Bangkok Suffers Severe Smog as PM2.5 Levels Soar Amidst Heat Wave

[webfact]

Trump says he will order 'safe zones' for Syria

By Julia Edwards Ainsley and Matt Spetalnick

REUTERS

 

A child walks through rubble of damaged buildings in al-Rai town, northern Aleppo countryside, Syria January 20, 2017. REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

 

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. President Donald Trump said on Wednesday he "will absolutely do safe zones in Syria" for refugees fleeing violence in the war-torn country.

 

Saying Europe had made a tremendous mistake by admitting millions of refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern trouble spots, Trump told ABC News in an interview: "I don't want that to happen here."

 

"I'll absolutely do safe zones in Syria for the people," he added, without giving details.

 

According to a document seen by Reuters on Wednesday, Trump is expected to order the Pentagon and the State Department in coming days to craft a plan for setting up the “safe zones,” a move that could risk escalation of U.S. military involvement in Syria’s civil war.

 

The draft executive order awaiting Trump's signature signaled the new administration was preparing a step that Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, long resisted, fearing the potential for being pulled deeper into the bloody conflict and the threat of clashes between U.S. and Russian warplanes over Syria.

 

"The Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Defense, is directed within 90 days of the date of this order to produce a plan to provide safe areas in Syria and in the surrounding region in which Syrian nationals displaced from their homeland can await firm settlement, such as repatriation or potential third-country resettlement," the draft order said.

 

Creation of safe zones could ratchet up U.S. military involvement in Syria and mark a major departure from Obama’s more cautious approach. Increased U.S. or allied air power would be required if Trump chooses to enforce “no fly” restrictions, and ground forces might also be needed to protect civilians in those areas.

 

Still, the document gave no details on what would constitute a safe zone, exactly where they might be set up and who would defend them. Jordan, Turkey and other neighboring countries already host millions of Syrian refugees. The Turkish government had long pressed Obama, without success, for creation of a no-fly zone in Syria on its border with Turkey.

 

The draft raised the possibility of establishing those safe havens in neighboring countries but did not elaborate.

 

Trump’s call for a plan for safe zones is part of a larger directive expected to be signed in coming days that includes a temporary ban on most refugees to the United States and a suspension of visas for citizens of Syria and six other Middle Eastern and African countries deemed to pose a terrorism threat.

 

It represents a modified version of the blanket ban on Muslims entering the United States that Trump initially advocated on the campaign trail last year, sparking criticism from human rights groups and across the U.S. political spectrum.

 

REPUBLICANS HAVE CALLED FOR SAFE ZONES

 

U.S. military officials had long warned that the creation of no-fly zones inside Syria would require a large number of additional resources beyond the fight against Islamic State and it would be difficult to ensure that jihadist insurgents did not infiltrate those areas amid the chaos of Syria's civil war.

 

Some Republican lawmakers have advocated the creation of such zones, especially to protect civilians fleeing the conflict against attacks by forces loyal to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.

 

During and after the presidential campaign, Trump called for no-fly zones to harbor Syrian refugees as an alternative to allowing them into the United States. Trump accused the Obama administration of failing to properly screen Syrian immigrants entering the United States to ensure they had no militant ties.

 

Obama's aides have insisted the vetting was meticulous and none of the Syrian refugees allowed in have been implicated in any attacks.

 

On the campaign trail, Trump gave no details as to how he might go about creating such havens, except to say that he would ask Gulf states to help pay.

 

“All the questions of setting up a safe zone are still there,” a U.S. official said. “If you're going to declare a safe zone, there's a lot of other things" that would have to be analyzed and put in place before it becomes feasible.

 

Among the biggest questions would be how to avoid confrontations with Russian forces in Syria helping keep Assad in power.

 

Under the broader executive order, which the draft document says is intended to "protect the American people from terrorist attacks by foreign nationals," Trump would impose a 30-day suspension of the entry of immigrants from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

 

The temporary halt is aimed at giving the homeland security secretary, the secretary of state and the director of national intelligence enough time to determine what information is needed from each country to ensure visas are not issued to individuals that pose a national security threat, according to the draft.

