Weapons for the Free Syria Army

[Dalian Blue]

The foreign policy of this and previous UK governments has been an absolute shambles.....we isolate the Syrian and Iranian leadership (who are also enemies of ISIS) We create the vacuum in Syria and Iraq into which the jihadists flood. We provide the weapons which they are using either by selling them or having provided them to the Iraq forces.

Because of poor border controls we are unable to stop the flow of brits (said to be between 1500 and 2000) to join the Holy War or stop their return

they now control an area larger than Great Britain and the US and the UK can't even fly over Syrian airspace to attack the ISIS bases in the north of the 'Caliphate'.

The only friends of Syria who could get permission for us to do that are the Russians and , guess what, we've fallen out with them as well.

Still we'll be able to sort it out when our two new aircraft carriers go operational in 2020.........

Why would US / UK or anyone else for that matter want to fly over Syria to get to Iraq when Turkey is in NATO?

ISIS stronghold is in Southern Syria ...without permission from the Syrians we would not be able to bomb their defences. The Syrians have an air defines system which consists of

The Syrian Air Defense Force is an independent command within the Syrian Armed Forces. It has been merged into and then separated from both the Syrian Arab Army and the Syrian Arab Air Force. The Syrian Air Defense Force controls twenty-five air defense brigades, each with six SAM batteries. It is equipped with 650 static SA-2, SA-3 and SA-5 launchers, 200 mobile SA-6 and SA-11 launchers and over 4,000 anti-aircraft guns ranging from 23mm to 100mm in caliber. There are also two independent SA-8 and SA-10 SAM Regiments, each with four batteries of 48 mobile SAMs.

The Syrian early warning system comprises Long Track; P-12 Spoon Rest; P-14 Tall King; H-15 Flat Face; P-30 Big Mesh; P-35 Bar Lock; P-80; PRV-13; PRV-16 Thin Skin mobile and static radar sites throughout Syria.

Wonder who sold them this f*cking lot. Obviously we would need them to stand down before we flew into their air space

Now, I find this confusing, I thought that Southern Syria was controlled by Assad's forces? I wouldn't have thought Assad would be hanging around Damascus if ISIS controlled it. Please see these links:

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_Syria#mediaviewer/File:Territorial_control_of_the_ISIS.svg" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_St ... e_ISIS.svg</a>

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_State_of_Iraq_and_Syria#mediaviewer/File:Syria_and_Iraq_2014-onward_War_map.png" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_St ... ar_map.png</a>

As for the weapons systems, of course the USSR / Russia sold them to Syria, they have been allies for years.

 

[nijinsky's fetlocks]

Arm a pro-western glove puppet, then when he no longer plays ball, arm the opposition.
Or better still arm both sides, because then you're sure to back the winner.
Then carve up the defence contracts to rebuild a country that the weapons you sold reduced to rubble.
Then install a new glove puppet, and repeat ad nauseum.
It's a familiar template, but one which makes money, so I doubt it will be changing anytime soon.
At least our regular interventions are making the world a safer place, and winning hearts and minds.

 

[Blue Mist]

Or could it be that Asad did not fight ISIS, rather he actually encourage them because it split the opposition, politics in the Middle East are rarely simple

Is there any basis at all for you saying this?

Unfortunately yes. Some top bloke, name escapes me, was on TV this morning, he believes that jihadist leaders were allowed out of Syrian jails and helped in their efforts to capture oil fields, Assad then by agreement bought oil from them which provided a lot of the funding for their current struggle. All this was based on the agreement that they would not attack him.
It of course split the opposition who are fighting him and deflected the Wests attention from him.
I accept it is only a theory but it is evil politics at it's best, the west have stopped talking about arming Syrian rebels with some going as far as to say we should talk to Assad !

Note to the War Criminal Blair: In future keep your nose out.

 

[Ducado]

Or could it be that Asad did not fight ISIS, rather he actually encourage them because it split the opposition, politics in the Middle East are rarely simple

Is there any basis at all for you saying this?

Unfortunately yes. Some top bloke, name escapes me, was on TV this morning, he believes that jihadist leaders were allowed out of Syrian jails and helped in their efforts to capture oil fields, Assad then by agreement bought oil from them which provided a lot of the funding for their current struggle. All this was based on the agreement that they would not attack him.
It of course split the opposition who are fighting him and deflected the Wests attention from him.
I accept it is only a theory but it is evil politics at it's best, the west have stopped talking about arming Syrian rebels with some going as far as to say we should talk to Assad !

Note to the War Criminal Blair: In future keep your nose out.

Juan Cole thinks so (by he way one of the best sites to read about the Middle East and particularly Iran and the various Shia sects)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding-cambodia-policy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding ... olicy.html</a>

 

[bluemanc]

So when does the mass demonstrations & boycotting of Qatar for funding this islamic state mob start.
Hang on a minute,al jazeera just reported somebody's broke a toenail in Gaza.Everyone outside Tesco & Sansbury's boycotting Israeli goods.

 

[Skashion]

Is there any basis at all for you saying this?

Unfortunately yes. Some top bloke, name escapes me, was on TV this morning, he believes that jihadist leaders were allowed out of Syrian jails and helped in their efforts to capture oil fields, Assad then by agreement bought oil from them which provided a lot of the funding for their current struggle. All this was based on the agreement that they would not attack him.
It of course split the opposition who are fighting him and deflected the Wests attention from him.
I accept it is only a theory but it is evil politics at it's best, the west have stopped talking about arming Syrian rebels with some going as far as to say we should talk to Assad !

Note to the War Criminal Blair: In future keep your nose out.

Juan Cole thinks so (by he way one of the best sites to read about the Middle East and particularly Iran and the various Shia sects)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding-cambodia-policy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding ... olicy.html</a>

Cole says Assad 'encourage[d]' ISIS? The group that wants to establish a caliphate on its territory? No, he basically says they've avoided a two front war, which makes perfect sense so far as they can. Hezbollah are also letting the Lebanese Army fight ISIS for them but if you think Hezbollah are encouraging ISIS to be in Lebanon that's a very different claim.

There is no chance of any long-term arrangement between Assad and ISIS, their respective aims of Shia and Sunni rule in Syria are at odds. Why's Assad fought a civil war for three years, to deny moderate Sunnis power but let the fucking nutjobs Sunnis take over?

 

[Dalian Blue]

Unfortunately yes. Some top bloke, name escapes me, was on TV this morning, he believes that jihadist leaders were allowed out of Syrian jails and helped in their efforts to capture oil fields, Assad then by agreement bought oil from them which provided a lot of the funding for their current struggle. All this was based on the agreement that they would not attack him.
It of course split the opposition who are fighting him and deflected the Wests attention from him.
I accept it is only a theory but it is evil politics at it's best, the west have stopped talking about arming Syrian rebels with some going as far as to say we should talk to Assad !

Note to the War Criminal Blair: In future keep your nose out.

Juan Cole thinks so (by he way one of the best sites to read about the Middle East and particularly Iran and the various Shia sects)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding-cambodia-policy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding ... olicy.html</a>

Cole says Assad 'encourage[d]' ISIS? The group that wants to establish a caliphate on its territory? No, he basically says they've avoided a two front war, which makes perfect sense so far as they can. Hezbollah are also letting the Lebanese Army fight ISIS for them but if you think Hezbollah are encouraging ISIS to be in Lebanon that's a very different claim.

There is no chance of any long-term arrangement between Assad and ISIS, their respective aims of Shia and Sunni rule in Syria are at odds. Why's Assad fought a civil war for three years, to deny moderate Sunnis power but let the fucking nutjobs Sunnis take over?

I see where you are going with this Skash, but I thought I'd add this quote to provide a slightly differing take, which, in my humble opinion, reinforces what you have posted:

"In an interview he stated that he saw democracy in Syria as 'a tool to a better life' but then argued that it would take time for democracy to come about and that it could not be rushed. Bashar al-Assad has been described as even more secular than his father, Hafez al Assad. This includes minimal references to religion in public speeches and minimal public association with religious figures."

<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad#Secularism" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad#Secularism</a>

 

[hgblue]

So when does the mass demonstrations & boycotting of Qatar for funding this islamic state mob start.
Hang on a minute,al jazeera just reported somebody's broke a toenail in Gaza.Everyone outside Tesco & Sansbury's boycotting Israeli goods.

18 Palestinians being executed in cold blood would normally provoke a fair amount of outrage, but the fact that their killers were Hamas means it barely warrants a mention. Selective outrage?

 

[bluemanc]

So when does the mass demonstrations & boycotting of Qatar for funding this islamic state mob start.
Hang on a minute,al jazeera just reported somebody's broke a toenail in Gaza.Everyone outside Tesco & Sansbury's boycotting Israeli goods.

18 Palestinians being executed in cold blood would normally provoke a fair amount of outrage, but the fact that their killers were Hamas means it barely warrants a mention. Selective outrage?

I'd be shocked if it was any different.
They executed the tunnel diggers & are now executing random civilians,very little mention of the restrictions and threats made against reporters or the using of Schools/public buildings to launch rockets into Israel.
All orchestrated and funded by the Qatar backed Hamas.

 

[Blue Mist]

Unfortunately yes. Some top bloke, name escapes me, was on TV this morning, he believes that jihadist leaders were allowed out of Syrian jails and helped in their efforts to capture oil fields, Assad then by agreement bought oil from them which provided a lot of the funding for their current struggle. All this was based on the agreement that they would not attack him.
It of course split the opposition who are fighting him and deflected the Wests attention from him.
I accept it is only a theory but it is evil politics at it's best, the west have stopped talking about arming Syrian rebels with some going as far as to say we should talk to Assad !

Note to the War Criminal Blair: In future keep your nose out.

Juan Cole thinks so (by he way one of the best sites to read about the Middle East and particularly Iran and the various Shia sects)

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding-cambodia-policy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.juancole.com/2014/08/budding ... olicy.html</a>

Cole says Assad 'encourage[d]' ISIS? The group that wants to establish a caliphate on its territory? No, he basically says they've avoided a two front war, which makes perfect sense so far as they can. Hezbollah are also letting the Lebanese Army fight ISIS for them but if you think Hezbollah are encouraging ISIS to be in Lebanon that's a very different claim.

There is no chance of any long-term arrangement between Assad and ISIS, their respective aims of Shia and Sunni rule in Syria are at odds. Why's Assad fought a civil war for three years, to deny moderate Sunnis power but let the fucking nutjobs Sunnis take over?

Skash, I am not saying that Assad is thinking long term, you asked if there was any basis to what Ducado said and I supplied the link but in some respects it makes sense on a short term basis. The west have now turned their attention away from hating him and wanting to arm his enemies. The Kurds Iraquis and yank drones are killing his enemies, instead of fighting a large insurgent force he has split them leaving a smaller force to fight which helps him strengthen his position in his own country so when the ISIS have suffered losses on three fronts it is easier for him to wage war against them.

It is only a theory someone put forward but I could see Assad doing this.