Assad calls U.S. forces 'invaders', but still hopeful on Trump

[rooster59]

Assad calls U.S. forces 'invaders', but still hopeful on Trump

By Tom Perry

 

Syria's President Bashar al-Assad speaks during an interview with Yahoo News in this handout picture provided by SANA on February 10, 2017, Syria. SANA/Handout via REUTERS/Files

 

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said U.S. forces in Syria were "invaders" and he had yet to see "anything concrete" emerge from U.S. President Donald Trump's vow to prioritise the fight against Islamic State.

Assad has said he saw promise in Trump's statements emphasising the battle against Islamic State in Syria, where U.S. policy under President Barack Obama had backed some of the rebels fighting Assad and shunned him as an illegitimate leader.

"We haven't seen anything concrete yet regarding this rhetoric," Assad said in an interview with Chinese TV station Phoenix. "We have hopes that this administration in the United States is going to implement what we have heard," he said.

The United States is leading a coalition against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

In Syria, it is working with an alliance of Kurdish and Arab militias. Their current focus is to encircle and ultimately capture Raqqa - Islamic State's base of operations in Syria.

This week, the U.S.-led coalition announced that around 400 additional U.S. forces had deployed to Syria to help with the Raqqa campaign and to prevent any clash between Turkey and Washington-allied Syrian militias that Ankara sees as a threat.

Asked about a deployment of U.S. forces near the northern city of Manbij, Assad said: "Any foreign troops coming to Syria without our invitation ... are invaders."

"We don't think this is going to help".

Around 500 U.S. forces are already in Syria in support of the campaign against Islamic State.

Assad said that "in theory" he still saw scope for cooperation with Trump, though practically nothing had happened in this regard. He dismissed the U.S.-backed military campaign against Islamic State in Syria as "only a few raids", and said a more comprehensive approach was needed.

The U.S.-led coalition is currently backing a campaign by its Syrian militia allies to encircle and ultimately capture Raqqa, Islamic State's base of operations in Syria.

Assad noted that the Russian-backed Syrian army was now "very close" to Raqqa city after advancing to the western banks of the Euphrates River this week - a rapid gain that has brought it to the frontier of areas held by the U.S.-backed forces.

He said Raqqa was "a priority for us", but indicated that there could also be a parallel army attack towards Deir al-Zor in the east, near the Iraqi border. Deir al-Zor province is almost completely controlled by Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

The Deir al-Zor region had been "used by ISIS as a route for logistics support between ISIS in Iraq and ISIS in Syria, so whether you attack the stronghold or you attack the route that ISIS uses, it (has) the same result", Assad said.

INTELLIGENCE COOPERATION WITH CHINA

With Russian and Iranian military support, Assad firmly has the upper hand in the war with rebels who have been trying to topple him with backing from states including Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

U.N.-led peace talks in Geneva ended earlier this month with no breakthrough. Assad said he hadn't expected anything from Geneva. He added that deals brokered locally with rebels were "the real political solutions" since the war began.

The so-called local "reconciliation" agreements are the government's preferred method for pacifying rebellious areas, and have often been concluded after years of government siege and bombardment.

In some cases, the rebels have been given safe passage to the insurgent-dominated province of Idlib. The opposition says the agreements amount to forced displacement.

"We didn't expect Geneva to produce anything, but it's a step and it's going to be a long way," Assad said. He added that it would be up to Syrians to decide their future political system, and there would be a referendum on it.

Assad also praised "crucial cooperation" between Syria and Chinese intelligence against Uighur militants who have joined the insurgency against him. He said ties with Beijing were "on the rise".

China and Russia last month blocked U.N. sanctions on Syria over accusations of chemical weapons attacks during the war.

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-12

[Srikcir]

5 hours ago, rooster59 said:

U.S. forces in Syria were "invaders"

True. Unbelievable the US didn't try some diplomacy to coordinate with Syria to allow US forces into Syria in recognition of Syria's sovereignty that is backed by Russia and China. For any UN Security Council action the US needs support of Russia and China. McMasters & Tillerson should know better.