 

Countries that do not provide adequate information about their nationals will be required to do so within 60 days or risk being blocked from entering the United States. That would exclude diplomatic visas, NATO visas and visas for travel to the United Nations.

 

It would also suspend the overall U.S. refugee program for 120 days so the government can study the process and determine if additional checks are necessary, but that could be waived on a case-by-case basis. It would completely stop refugee processing of Syrians until “I have determined that sufficient changes have been made” to the refugee program to ensure “its alignment with national interest," the draft said.

 

(Additional reporting by Mica Rosengberg, Phil Stewart, Yara Bayoumy, Jonathan Landay, Eric Beech and Warren Strobel; Editing by James Dalgleish and Peter Cooney)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-01-26

[Ralf61]

Yea, establish those save zones in Saudi Arabia, and let the Saudis pay for them...

[DrTuner]

Keep civilians in safe zones and let russkies bomb the shit out of ISIS. Might work. 

[Jingthing]

The idea sounds implausible. 

[zorro1]

They could do it thai style with security guards blowing whistles and waving hands.. Isis this way, refugees the other way. What could go wrong?

[optad]

Hasn't provided much sanctuary for hospitals letting the US know where they are.

[elgordo38]

4 hours ago, webfact said:

"will absolutely do safe zones in Syria"

He makes it sound as simple as ordering a Cheeseburger at MacDonalds. 

[alocacoc]

Saying Europe had made a tremendous mistake by admitting millions of refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern trouble spots, Trump told ABC News in an interview: "I don't want that to happen here."

 

He is so right with that. For this insight alone he deserved to got elected.

[harleyclarkey]

Europe, even with the wet, weak liberals and that useless Obama, should have done this years ago. I said it here already. The hoards of battle weary, angry, sexually frustrated, militant young male Muslims should never have been allowed to leave Syria and other countries.  Male Muslims? Have a look at the boats flooding across the Med. See many women? No. 

 

Trump has the balls to see the reality that the west has ignored for years. Far safer for the civilians, safer for Europe and more humanitarian to safe guard them in their own country. Protect them, feed them and medicate them. A fraction of the cost of this catastrophe that Europe now faces. Thanks, Angela. You are solely responsible for the Brexit mess and perhaps the break up of the UK and even your beloved EC.

 

No real issue here for conflict unless Russia and Assad decide to have a go at the safe zone.

[Srikcir]

For Trump to "order" safe zones within the sovereign nation of Syria, he'll have to invade the country to deprive it of soveriegnty over any part of Syria. On this the US will stand alone (especially since Trump dissed NATO and the EU) and I doubt even Israel would participate as a ally. Russia will use the action to vigorously support its partner Syria along with Iran. Turkey might deny the US its airbases and air space. This situation becomes a zero-sum game  for the US.

PS: Syria doesn't have oil to steal.

Hopefully, the US new Secretaries of State and Defense along with the CIA Director will "educate" Trump on the consequences of unilateral US forced safe zones such that he reverse this policy. The concept might gain more global traction with UN Security Council participation and/or negotiations with the Syria/Russia/Iran trivecta. But the US will have to anticipate giving up something in negotiations

[otherstuff1957]

Unless he puts a large number of troops on the ground in these safe zones, how will he keep ISIS and other militants out?

 

If militants enter the safe zones, will he let the Syrian/Russian forces go after them or will he try to keep them out?

 

These safe zones sound like a good idea on the surface, but they would have the potential for turning into a real mess.  I rather suspect the 'no fly zone' would come to a quick end when Russian jets enter it for a quick bombing raid!

[Stargeezr]

I hope President Trump, does not forget to tell Canada's leader PM Trudeau, to think

twice before, getting another 25 to 50 thousand refugees into that vountry if they have not

been fully vetted, and checked into. Besides, does anyone know that it will take 5 years or more

to get these refugees taught for the English language, let alone house, feed, and clothe all

these people.  Much cheaper to leave them near their home countries, then help them move

back when the battles are over

[simple1]

8 hours ago, Srikcir said:

For Trump to "order" safe zones within the sovereign nation of Syria, he'll have to invade the country to deprive it of soveriegnty over any part of Syria. On this the US will stand alone (especially since Trump dissed NATO and the EU) and I doubt even Israel would participate as a ally. Russia will use the action to vigorously support its partner Syria along with Iran. Turkey might deny the US its airbases and air space. This situation becomes a zero-sum game  for the US.

