Syria: US diplomats urge anti-Assad military strikes

[rooster59]

Syria: US diplomats urge anti-Assad military strikes

As US-led air power pounds ISIL in Syria, dozens of State Department officials want the Assad regime to feel the force of American military might.

As reported in the Wall Street Journal, more than 50 US diplomats have signed a confidential, internal memo sharply critical of current policy. The document urges ‘targeted strikes’ against Syria’s government to stop its persistent violations of a ceasefire brokered earlier this year.

While the United States has called on President Assad to step down, Barack Obama has been reluctant to deepen Washington’s involvement in the civil war.

One US official, who did not sign the cable but has read it, told Reuters the cable was unlikely to alter that, or shift Obama’s focus from the battle against the persistent and spreading threat posed by ISIL.

A second source, who had read the cable and spoke on condition of anonymity, said it reflected the views of US officials who have worked on Syria, some of them for years, and who believe the current policy is ineffective.

-- (c) Copyright Euronews 2016-06-18

[stevenl]

Are those the same diplomats that wanted to remove Saddam Hussein and Ghadaffi?

[shirtless]

These guys should be working in a sheltered work shop how many times can they get this wrong.

[mania]

oxymoron if there ever was one..............

Barack Obama has been reluctant to deepen Washington’s involvement in the civil war.

[Roomuck]

49 killed by a gay American in a nightclub by a lone gunmen draws huge press coverage.

Americans and others bombing the bejesus out of Syria daily( previously Iraq, Afghanistan,Vietnametc etc ) kids being blown to pieces daily, and this is not mentioned.

[hansnl]

Another sign US politicos have no idea about foreign politics.

Even the biggest moron can see that these terrorist organisations are more dangerous to the world as the Assad regime.

If Assad falls away, there will be another free playground for the bloody ayatollas from Iran.

Sorry, of course Obama is the new good friend of the ayatollas, including giving them a lot of money for spreading their filth.

But never mind, Boeing can now deliver a lot of planes.........

[ilostmypassword]

Another sign US politicos have no idea about foreign politics.

Even the biggest moron can see that these terrorist organisations are more dangerous to the world as the Assad regime.

If Assad falls away, there will be another free playground for the bloody ayatollas from Iran.

Sorry, of course Obama is the new good friend of the ayatollas, including giving them a lot of money for spreading their filth.

But never mind, Boeing can now deliver a lot of planes.........

Wow. Talk about getting something 100% wrong. Iran has been Assad's chief backer. It's the Sunni extremists like Isis and Al Qaeda who are trying to bring Assad down.

[Credo]

Syria is a difficult situation to negotiate. The US has had little involvement and less interests in the country. The years of cold relations between Assad Sr., and his son, mean that there is not a lot of information or local assets in the country. There is not accurate information on the ground for the feel of the locals.

Removing Assad will leave a void; if he remains it means a continuation of very repressive measures. Either way it means a continuation of people suffering and leaving the country.

Assad doesn't really present a threat to the US at this point, but ISIS does, so I tend to agree with the limited approach of fighting the known enemy.

Of course, there is Russia and Iran in the mix.

There are no good solutions.

[JingerBen]

Syria is a difficult situation to negotiate. The US has had little involvement and less interests in the country. The years of cold relations between Assad Sr., and his son, mean that there is not a lot of information or local assets in the country. There is not accurate information on the ground for the feel of the locals.

Removing Assad will leave a void; if he remains it means a continuation of very repressive measures. Either way it means a continuation of people suffering and leaving the country.

Assad doesn't really present a threat to the US at this point, but ISIS does, so I tend to agree with the limited approach of fighting the known enemy.

Of course, there is Russia and Iran in the mix.

There are no good solutions.

Agreed, there are no good solutions.

What's more, there are no good ​intentions ​by any of the countries involved.

The Middle East is a bloody quagmire that should be avoided by all.

[mopar71]

The Euronews headline is much different than the Business Insider headline for the same story...

An 'embarrassing' break: Dozens of State Department officials just revolted against Obama's Syria policy

At least 51 "mid-to-high-level State Department officials" have signed a dissent channel cable breaking with President Barack Obama's policy on Syria and calling for US airstrikes on the regime of Syrian President Bashar Assad.

"Failure to stem Assad's flagrant abuses will only bolster the ideological appeal of groups such as Daesh, even as they endure tactical setbacks on the battlefield," the cable reads, according to The Journal.

http://www.businessinsider.com/state-department-officials-call-for-airstrikes-on-assad-2016-6

[Kasset Tak]

There are only 2 explanations to why they did this:

1. They are stupid and want to force US in to open war with Russia and/or Iran.

or

2. They are just stupid

Either way they should not be in the State Department, they should be moved to the army or the marines and be forced to fight on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan instead.

[neverdie]

Syria is a difficult situation to negotiate. The US has had little involvement and less interests in the country. The years of cold relations between Assad Sr., and his son, mean that there is not a lot of information or local assets in the country. There is not accurate information on the ground for the feel of the locals.

