U.S. and Allies Hit ISIS Targets in Syria - NYT

[flamingdem]

** CNN reporting is that the USA is the only non-Arab nation of multiple nations involved with the strikes

Update: United Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Jordan are the partners


WASHINGTON — The United States and allies launched airstrikes against Sunni militants in Syria early Tuesday, unleashing a torrent of cruise missiles and precision-guided bombs from the air and sea on the militants’ de facto capital of Raqqa, Syria, and along the porous Iraq border.

American fighter jets and armed Predator and Reaper drones, flying alongside warplanes from several Arab allies, struck a broad array of targets in territory controlled by the militants known as the Islamic State. American military officials said the targets included weapons supplies, depots, barracks and buildings the militants use for command and control. Tomahawk cruise missiles were fired from United States Navy ships in the region.

The strikes represent a major turning point in President Obama’s war against the Islamic State and open up a risky new stage of the American military campaign. Until now, the administration has bombed Islamic State targets only in Iraq, and had suggested it would be weeks if not months before the start of a bombing campaign against Islamic State targets in Syria.

The strikes come 13 days after Mr. Obama announced in an address to the nation that he was authorizing an expansion of the military campaign against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/23/world/middleeast/us-and-allies-hit-isis-targets-in-syria.html?smid=nytnow-share&smprod=nytnow&_r=0

[delrem]

1. Friends of Syria, all. Wonderful. nt

[flamingdem]

2. Interesting to note that but Turkey isn't there

so it's not fully across the board.

Pretty amazing to see any Sunnis taking part though considering the blow back they'll get at home.

[delrem]

3. The idea is to take out Syria, then Iran.

The freedom loving democracies of Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Jordan, have funded and and empowered ISIS to the hilt, and this is their payoff.

[flamingdem]

4. I don't think the administration wants to take out Iran

That's the neocon goal though.

[delrem]

5. Not yet.

But wait until HRC is president. Just you wait!
Or, well, the "peas in a pod" alternative, Jeb.

[flamingdem]

7. True that. But she's not all in

.. yet!

Note that Engel from msnbc says the airstrikes will benefit Assad:

Richard Engel @RichardEngel

US airstrikes in #Syria will benefit #Assad by allowing his ground forces to reclaim territory from #ISIS http://on.msnbc.com/1sYA9Yu

[delrem]

10. Engel is totally embedded. He says nothing that the MIC doesn't want him to say.

I find it a bit of a stretch, to suppose that the USA bombing of Syria, which the USA has wanted to do for well over a year in an effort to overthrow Assad ("regime change" isnt "war", y'know), will somehow help Assad.

[flamingdem]

12. Now I know what you meant by embedded on the other thread

I don't get that from him but I'll pay more attention.

He seems to be a know-it-all who second guesses the administration. Seems..

[delrem]

22. He's ubiquitous. I'm Canadian and he's ubiquitous *here*, too.

He's *totally* embedded.
I don't trust his reportage.

I'll wait for the non-embedded sources.

Honestly flamingdem, I'm out of my league with the sophistication of the massive pro-war MSM lies that pass as news in 2014. Pulling my hair out at the in-your-facedness of the lies. I thought it was as bad as it could get during GWB's awful times, but BHO is so much more intelligent - there's no comparison - except for the lies are still lies.

But this *is* a brand new hot war in the ME and it won't end until Assad is gone (at least), and the overall plan *is* to take out Iran. For what, for why, I don't know. It's just impossible for me to deny my awareness of PNAC and and the entire route that's been taken to get the world to where it is today, with the USA *finally* getting to bomb Syria (under a "humanitarian" pretext) -- and I see no barrier in the way of the USA continuing the identical trajectory. None. Certainly none within the Democratic or Republican party establishments.

[flamingdem]

26. Last week I sat for five hours on a plane next to a guy from Qatar

I don't have a dog in this fight and I'm new to the ME news obsession.

So who knows.

But he told me that the US and Iran are friends in reality.
He told me the toughest problem was to get an Arab to kill another since they have relatives in all the countries.

Israel is not golden after what they did in Gaza. The US won't continue to be their "mule" if they don't improve.

There are lots of lies but there's a lot that's just chaotic and the truth peaks out.

Engel is still going on and on about too little to late, I don't think he's propping up the govt.

[delrem]

27. Not "propping up the govt", but "propping up the MIC".

He's embedded. He's *totally* onside this war.
He's just putting forward the view that he was told to put forward, that the US should have gotten in *heavier* and *sooner*, but there's no analysis to show what the fuck that even means.

Like, against who????

1/2 billion new moneys for 'moderate rebels' to take out Assad. uh huh. Does Richard Engel connect the dots? Does he even try?
Friends of Syria = the new partners in bombing Syria. Does Richard Engel connect the dots, from the direct and official pre-history of these events to these current events? Does he even try?

He looks good against a green screen, wearing his star-war-reporter clothes.