PS: Syria doesn't have oil to steal.

Hopefully, the US new Secretaries of State and Defense along with the CIA Director will "educate" Trump on the consequences of unilateral US forced safe zones such that he reverse this policy. The concept might gain more global traction with UN Security Council participation and/or negotiations with the Syria/Russia/Iran trivecta. But the US will have to anticipate giving up something in negotiations

 

US & some allies have already declared some areas of Syrian as "ungoverned" thereby making it legal, under their laws of warfare, to engage militarily without Syrian government permission.

 

It's possible the US could negotiate with Turkey to provide military forces on the ground to enforce 'safe zone/s' as Turkey had previously commented on such plans. Although Turkey's involvement would raise the question of security for Kurdish forces, supported by the US, currently operating near the Syrian/Turkish border. I guess the same would apply for previous safe zones suggested on the Jordanian/ Syrian border i.e. Jordanian ground troops

Edited January 26, 2017 by simple1

[heybruce]

15 hours ago, DrTuner said:

Keep civilians in safe zones and let russkies bomb the shit out of ISIS. Might work. 

Absolute genius!  Tell the civilians to go to one part of Syria and ISIS to go to another part, then bomb the part that only has ISIS.

 

It could work in our cities as well; tell the law-abiding citizens to go to one part of the city and the lawbreakers to another, then arrest everyone in the lawbreaking zone.

 

How could this plan possibly fail?

[craigt3365]

16 hours ago, optad said:

Hasn't provided much sanctuary for hospitals letting the US know where they are.

I do believe it was Russia and Syria who bombed the most hospitals there....

[craigt3365]

5 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

US & some allies have already declared some areas of Syrian as "ungoverned" thereby making it legal, under their laws of warfare, to engage militarily without Syrian government permission.

 

It's possible the US could negotiate with Turkey to provide military forces on the ground to enforce 'safe zone/s' as Turkey had previously commented on such plans. Although Turkey's involvement would raise the question of security for Kurdish forces, supported by the US, currently operating near the Syrian/Turkish border. I guess the same would apply for previous safe zones suggested on the Jordanian/ Syrian border i.e. Jordanian ground troops

Didn't they have a "Green zone" in Iraq?  It was suppose to be super safe....but was still bombed?

[maewang99]

it's getting to be the same as Thailand and North Korea (the Great Again USA).

there's a problem? issue an order.. or just a tweet.

problem solved.  next?

it's a simple world if you have a simple mind.  just don't think too much... or better yet, don't think at all... just 'go with your gut'....  it works for building buildings... or defending a helicopter landing zone... it should work just fine for everything else as well. right?

 

Edited January 27, 2017 by maewang99

[simple1]

54 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Didn't they have a "Green zone" in Iraq?  It was suppose to be super safe....but was still bombed?

True, but heavily fortified & never really faced being over run with mass civilian massacres. US had previously suggested it would take up to 15,000 troops to protect a safe zone parallel to the Turkish border in Syria; from memory the proposed land area was roughly 100 kilometres long, by 40 kilometres in depth. Could be proven wrong, but do not believe Trump will be able to overcome objections to base US combat troops in the area and for sure a very expensive exercise.

 

Look forward to reading the Trump proposal to permanently remove Islamist extremism within the term of his Administration.

Edited January 27, 2017 by simple1

[rabas]

17 hours ago, zorro1 said:

They could do it thai style with security guards blowing whistles and waving hands.. Isis this way, refugees the other way. What could go wrong?

 

Ear damage, from those 2000 db whistles?

[thaibeachlovers]

14 hours ago, Srikcir said:

For Trump to "order" safe zones within the sovereign nation of Syria, he'll have to invade the country to deprive it of soveriegnty over any part of Syria. On this the US will stand alone (especially since Trump dissed NATO and the EU) and I doubt even Israel would participate as a ally. Russia will use the action to vigorously support its partner Syria along with Iran. Turkey might deny the US its airbases and air space. This situation becomes a zero-sum game  for the US.

