Posted on 06/20/2017 9:53:53 AM PDT by Kaslin
Sunday, a Navy F-18 Hornet shot down a Syrian air force jet, an act of war against a nation with which Congress has never declared or authorized a war.
Washington says the Syrian plane was bombing U.S.-backed rebels. Damascus says its plane was attacking ISIS.
Vladimir Putin's defense ministry was direct and blunt:
"Repeated combat actions by U.S. aviation under the cover of counterterrorism against lawful armed forces of a country that is a member of the U.N. are a massive violation of international law and de facto a military aggression against the Syrian Arab Republic."
An ABC report appears to back up Moscow's claims:
"Over the last four weeks, the U.S. has conducted three air strikes on pro-regime forces backed by Iran that have moved into a deconfliction zone around the town of Tanf in southwestern Syria, where there is a coalition training base for local forces fighting ISIS."
Russia has now declared an end to cooperation to prevent air clashes over Syria and asserted an intent to track and target aerial intruders in its area of operations west of the Euphrates.
Such targets would be U.S. planes and surveillance drones.
If Moscow is not bluffing, we could be headed for U.S.-Russian collision in Syria.
Sunday's shoot-down of a hostile aircraft was the first by U.S. planes in this conflict. It follows President Trump's launch of scores of cruise missiles at a Syrian airfield in April. The U.S. said the airfield was the base of Syrian planes that used chemical weapons on civilians.
We are getting ever deeper into this six-year sectarian and civil war. And what we may be witnessing now are the opening shots of its next phase -- the battle for control of the territory and population liberated by the fall of Raqqa and the death of the ISIS "caliphate."
The army of President Bashar Assad seeks to recapture as much lost territory as possible and they have the backing of Russia, Iranian troops, Shiite militia from Iraq and Afghanistan, and Hezbollah.
Assad's and his allied forces opposing ISIS are now colliding with the U.S.-backed Syrian Democratic Forces opposing ISIS, which consist of Arab rebels and the Syrian Kurds of the PYD.
But if America has decided to use its air power to shoot down Syrian planes attacking rebels we support, this could lead to a confrontation with Russia and a broader, more dangerous, and deadly war for the United States.
How would we win such a war, without massive intervention?
Is this where we are headed? Is this where we want to go?
For, again, Congress has never authorized such a war, and there seems to be no vital U.S. interest involved in who controls Raqqa and neighboring lands, as long as ISIS is expelled. During the campaign, Trump even spoke of U.S.-Russian cooperation to kill ISIS.
While in Saudi Arabia, however, he seemed to sign on to what is being hyped as an "Arab NATO," where the U.S. accepts Riyadh as the principal ally and leader of the Gulf Arabs in the regional struggle for hegemony with Shiite Iran.
Following that Trump trip, the Saudis -- backed by Egypt, the UAE and Bahrain -- sealed their border with Qatar, which maintains ties to Iran. And though Qatar is also host to the largest U.S. air base in the region, al-Udeid, Trump gave the impression its isolation was his idea.
President Trump and his country seem to be at a decision point.
If, after the fall of ISIS in Raqqa, we are going to use U.S. power and leverage to solidify the position of Syrian rebels and Kurds, at the expense of Damascus, we could find ourselves in a collision with Syria, Russia, Hezbollah, Iran and even Turkey.
For Turkish President Erdogan looks on our Kurdish allies in Syria as Kurdish allies of the terrorist PKK inside his own country.
During the campaign, candidate Trump won support by pledging to work with Russia to defeat our common enemy. But if, after ISIS is gone from Syria, we decide it is in our interests to confront Assad, we are going to find ourselves in a regional confrontation.
In Iraq, the U.S. and Iran have a common foe, ISIS, and a common ally, the government in Baghdad. In Syria, we have a common foe, ISIS. But our allies are opposed by Assad, Russia, Iran and Hezbollah.
The question before us: After Raqqa and Mosul fall and the caliphate disappears, who inherits the ISIS estate?
The U.S. needs now to delineate the lines of advance for Syria's Kurds, and to talk to the Russians, Syrians and Iranians.
We cannot allow our friends in the Middle East and Persian Gulf to play our hand for us, for it is all too often in their interests to have us come fight their wars, which are not necessarily our wars.
Why does he think there’s going to be an after?
