re: Iranian-backed militants kill 3 U.S. service members, injure 25 in Jordan

quote:

---

So what’s 3 US servicemen worth to mush brain and his administration?

---

quote:

---

servicemen

---

quote:

---

men

---

Careful when making dangerous assumptions.

quote:

---

Maybe we should just get the frick out of there

---

I'm all for getting completely out of the whole area but first send them a little present for killing our troops.

quote:

---

Or when Trump blew Soleimani to pieces and Iran shut the frick up after that

---

Not a Trump guy, but credit where credit due. Brilliant response

quote:

---

At least we’re there with their government’s permission. Having troops in Syria is the real WTF.

---

Certain elements have been in Syria for years, killing the shite out of bad guys.

It's a 3-sided civil war - Syria, SDF/rebels, and ISIL/ISIS. A look at before and after territorial maps will show you why we've been there. ISIL/ISIS used to dominate eastern Syria, but now the SDF has taken nearly all of that back.

Plenty of frickery going on around the world, and definitely some in Syria as well, but it's a place we need to be doing the specific things we're doing.

LINK / before they go to war, they need to explain how a drone got through their defenses.

quote:

---

No, no it’s not. We’ve facilitated the destabilization there.

---

Thanks for your declarative statement with minimal explanation. Whether or not we created/caused/"facilitated" the destabilization is up for debate, but we most certainly have tried to influence/shape the destabilization in our favor.


Pushback against al-Assad started all the way back during the Arab Spring.

The West and its allies supported the Free Syrian Army (FSA), the armed wing of the revolution, mostly defectors from the Syrian Army/Syrian Arab Army (SA/SAA).

Russia and Iran jumped in to support al-Assad and the SA/SAA.

The big FSA umbrella split into 2 main factions/umbrellas - the Syrian Defense Forces (SDF, mostly Kurdish and some Arab, supported by the US) and the Syrian National Army (SNA, supported by Turkey). There are some other smaller ones, but these are the 2 main players (ISIS/ISIL was the 3rd until they got wrecked...al-Nusra Front/al-Qaeda was sort of on that side as well, but they also clashed with ISIS/ISIL).

In other words, the West was all on the same side until the split, but now the US and Turkey, who are both NATO, are backing opposing rebel groups - both aligned against al-Assad/SA/SAA, but also aligned against each other (mostly because the Turks aren't down with the Kurds' YPG, which is the bulk of the SDF, and its links to the Kurdish PKK).

During all of this, ISIS/ISIL blew up and dominated most of eastern Syria. They controlled the bulk of the eastern half of the country. Some of the original FSA manpower, who had been backed and trained by us because they were in opposition to al-Assad/Iran/Russia, joined ISIS/ISIL (this is the ugly "fighting the very people we trained/equipped" part of civil wars/insurgencies).

Everybody was kung fu fighting at this point. SA/SAA fighting SDF, SNA, and ISIS/ISIL; SDF fighting mostly ISIS/ISIL, but also SA/SAA, SNA, and even Turkey; SNA fighting the SA/SAA, SDF, and ISIS/ISIL.

About the only semi-straightforward relationship is the Revolutionary Commando Army (RCA), now called the New Syrian Army/Syrian Free Army (NSA/SFA…not to be confused with SNA or the original FSA…these people aren’t very creative with their names…). These are the folks in Homs and the US base at Al-Tanf, near the Syria/Iraq/Jordanian border. Their primary focus was/is anti-ISIS/ISIL, but because they are technically an “opposition group (to al-Assad/Russia/Iran)”, Syria/Russia/Iran justifies attacking them (and by extension, the US and our base at Al-Tanf). It’s an easy way for Russia/Iran to take swipes at us.

The United States was already engaged heavily with ISIS/ISIL in Iraq and was backing the SDF in Syria, who was heavily engaged with ISIS/ISIL there, so we expanded our anti-ISIS/ISIL scope to include eastern Syria. JSOC and others were directly killing folks for years until eastern Syria was taken back.

ISIS/ISIL was territorially defeated years ago (SDF took most of it, but al-Assad/SA/SAA were also able to push their western half east a good bit), but there are still people who need killing, so we have some folks there doing it (mostly training/advising the SDF).

ISIS/ISIL's defeat turned a 4-sided civil war into a 3-sided one (al-Assad/SA/SAA/Russia/Iran vs. US/SDF and Turkey/SNA, who also fight each other when they're not fighting al-Assad).

Our military involvement is very specific in scope. The bulk of it early on was focused on killing ISIS/ISIL. Not "defeat them", but no shite "kill them all." A secondary benefit was/is our support for the people doing most of the work (SDF) strengthening opposition to al-Assad and his backers Russia/Iran (which is a good thing on its face most of the time).

Everybody uses their proxies, for the most part, with the occasional dustup between the US and actual Syrian/Russian/Iranian forces.

The big wrinkle is that while everybody's opposed to al-Assad/Russia/Iran, some factions are ALSO opposed to each other, putting their respective backers at odds (US/SDF vs. Turkey/SNA).

ISIS/ISIL was mostly eradicated (not ideologically, but rather "ISIS/ISIL barely exists in Syria anymore because they're all fricking dead") and our focus shifted to its current state - continued support for the SDF so they don't get rolled over by al-Assad/Russia/Iran on one side or the Turks/SNA on the other (who have a common enemy in al-Assad, but might hate the SDF/Kurds even more). It also allows the killing of any ISIS/ISIL elements that pop back up.

Basically

1. Kill them all (ISIS/ISIL)
2a. Support the SDF against ISIS/ISIL (1)
2b. Support the SDF against al-Assad/Russia/Iran

turned into

1a. Support the SDF against al-Assad/Russia/Iran
1b. Continue to kill ISIS/ISIL whenever they stick their heads out, using SDF to do it


I'm well aware of the shite we stir up around the world and I'm not in favor of it for the most part.

However, some asses need to be kicked and ISIS/ISIL in Syria was one of them. Sometimes it means defeating an enemy politically and/or ideologically, but sometimes it just means killing lots of MFers.

It required little of anything "new" (mostly just an expansion of the same thing we were doing in Iraq) and as an added benefit, we strengthened a group in opposition to al-Assad/Russia/Iran.

With fewer than 1000 folks, we're able to bleed Iran and Russia of resources/manpower, and keep a lid on ISIS/ISIL in the meantime. Those are absolutely worth the small footprint we maintain in the area.

Go get your shine box.

quote:

---

but biden said the other day he told iran not to do anything

---

Think about how much of our tax money the government has given to these goat frickers...