PS: Syria doesn't have oil to steal.

Hopefully, the US new Secretaries of State and Defense along with the CIA Director will "educate" Trump on the consequences of unilateral US forced safe zones such that he reverse this policy. The concept might gain more global traction with UN Security Council participation and/or negotiations with the Syria/Russia/Iran trivecta. But the US will have to anticipate giving up something in negotiations

I have to agree with you. Syria is a morass for any western country trying to get involved. Given that the US has had no part in making the mess Syria is in ( that I am aware of ), I hope you are correct and Trump will be educated that he can't do anything there and just support the Kurds ( I know Turkey won't like that, but tough ) with whatever they need, and otherwise stay out of it.

Obama tried to get involved with his red line and ended up looking weak and foolish.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

 

US & some allies have already declared some areas of Syrian as "ungoverned" thereby making it legal, under their laws of warfare, to engage militarily without Syrian government permission.

 

It's possible the US could negotiate with Turkey to provide military forces on the ground to enforce 'safe zone/s' as Turkey had previously commented on such plans. Although Turkey's involvement would raise the question of security for Kurdish forces, supported by the US, currently operating near the Syrian/Turkish border. I guess the same would apply for previous safe zones suggested on the Jordanian/ Syrian border i.e. Jordanian ground troops

Turkey can't be trusted on the Kurdish situation. All that would happen would be the US supporting Turkey attacking Kurds while claiming to be securing a safe zone.

[rabas]

13 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Turkey can't be trusted on the Kurdish situation. All that would happen would be the US supporting Turkey attacking Kurds while claiming to be securing a safe zone.

Sorry, why on earth would the US attack the Kurds?

[thaibeachlovers]

4 minutes ago, rabas said:

Sorry, why on earth would the US attack the Kurds?

Read it again. Turkey would attack the Kurds as they are already doing, but if the US was supporting Turkey to make safe zones, they would be indirectly supporting Turkey's attacks on the Kurds.

I never said US troops would themselves attack the Kurds.

[DM07]

Oh, he will just "order" safe- zones!

Damn, why did nobody else think of "ordering" safe- zones!

Easy- peasy!

Great job, Donald.... 

[Srikcir]

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

It's possible the US could negotiate with Turkey to provide military forces on the ground to enforce 'safe zone/s' as Turkey had previously commented on such plans.

Syria, Russia and Iran are already working with Turkey to craft resolution of military conflicts within Syria. The US has being bypassed in such negotiations.

7 hours ago, simple1 said:

Turkey's involvement would raise the question of security for Kurdish forces, supported by the US, currently operating near the Syrian/Turkish border.

Turkey has already answered that question: Kurds are to exit Syria or face attacks from Turkey.

[ddavidovsky]

So a safe zone is a refugee camp with guards? Sounds reasonable.

Edited January 27, 2017 by ddavidovsky

[mike324]

easier said than done, but I do think safe zone is better than having an influx of refugees around Europe.

[simple1]

2 hours ago, Srikcir said:

Syria, Russia and Iran are already working with Turkey to craft resolution of military conflicts within Syria. The US has being bypassed in such negotiations.

Turkey has already answered that question: Kurds are to exit Syria or face attacks from Turkey.

 

IMO, as with your other point probably likely all prior proposals / groupings are fluid, have to wait and see how the dice roll. An example of a number of different scenarios being reported...

 

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-turkey-idUSKBN15A10O

[elgordo38]

On 1/26/2017 at 4:51 PM, alocacoc said:

Saying Europe had made a tremendous mistake by admitting millions of refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern trouble spots, Trump told ABC News in an interview: "I don't want that to happen here."

 

He is so right with that. For this insight alone he deserved to got elected.

Good post but sadly I have seen so many "insighted" politicians come and go over the years leaving behind nothing but "insight" and little else. "Insight" is just another propaganda tool in their BS toolbox. It and other "tools" fill people with false hope to get their vote. The voters sadly do not have enough "insight" to see though these political charlatans. Every four years the sheeple line up to be shorn.