 

With regard to the retaking of Raqqa, the Syrian Army has every right to be the first military force to enter the city and not Syrian rebels, US nor any other foreign force. To do so would in effect constitute a foreign conquest. The US needs to be careful in keeping Asaad's cooperation to destroy ISIS.

[elgordo38]

9 hours ago, rooster59 said:

BEIRUT (Reuters) - Syrian President Bashar al-Assad said U.S. forces in Syria were "invaders" and he had yet to see "anything concrete"

And you sir are a butcher plain and simple. 

[boomerangutang]

From the OP:

Assad also praised "crucial cooperation" between Syria and Chinese intelligence against Uighur militants who have joined the insurgency against him. He said ties with Beijing were "on the rise". 

 

With the US fading away from the Int'l scene, other countries will fill the void - particularly China and Russia.  Trump's 'America First' along with him (and Tillerson) lessening # of workers at the State Dept will render the US State Dept toothless.  

 

Also, Assad should know by now that Trump can't be trusted on any level.  He changes his stances on issues, day by day.   Part of it is just ignorance, but it's also his character.  He can't focus, and doesn't give credence to US intelligence reports.

[keep it real]

1 hour ago, boomerangutang said:

 

 

With the US fading away from the Int'l scene, other countries will fill the void - particularly China and Russia.  Trump's 'America First' along with him (and Tillerson) lessening # of workers at the State Dept will render the US State Dept toothless.  

 

Also, Assad should know by now that Trump can't be trusted on any level.  He changes his stances on issues, day by day.   Part of it is just ignorance, but it's also his character.  He can't focus, and doesn't give credence to US intelligence reports.

who can be trusted....555....NO ONE!

[Gene1960]

What Al Assad says is irrelevant. Syria is no longer a sovereign nation, regardless of Russia's efforts.

[FritsSikkink]

2 hours ago, Gene1960 said:

What Al Assad says is irrelevant. Syria is no longer a sovereign nation, regardless of Russia's efforts.

Who decides that, the USA?

[Gene1960]

Who decides that, the USA?

No. Not only the USA.

Syria is a country where the capital Damascus and Al -Assad do not have a full control over the territory and infrastructure, it's a country where foreign actors enjoy a lot of freedom of actions, a part of Syria is occupied and the fate of the country is still not clear yet.

[FritsSikkink]

30 minutes ago, Gene1960 said:

No. Not only the USA.

Syria is a country where the capital Damascus and Al -Assad do not have a full control over the territory and infrastructure, it's a country where foreign actors enjoy a lot of freedom of actions, a part of Syria is occupied and the fate of the country is still not clear yet.

It is just an excuse for the USA to bomb the governments army and to arm anti government groups so they can replace to chosen leader with a friend.

[craigt3365]

2 hours ago, FritsSikkink said:

Who decides that, the USA?

The world community. 

[craigt3365]

45 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

It is just an excuse for the USA to bomb the governments army and to arm anti government groups so they can replace to chosen leader with a friend.

You mean like Russia and Iran have already done?  Bomb the government's enemies so they can keep their friend the leader?  Regardless of how many hundreds of thousands are killed?  Great strategy.  Look where that's gotten us.

 

Anyway, a new leader might not be a bad thing.  Can't really get any worse.

[boomerangutang]

7 hours ago, keep it real said:

who can be trusted....555....NO ONE!

Most European leaders, or at least their Foreign Ministers, are usually on the mark.  Kerry was a respectable Sec. of State in the Obama administration.   What did Kerry declare that turned out to be untrue?  Kerry was knowledgeable about world affairs and knew how to conduct himself in the State position.  In stark contrast Tillerson doesn't know diddly squat about int'l affairs - beyond how to finagle drilling rights in Russia's Arctic region. He doesn't acknowledge journalists when they ask him questions.  Trump takes it a step further, and hides away from anyone who doesn't lavish praise on him.  I predicted Trump and his people would devolve to avoiding anyone outside their inner circle.  Less than 2 months on the job, and it's already happening.

