w/o killing him, that is how serious this is.
I predict there would be attacks in Russia, such as explosions, beheading of Russian pilots.
I predict there would be attacks in Russia, such as explosions, beheading of Russian pilots.
Nato piolots allegedly attacking Isis for over a year would be given flowers and girls
1
and where are these "moderates"? How many really are there?
2
The US and NATO’s goal, as dictated by Saudi Arabia, is to remove Asad from power. This is what they were after. And they went so far as to arming terrorist groups affiliated with alQueda to accomplish that goal. This is obscene.
The Syrian government’s goal, is to remain in power; in their position as the legitimate government of that country, they requested help from their allies, and their allies came to their rescue. We would have done the same for our allies, or so we claim.
That NATO and the US are complaining about Russia’s bombing of alQueda affiliates, is unacceptable. It actually is treason, being that alQueda is our sworn mortal enemy, and we are now standing up for them.
Turkey will sit on their hands, no matter what Russia does. NATO should just move aside, and stop arming the alQueda affiliates.
What a joke have we become.
The Syrian government’s goal, is to remain in power; in their position as the legitimate government of that country, they requested help from their allies, and their allies came to their rescue. We would have done the same for our allies, or so we claim.
That NATO and the US are complaining about Russia’s bombing of alQueda affiliates, is unacceptable. It actually is treason, being that alQueda is our sworn mortal enemy, and we are now standing up for them.
Turkey will sit on their hands, no matter what Russia does. NATO should just move aside, and stop arming the alQueda affiliates.
What a joke have we become.
114
One has to wonder if it was indeed Al Queda that knocked down the World Trade Centres, and slaughtered 3,000 Americans while doing it. And now they are the dear friends of the Pentagon and the Neo Cons trying to overthrow President Assad in Syria. The conspiracy theorists should be having a ball with this one.
7
Precisely. Russians are bombing the so-called "Army of Conquest", which is made up mostly of al-Qaeda affiliates and, possibly, some more moderate groups funded and armed by US. So we are blaming the Russians for bombing those "moderate" forces, while those forces are fighting shoulder-to-shoulder with the extremists to depose a legitimate government of Syria. Those "moderates" are joined with al-Nusra Front within a single military structure. How are the Russians supposed to bomb only the extremists but not them? If those "moderates" do not want to get bombed and called "terrorists", maybe they should disassociate and separate themselves from the actual terrorists. Did that not occur to them and their sponsors?
This is excellent analysis!
"Not wanting to inflame the situation, but also wary of appearing too passive, Western officials have responded cautiously, taking a number of limited steps while raising the rhetorical heat on Moscow."
This is President Truman's fault: we should have nuked Russia when we had the chance.
That said, maybe we need stronger leadership from people like Bush 3 (aka "the weed") or "Bomber" John McCain.
This is President Truman's fault: we should have nuked Russia when we had the chance.
That said, maybe we need stronger leadership from people like Bush 3 (aka "the weed") or "Bomber" John McCain.
2
Wow, going all the way back to Truman...why not blame the WW1 allies for not invading and occupying Russia when it bailed out of the war to fight a civil war, won by the Communists. If we'd listen to the likes of you, well, we probably wouldn't even be here. Let's hope cooler heads prevail; Putin's just testing our resolve so a little escalation for the sake of appearances is in order.
2
Advocating a nuclear war, and the whole sale murdering of foreign citizens for political gain, is about as stupid as any one can get.
12
Do you know how many atomic bombs the US had after the two dropped on Japan? 0, as in ZERO.
2
I love how this is framed: as if this were a schoolyard fight. I sincerely hope those who speak this way are simply trying to manipulate public opinion. It's too horrifying to consider that they may well mean what they say.
51
"Confronted with its biggest military challenge since the end of the Cold War, a weakened NATO took steps"
This is certainly not its biggest challenge since the end of the Cold War. That would have been the Balkan fiasco, then Afghanistan, then Ukraine. This is just the one being hyped at the moment.
NATO is not weakened either. Its spending is up over the last few years, and the forces of many of its nations are strengthening theirs forces in response to the Ukraine issues. The US has been increasing deployments too.
This is irresponsible reporting. It is repeating bald propaganda from hawks seeking military action.
This is certainly not its biggest challenge since the end of the Cold War. That would have been the Balkan fiasco, then Afghanistan, then Ukraine. This is just the one being hyped at the moment.
NATO is not weakened either. Its spending is up over the last few years, and the forces of many of its nations are strengthening theirs forces in response to the Ukraine issues. The US has been increasing deployments too.
This is irresponsible reporting. It is repeating bald propaganda from hawks seeking military action.
153
"several NATO officials expressed frustration that they did not see a clear path out of the increasingly complicated tangle that has become NATO’s relationship with Russia" Bottom Line_ Leadership. This is what happens when America retreats from the world stage. Vacuum. Putin sees an Opportunity. And in 2016 whoever is in The white house is going to have a huge mess to deal with. Oh obama how you have failed us....
1
Neither the Balkans, nor Afghanistan, nor the Ukraine presented an existential threat to the United States or NATO. Nuclear armed Russia on the move can.
Do not pencil me in as a hawk or warmonger. I'm just looking at the risks. This needs to be defused diplomatically so that the potential for war is lessened. That means the world needs to play close attention.
Do not pencil me in as a hawk or warmonger. I'm just looking at the risks. This needs to be defused diplomatically so that the potential for war is lessened. That means the world needs to play close attention.
The US retreating? I don't call spending 50 billion dollars arming terrorist groups in the ME to overthrow governments exactly retreating
1