Administration Searches For New Approach To Aiding Rebels In Syria

[Purveyor]

Source: Washington Post

By Karen DeYoung September 16 at 7:38 PM

The Obama administration is moving toward major changes in its military train-and-equip program for the Syrian opposition after the acknowledged failure of efforts to create a new force of rebel fighters to combat the Islamic State there.

In comments that appeared to shock even many of those involved in Syria policy elsewhere in the government, Gen. Lloyd J. Austin III, the head of the U.S. Central Command, told Congress on Wednesday that only “four or five” trainees from the program, a $500 million plan officially launched in December to prepare as many as 5,400 fighters this year, have ended up “in the fight” inside Syria.

The course correction would mark the first significant alteration in the Obama administration’s year-old strategy of defeating the militants with air power, along with training and supplies for indigenous forces fighting them on the ground. It comes as critics have drawn a direct line between Obama’s long-standing reluctance to more directly intervene in the fight and the growing flood of Syrian refugees fleeing to the West.

Defense officials who described the proposed changes said the yearly goal would be substantially lower, perhaps as few as 500. Rather than front-line forces, fighters would be trained as enablers and liaisons between U.S. forces outside the country — particularly those directing U.S. airstrikes — and groups such as Syrian Kurds and Sunni Arabs that the Pentagon thinks have been effective against the militants.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/administration-searches-for-new-approach-to-aiding-rebels-in-syria/2015/09/16/938fd336-5c9e-11e5-8e9e-dce8a2a2a679_story.html

[msongs]

1. the current strategies have led to the mass migration of syrians out of syria. nt

[delrem]

2. Are they trained to overthrow Assad, or to put IS to rest?

These are contradictory objectives, since IS is intent on overthrowing Assad with the overarching goal of establishing an Islamic Caliphate across vast areas of Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen and the ME, under more or less Saudi run Wahhabist control.

[Hortensis]

3. And Assad is supported by Iran because his family's religion

is similar to the ruling theocracy's. It is all so complex. Where'd the trained Syrians who ran after after being ambushed go, at least?

What I do know is that mounting a ground war in Iran would be disastrous and cost us dreadfully for many years to come -- and that my grandsons are not going to die in one.

[jamzrockz]

4. Yea, cos we all know countries only support each other because of religion

I figure that must be the reason why the US and EU supports all the backwards, Wahhabi, Sunni states in the middle east. You said it, it is religion and nothing else. Couldn't be 2 minority sect protecting themselves from a very aggressive western backed Sunni state? or just2 allies with similar goals working together.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

5. Apparently, they are trained to run

We keep training them, and they don't fight. They vanish. Or worse.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/general-austin-us-trained-syrian-rebels-fighting-isis/story?id=33802596

[leveymg]

12. They did a lot of cross-training to carry $100 million each out of the country.

First mission, take the Grand Casino in Monaco.

[pampango]

6. And Russia searches for new ways to aid Assad. Look for more civilians to flee Syria. n/t

[nyabingi]

7. This is just silly

There have been reports in Farsi-based media sources that report, from Iraqi fighters on the ground fighting ISIS in Iraq, that they've seen US and UK helicopters directly dropping supplies and equipment to ISIS forces there. I tend to believe what they're saying because since the US supposedly began its war to wipe out ISIS, they've done nothing but conquer more territory.

The US military has satellites and know where ISIS is based, so why aren't those bases being targeted?

ISIS is serving at our behest in the Middle East, so it's not logical that we'd actually want to stop them. We are panicking now about potential Russian involvement because the Russians will definitely target ISIS and defeat our proxy army. Our media is already hard at work trying to convince you and me that ISIS and al-Nusra aren't so bad and deserve our support.

Some of you will think this is conspiracy, but just watch and see what happens.

[PufPuf23]

8. Can someone sort out for me the "rebels" we support in Syria? Who are the refugees?

The factions I perceive within Syria:

1, Current government headed by Assad that are Alawite Shia heading Ba'athist secular government backed by Russians (who have a navy base at Tartus).

2. Rebels that are predominantly Sunni that are ISIS.

3. Rebels that are predominantly Sunni and are not ISIS such as the Free Syrian Army of defectors from Assad.

4. Kurdish nationalists that are primarily Sunni but also Shia and other religions that are the largest minority in Syria.

5. Various Christians, Druzes, other Syrian minorities that may or may not support Assad.

The rebels we are now trying to support are in faction #3 and we are more or less neutral towards factions #4 and #5.

Four years or so ago when the Syrian civil war started we showed acknowledged little separation between factions #2 and #3. Then and now our Sunni Arab allies from the GCC primarily back faction #2.

Turkey does not like the Kurdish nationals faction #4 nor factions #1 nor #2.

Assad and faction #1 probably had enough support to continue in power if there had not been outside influence during the period of the Arab Spring in the region.

France wants to bomb somebody, I assume faction #2.

Who are the refugees?

I assume that the refugees are from faction #5 but are dominated in number by primarily rural Sunnis who have loss their means of livelihood from drought and war. I imagine that there are some actors that think it great that the nations of Western Europe have problems because they accept the refugees.

According to the article we are having problems finding rebels, I assume from faction #3. Syria is a cluster fuck.

What am I missing? Am I correct about the refugees?

Who should we bomb?

[jwirr]

9. And another question: Is there any chance of peace

in this mess no matter what WE do?

[PufPuf23]

10. Over the short and medium term, no.

I was joking about who to bomb, we should bomb nobody.

Here is a really good book that reads like a historical novel about the Middle East and why we are where we are today.

A Peace to End All Peace: The Fall of the Ottoman Empire and the Creation of the Modern Middle East


"The critically acclaimed New York Times bestselling account of how the modern Middle East came into being after World War I, and why it is in upheaval today

In our time the Middle East has proven a battleground of rival religions, ideologies, nationalisms, and dynasties. All of these conflicts, including the hostilities between Arabs and Israelis that have flared yet again, come down, in a sense, to the extent to which the Middle East will continue to live with its political inheritance: the arrangements, unities, and divisions imposed upon the region by the Allies after the First World War.

In A Peace to End All Peace, David Fromkin reveals how and why the Allies came to remake the geography and politics of the Middle East, drawing lines on an empty map that eventually became the new countries of Iraq, Israel, Jordan, and Lebanon. Focusing on the formative years of 1914 to 1922, when all-even an alliance between Arab nationalism and Zionism-seemed possible he raises questions about what might have been done differently, and answers questions about why things were done as they were. The current battle for a Palestinian homeland has its roots in these events of 85 years ago."

http://www.amazon.com/Peace-End-All-Ottoman-Creation/dp/0805068848/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1442520982&sr=1-2&keywords=The+Peace+to+End+all+Peace

[jwirr]

11. Thank you. I will add that book to my long list of books

to read. I am beginning to think all of the problems will be solved before I am done reading them all. I hope so.

[PufPuf23]

13. There are answers to some of my questions in this other thread.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10141208507

[jwirr]

14. Thank you.

[ozone_man]

15. You've got it sorted.

We arm the terrorists, #3 directly, and #2 indirectly through our allies like Saudia Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar.

Who should we bomb? Haven't we done enough damage? We clearly do not care one iota about the welfare of Syrian people. It's another neocons war like Iraq, but with a different rule set and "reason" for being there.