[Stargeezr]

Assad is a war criminal, who has killed his own people. He needs to be brought

to justice and pay for his crimes.

Geezer

[FritsSikkink]

2 hours ago, craigt3365 said:

The world community. 

The USA isn't the world community

[craigt3365]

29 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

The USA isn't the world community

Exactly my point.  You have a habit of blaming all the worlds problems on the US. LOL

[FritsSikkink]

1 hour ago, craigt3365 said:

Exactly my point.  You have a habit of blaming all the worlds problems on the US. LOL

No, I am against them invading and bombing other countries. Do you think really that it is normal for a country to be at war everyday for over 200 years in a row? Can't laugh about that. 

[craigt3365]

12 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

No, I am against them invading and bombing other countries. Do you think really that it is normal for a country to be at war everyday for over 200 years in a row? Can't laugh about that. 

You've been looking at click bait websites.  A few countries have more impressive records than this.  Russia for one.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Russia

 

But now, we're off topic.  And you've proved my point.  You are anti-US.

[metisdead]

Troll posts and replies have been removed. 

[Morch]

On 3/13/2017 at 6:25 AM, craigt3365 said:

You mean like Russia and Iran have already done?  Bomb the government's enemies so they can keep their friend the leader?  Regardless of how many hundreds of thousands are killed?  Great strategy.  Look where that's gotten us.

 

Anyway, a new leader might not be a bad thing.  Can't really get any worse.

 

Russia and Iran are present by invitation and consent of the Syrian Regime. Like it or not, that's a wee bit more of a firm ground than the US involvement. The US could have taken a more proactive approach, diplomatically and militarily, but that would necessitate a level of involvement the Obama administration wasn't keen on.

 

Quote

Anyway, a new leader might not be a bad thing.  Can't really get any worse.

I think some might be unpleasantly surprised by how deep and dark this rabbit hole can get. Doesn't even take a whole lot of imagination.  

 

[ilostmypassword]

2 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Russia and Iran are present by invitation and consent of the Syrian Regime. Like it or not, that's a wee bit more of a firm ground than the US involvement. The US could have taken a more proactive approach, diplomatically and militarily, but that would necessitate a level of involvement the Obama administration wasn't keen on.

 

I think some might be unpleasantly surprised by how deep and dark this rabbit hole can get. Doesn't even take a whole lot of imagination.  

 

Ronald Reagan quickly found out how bad it could be. And to give him due credit, he had what was left of the Marines skedaddle the hell out of there just as quick as they could.

[Gene1960]

Maybe you all have missed the news about the meeting of Turkey, the USA and Russia in Antalya, Turkey. Please note, that the military cooperation, if limited, is doing well without Al- Assad. Obviously, the Russian Chief of Staff Guerassimov is talking on behalf of Damascus.


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/03/07/top-russian-turkish-us-generals-meet-amid-standoff-northern/

[craigt3365]

15 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Russia and Iran are present by invitation and consent of the Syrian Regime. Like it or not, that's a wee bit more of a firm ground than the US involvement. The US could have taken a more proactive approach, diplomatically and militarily, but that would necessitate a level of involvement the Obama administration wasn't keen on.

 

I think some might be unpleasantly surprised by how deep and dark this rabbit hole can get. Doesn't even take a whole lot of imagination.  

 

There's legitimate debate as to whether Assad is still head of the government as the election wasn't legal.  And debate as to what constitutes Syria.  I hear what you say, but would hate to hang my hat on this one item.  Especially considering how many he's killed.  Legitimate or not.

[Scott]

An inflammatory post has been removed along with replies.   I think we can leave Israel out of the equations on this topic.   Continuing to go there will result in suspensions.  

[ilostmypassword]

On 3/13/2017 at 6:25 AM, craigt3365 said:

You mean like Russia and Iran have already done?  Bomb the government's enemies so they can keep their friend the leader?  Regardless of how many hundreds of thousands are killed?  Great strategy.  Look where that's gotten us.