But jezzuss keeryst on a pogo stick, don't tell me that anyone in his position would be unaware of Saudi Arabia's role in funding mercenary armies, most recently to take out Libya, to take out Syria. Don't tell me that anyone in his position should be excused from understanding that elementary connections ought to be made, between the funders of a holocaust and the perps actually physically engaged in that holocaust.

[flamingdem]

28. Check out his twitter feed to see if he's mentioning those things but..

.. now I see what you're saying. The US never points a finger at Saudi Arabia or complains about their human rights abuses or support of groups like Isis.

Legacy of Bush. It should all have a bright light shone on it.

And when I asked the Qatari guy if the govt there supports Isis or Hamas he wouldn't get into it except to say some people support groups, not the government.

I agree that the Free Syrian army is a crap shoot. Engel has got to be reporting on this because it's mainstream now.

[delrem]

29. Nice to have a discussion with someone reasonable. nt

eta: where "reasonable" doesn't just mean "agrees with me on everything".

[flamingdem]

30. Check this out - just posted this - Iranian talks with Saudi Arabia may signal thaw in relations

Seems interesting that Isis brings together enemies.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014901304

[grahamhgreen]

32. Yeah, they're on the list.

[Aerows]

24. Yep.

Anyone that doesn't know this by now doesn't WANT to know it.

[GGJohn]

6. Reports on CNN that Turkey is about to jump in also.

This is a pretty significant escalation against ISIS, especially with the Arab nations taking part.

[flamingdem]

8. I agree. It has an element of surprise since the media was saying there

was no agreement from Arab nations to participate.

I really credit the administration for working their collective rears off to make this happen, finally, the kind of cooperation that should have happened years ago.

On Isis twitter sites they're trying to say that the the US is attacking but denying the fact that Arab nations are attacking. This is a strategic win.

If Turkey joins that would be gravy he he

[delrem]

9. I can't figure out Turkey!

Erdogan must be a fucking imbecile. To not see the inevitability of Turkey losing a lot of land to the new country of Kurdistan, coming after the partition of Iraq, Syria, and yes, Turkey.

To say nothing of the fact that you just don't DO THAT to a bordering nation - what Turkey (and Jordan) have been doing to Syria - without the expectation of at least some repercussions.

Not to say that *I'm* against the creation of a country "Kurdistan" or however named. I'm neutral with a strong tendency toward being positive -- with the caveat that I'm far too ignorant to weigh in with an actual argument. Unless I'm missing out on some major non-MSM news sources I haven't noticed that the Kurds have been acting in totally uncivilized and irrational fashion (unlike just about every other actor on the scene, including the USA and its various "coalition in chaos" partners).

Abdullah II of Jordan, that living mockery of a "King", is another whose actions can't be explained without doing some unpleasant pathology

[flamingdem]

13. Heard a segment on Kurds and Turkey today on NPR, not sure how to find it

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/22/350662102/whats-turkeys-next-step-in-fight-against-isis

http://www.npr.org/2014/09/22/350662109/kurdish-refugees-join-huge-numbers-of-displaced-syrians

PS just reporting Qatar was involved too

[grahamhgreen]

33. They hate the Kurds.

[delrem]

34. A lot of Turkish citizens are Kurds.

So "they", in "They hate the Kurds" is too ambiguous.

It'd be like talking about the Ukraine. Not all "hate the Russians", only a significant and geographically concentrated sector, and this sector has only recently been emboldened.

If this shit happened in Canada, where I live, it might be "Not all hate the French", meaning the French Canadians who've contributed such an overwhelming culture to Canada.

[morningfog]

11. Illegal acts of war.

[flamingdem]

14. The UN will be discussing this

next week, maybe! I think they'll approve.

[morningfog]

15. Retroactive approval? I don't think so.

[flamingdem]

16. I think you're late to the party on this

because the strikes are happening to put Arab nations on the spot next week at the UN.

Syria isn't popular there.

[morningfog]

17. Still, no UN resolution. These are illegal acts.

And there won't be a UN resolution. And there can't be one that retroactively sanctions it.

[Dwayne Hicks]

18. Honestly

The UN does not say what we can and cannot do. We don't need a UN resolution though it would help. But lets face it with Russia and China having veto power the UN is a joke. This idea that the UN must approve of everything before its "legal" is mind boggling.

[flamingdem]

19. Isis is illegal too

so that might bear on the situation.

[morningfog]

20. That does not legalize our bombing.

[Dwayne Hicks]

21. I see

So only the UN has that power? The president or congress is subject to the UN? Is this what you are saying?

[morningfog]

23. Under international law, a UN resolution is required unless it is self defense.

By the way, when did Congress declare war or pass an authorization to use force in Syria?

[Dwayne Hicks]

25. Eh

The war powers act allows the president to conduct military operations for 40 days before submitting to congress. And again the UN does not govern us or anyone else. Its a weak argument really. This idea that the UN is this almighty governing body that everyone must get approval from is absurd. Yes it would help and no we don't "need" them.

[delrem]

31. Bombing Syria, against the express wishes of Syria's president, is illegal. nt