Awww, shaddup, Pootie Poot.
Shoot at our men on the ground and your airplane is gonna get shot down.
Townhall ... “Russia, Russia, Russia!!!”
Why is it always the moronic, inexperienced in the ways of the military ‘news media’ to begin banging the drums for direct conflict, any time any ship, plane, tank, or ground troop of Russia and America bump shoulders in the hockey game of annihilating ISIS?
So Putin is aligning with pro-ISIS regimes now?
The Soviets always had a fondness for muslim barbarism, just like the NAZIs and the european elite.
For the russians, the ME is merely a market to ply their wares, nothing more, nothing less.
Krathammer made an excellent point the other day...
We are moving into a scenario like the end of WWII...
Where powers to be were jocking for post war positions.
We all know ISIS is almost dead, just not finished...
There will be a mad scamble for Syria and its land...
This will be the true test of Trump foreign policy...
Assad is pro ISIS ?
Putin has always aligned Russia with Syria
Seriously, or did you mispost your comments.?
Russia is in Syria legally and with the permission of their treaty ally Syria.
The US is there because we’re trying to help Qatar and Saudi Arabia to build a gas pipeline to Europe across Syria. The strategic purpose of that pipeline is to harm Russia economically.
Syria said no to the plan and after they said no then all of the sudden the Obama Administration and John McCain decided that they had to arm the Islamic fundamentalists (who later became ISIS) so they could overthrow Assad and make way for the pipeline.
We destabilized one of the few stable Arab countries just so we could play economic chess with Russia.
And now the Russians are absolutely going to shoot back and I do not blame them one bit. The USA is 100% wrong in Syria. We created ISIS and now we’re using ISIS as a pretext to continue an undeclared war of aggression against a sovereign country that did us no harm and that was no threat to us or Israel.
I love our armed forces (I’m married to a Marine) but if they attack Russians or Russian allied then the result will be predictable.
We would not tolerate it if Russia were supporting a civil war in the United Kingdom or Israel and bombing government positions and shooting down their airplanes, would we?
Then why should Russia do any different?
Goose, meet gander.
There is no doubt this entire situation is a mess, but then situations like this are always a mess when the original enemy is routed and there is an all-out grab for power, territory, and assets remaining.
Iran wasn’t there before we destabilized the country.
That's not why Obama wanted to destabilize Syria.
Obama wants Assad gone for the same reason he wanted Qaddafi and Mubarak out.
He wants hard-lined islamic rule in these countries and that requires the destruction of moderating influences.
Patrick J. Buchanan - Official Website
After the ISIS War, a US-Russia Collision? (Creators.com
All these links have the same column by Pat Buchanan. Are you going to accuse them also of having written the op-ed, like you seem to do Town Hall?
When are you going to learn the difference between an author (Pat Buchanan) and publisher, like Townhall.com, Creators.com and WND?
The exception is his own website
Hard to find a single part of this quote that isn't incorrect.
We didn't create ISIS: they're more or less the same Baathist/al-Qaeda in Iraq guys who were attacking US soldiers a few years ago in Iraq. Zero's pathetic withdrawal from Iraq simply created the space for them to operate.
The Assad Syrian franchise operation didn't have any problem hosting them when they were killing Americans.
Almost all of Russia's and Syria's military operations have been directed against Syrian regime opponents, not ISIS.
As I am sure you know, Assad is an Alawite, a Shia/Twelver sect.
BTW, I didn’t know your husband is a Marine. Many thx to you and your husband for your service to our great country.
Obama tried to put his IslamoNazi bff’s into power in Syria, just like he did in Egypt and Libya and protected and armed and funded in Iran
four, at least, blatantly illegal wars or uses of our great nation’s fine military........to advance the spread of Islam of the very worst kind....
and now DJT has to figure out how to fix, repair what Obama destroyed..... not gonna be easy (and Putin will eventually lose his temper, too..nobody can stay calm in the face of repeated provocations ... forever)
“There will be a mad scamble for Syria and its land...
This will be the true test of Trump foreign policy...”
Why do we -want- Syria?
Thank you! I’ll pass that along!
He retired after 25 years going back and forth between active duty and reserve.
——Why do we -want- Syria?-—
I’m not sure we -want- Syria. I’m sure they will want our money to rebuild...
But we need to blunt Russia ? Align with Israel ?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.