 

Anyway, a new leader might not be a bad thing.  Can't really get any worse.

You think Syria run by ISIS wouldn't be worse?

[craigt3365]

5 minutes ago, ilostmypassword said:

You think Syria run by ISIS wouldn't be worse?

Absolutely not. LOL

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-isis-civilian-deaths-united-nations-syria-2016-8

Quote

Report: In less than a year, Russia has killed more civilians than ISIS

 

[ilostmypassword]

6 minutes ago, craigt3365 said:

Absolutely not. LOL

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/russia-isis-civilian-deaths-united-nations-syria-2016-8

 

But Assad doesn't have designs on expanding throughout the middle east. So while ISIS may be no worse for Syria, it will be a lot worse for its neighbors.

[Thorgal]

I think some might be unpleasantly surprised by how deep and dark this rabbit hole can get. Doesn't even take a whole lot of imagination.  
 

Diplomatic meeting in Astana with Russia, Syria and Turkey concerning ceasefire has been proven to be effective. Decisions were made in terms of days and weeks.

While previous US negotiations took months and years at UN and/or NATO level.

At that time Obama understood that his advice or mediation was no more required. The Russian initiative was successful and many Syrian civilians were saved.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

[Morch]

1 minute ago, Thorgal said:

 

Diplomatic meeting in Astana with Russia, Syria and Turkey concerning ceasefire has been proven to be effective. Decisions were made in terms of days and weeks.

While previous US negotiations took months and years at UN and/or NATO level.

At that time Obama understood that his advice or mediation was no more required. The Russian initiative was successful and many Syrian civilians were saved.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

 

 

And you quoted that bit of my post...because?

 

Things in Syria are far from settled, and there is no unity of purpose between Russia, Syria, Turkey and Iran. Not to mention those Syrians opposing Assad's rule.

 

The US diplomatic efforts were also hampered by such factors as seeking wider international participation, obstruction by Russia, and a reluctance to get involved in another overseas war. Putin's Russia got less qualms about these sort of things.

 

Glossing over the civilian deaths directly and indirectly caused by the Russian military intervention will not wash them away.

 

[craigt3365]

2 minutes ago, Thorgal said:

 

Diplomatic meeting in Astana with Russia, Syria and Turkey concerning ceasefire has been proven to be effective. Decisions were made in terms of days and weeks.

While previous US negotiations took months and years at UN and/or NATO level.

At that time Obama understood that his advice or mediation was no more required. The Russian initiative was successful and many Syrian civilians were saved.


Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect

BS.  Russia has killed more civilians than ISIS!  I'd have a hard time calling the Russian initiative successful. LOL  Unless of course you are reading the Russian media.

 

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/02/russia-turkey-iran-syria-ceasefire-astana-170206080423207.html

Quote

 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said on Sunday the Astana talks were a "breakthrough step" in efforts to resolve the crisis but were not intended to be a substitute for UN-led talks. 

 

"We are not planning to replace Geneva with the Astana format," he said in an interview published on the ministry's website.

 

Even Russia admits this is not meant to replace the UN negotiations.

[Thorgal]

Even Russia admits this is not meant to replace the UN negotiations.

Al Jazeera is a Qatari based media outlet. It's actually previous Middle East BBC branch personnel bought by Al Jazeera.It's known that the Qatari government sponsors the Syrian 'moderate' rebels franchise. And that they oppose the sovereign Syrian government.Even so, the French and UK government decided to supply also weapons to the Syrian opposition since 2012.

It's also a variety of 'invasion' and this has been confirmed by Assads multiple face to face interviews with multiple media outlets like in OP.

Would not be rational to use Qatari media feedback in order to make an objective opinion and eventually conclusions.

No, I didn't use any feedback from a Russian media outlet lately.

I use nowadays mostly Syrian non-governemental media outlets who are actually on the ground. Unfortunately, they aren't English, so I can't publish the links on TV.

Can you provide a link where it's proven that the Russian intervention killed more people than ISIS ?

Thanks !

Sent from my iPad using Thaivisa Connect