Removing Assad will leave a void; if he remains it means a continuation of very repressive measures. Either way it means a continuation of people suffering and leaving the country.

Assad doesn't really present a threat to the US at this point, but ISIS does, so I tend to agree with the limited approach of fighting the known enemy.

Of course, there is Russia and Iran in the mix.

There are no good solutions.

It's almost a replay on Iraq a couple of decades ago.

I sure MrTrump will tread lightly when he gets his chance. God help us.

[neverdie]

There are only 2 explanations to why they did this:

1. They are stupid and want to force US in to open war with Russia and/or Iran.

or

2. They are just stupid

Either way they should not be in the State Department, they should be moved to the army or the marines and be forced to fight on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan instead.

That is the end game, once it starts, it won't stop until we all stop.

Holocaust, coming to a suburb near you!

[slipperylobster]

There are only 2 explanations to why they did this:

1. They are stupid and want to force US in to open war with Russia and/or Iran.

or

2. They are just stupid

Either way they should not be in the State Department, they should be moved to the army or the marines and be forced to fight on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan instead.

That is the end game, once it starts, it won't stop until we all stop.

Holocaust, coming to a suburb near you!

So we are all doomed...

....meds haven't kicked in yet?

[pkspeaker]

and Yes these were the same <deleted> that wanted to invade iraq in the first place knowing it would be taken over by alqueda.. now they think the US isn't helping jihadists enough AND they wanna risk war with Russia and attack the legitimate government in Syria- which is the Assad led (secular) Baathest regime..

[hansnl]

Another sign US politicos have no idea about foreign politics.

Even the biggest moron can see that these terrorist organisations are more dangerous to the world as the Assad regime.

If Assad falls away, there will be another free playground for the bloody ayatollas from Iran.

Sorry, of course Obama is the new good friend of the ayatollas, including giving them a lot of money for spreading their filth.

But never mind, Boeing can now deliver a lot of planes.........

Wow. Talk about getting something 100% wrong. Iran has been Assad's chief backer. It's the Sunni extremists like Isis and Al Qaeda who are trying to bring Assad down.

On first sight I maybe wrong.

However, Iran came to the help of Assad on request of Assad.

Was that a good decision of Assad?

Probably not, time will tell.

That said, Iran plays and pays all terror groups that might be handy for their ultimate goal, control of the middle east, at least.

Divide and control, it is called.

And they are much better in this as the US will ever be.

Probably.

Iran is not exactly enamoured with Arabs, Turks,and so on.

Don't forget what the name Iran means.

"Land of the Aryans".

Nice?

100% wrong?

Don't think so.

The Middle East is very different, nothing is as it seems.

Betting on all players is normal practice.

Iran helps Assad, and also supports via-via the butchers of Isis, the Kurds and yes, Turkey.

Plus all Islamic induced terror groups.

If Assad disappears, Iran is already there.

If Assad wins, Iran is already there.

[neverdie]

There are only 2 explanations to why they did this:

1. They are stupid and want to force US in to open war with Russia and/or Iran.

or

2. They are just stupid

Either way they should not be in the State Department, they should be moved to the army or the marines and be forced to fight on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan instead.

That is the end game, once it starts, it won't stop until we all stop.

Holocaust, coming to a suburb near you!

So we are all doomed...

....meds haven't kicked in yet?

I'd say if the US, Russia & Iran kick something off my Meds will be irrelevant.

There's something strange that happens when history repeats, do ya think?

[mopar71]

Another sign US politicos have no idea about foreign politics.

Even the biggest moron can see that these terrorist organisations are more dangerous to the world as the Assad regime.

If Assad falls away, there will be another free playground for the bloody ayatollas from Iran.

Sorry, of course Obama is the new good friend of the ayatollas, including giving them a lot of money for spreading their filth.

But never mind, Boeing can now deliver a lot of planes.........

Wow. Talk about getting something 100% wrong. Iran has been Assad's chief backer. It's the Sunni extremists like Isis and Al Qaeda who are trying to bring Assad down.

On first sight I maybe wrong.

However, Iran came to the help of Assad on request of Assad.

Was that a good decision of Assad?

Probably not, time will tell.

That said, Iran plays and pays all terror groups that might be handy for their ultimate goal, control of the middle east, at least.

And Iran has a lot more money to spread around now.

[Krataiboy]

"Failure to stem Assad's flagrant abuses will only bolster the ideological appeal of groups such as Daesh, even as they endure tactical setbacks on the battlefield," the cable reads, according to The Journal.

I would have thought the US pitching in against their old enemy Assad would be the biggest boost yet to IS's standing. But then the CIA, which helped create the head-lopping Frankenstein in the first place, already knows that.

[FritsSikkink]

Are those the same diplomats that wanted to remove Saddam Hussein and Ghadaffi?

They need more oil and sell more weapons

[connda]

Deciphering the Syrian 'War' in one easy picture: