Syria/Assad is next

[countryguy]

It appears, to me, that ISIS knows its time is getting short, and that they'd better get their "fun" in, while they can.  Apparently, they've attracted sadists from world-wide, who see a chance to fulfill their most brutal, despicable fantasies.  They know that, in the end, the world won't stand for such depravity, and will, sooner or later, "take them out".

The only problem is, I think we're waiting too much "later".  I don't support military action, very often, but brutality on the level we're seeing in Iraq and Syria just cannot be ignored or condoned.

However, we do have to be ready to accept that, if American troops are committed, these sociopaths will see just how depraved they can get, with any Americans they capture.

[NamVetMike69]

NEAR MISS: US tried, failed to rescue American hostages held by ISIS in Syria

PRESIDENT OBAMA sent US special forces to Syria earlier this summer to rescue a number of Americans held by ISIS, believed to include journalist James Foley, but did not find the hostages, the Obama administration says

So much for transparency

[hoosier88]

NEAR MISS: US tried, failed to rescue American hostages held by ISIS in Syria

PRESIDENT OBAMA sent US special forces to Syria earlier this summer to rescue a number of Americans held by ISIS, believed to include journalist James Foley, but did not find the hostages, the Obama administration says

So much for transparency

(My bold)

Surely you don't expect that kind of operation to be announced in advance.  & sometimes not even if the operation succeeds. 

There's so much apparent confusion on the ground there in Syria, that I expect we - or anyone else with the operators & transport, & air cover, etc. - could attempt the mission.  It's too bad that the mission came up dry - it's a triumph of planning & execution that we apparently got all our raiders back out, with no deaths on our side, & also extracted our birds.

We've come a long way from Prexy Carter's attempt to break out the Embassy hostages back when, in Iran.  (& we've had a lot of practice now, in working out doctrine, insertions, methods, GPS, sigint, pathfinders, MTBF on our air transport, flying NOE with NVDs in desert, staging - the 100s of tiny steps that have to be taken to put boots on the ground & back out successfully.) 

[NamVetMike69]

You mean like Grenada ?

[hoosier88]

You mean like Grenada ?

(My bold)

Ah, our short, glorious war.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_Grenada

"Operation Urgent Fury was a 1983 United States–led invasion of Grenada, a Caribbean island nation with a population of about 91,000 located 100 miles (160 km) north of Venezuela, that resulted in a U.S. victory within a matter of weeks.  ...

"The U.S. awarded more than 5,000 medals for merit and valor.[8][9]  ...  (among 7,300 US effectives - my paren)

"Nearly 8,000 soldiers, sailors, airmen, and marines had participated in Operation Urgent Fury along with 353 Caribbean allies of the Caribbean Peace Forces. U.S. forces sustained 19 killed and 116 wounded; Cuban forces sustained 25 killed, 59 wounded, and 638 combatants captured. Grenadian forces casualties were 45 killed and 358 wounded; at least 24 civilians were killed, 18 of whom were killed in the accidental bombing of a Grenadian mental hospital.[2]:62  ...

"United States[edit]

"The invasion showed problems with the U.S. government's "information apparatus," which Time described as still being in "some disarray" three weeks after the invasion. For example, the U.S. State Department falsely claimed that a mass grave had been discovered that held 100 bodies of islanders who had been killed by Communist forces.[5] Major General Norman Schwarzkopf, deputy commander of the invasion force, said that 160 Grenadian soldiers and 71 Cubans had been killed during the invasion; the Pentagon had given a much lower count of 59 Cuban and Grenadian deaths.[5] Ronald H. Cole's report for the Joint Chiefs of Staff showed an even lower count.[2]  ...

"A heavily fictionalized account of the invasion from a U.S. military perspective is shown in the 1986 Clint Eastwood motion picture Heartbreak Ridge, in which marines replaced the actual roles of army units. Due to the movie's portrayal of several incompetent officers and NCOs, the army opted out its military support of the movie.[citation needed]  ..."

(My emphasis)

& some of the US casualties/wounded were due to poor maps & coordination between units requesting arty & the naval gun support.  Sure, we can beat up these little flyspeck countries with no probs - it's not like the Cuban/N. Korean forces had anywhere to flee to. 

The matchup of forces had the US/allies overwhelmingly outnumbering, outgunning, tac air, transport, naval guns.  The naval matchup doesn't even bother to list any Granadian vessels - which makes me think that there is no Granadian navy.  There was also a blip that 4 SEALs were lost in action - a night drop, low-level.

[A159]

NEAR MISS: US tried, failed to rescue American hostages held by ISIS in Syria

PRESIDENT OBAMA sent US special forces to Syria earlier this summer to rescue a number of Americans held by ISIS, believed to include journalist James Foley, but did not find the hostages, the Obama administration says

So, in all honesty here, our SFs failed to located and rescue hostages.

[A159]

I don't support military action, very often, but brutality on the level we're seeing in Iraq and Syria just cannot be ignored or condoned.

However, we do have to be ready to accept that, if American troops are committed, these sociopaths will see just how depraved they can get, with any Americans they capture.

It would be a hard pill for me to swallow if we go into Syria.... officially. I understand the thinking that at some point ISIS has to be eliminated, but I'm still in the camp that this is NATO's/Arab's mission, not ours. When I say NATO, I mean without US troops. And without US troops I mean no combat troops, only 'advisers' like how DC plays it today in the news. NATO supposedly carried out most of the missions in Libya .... why not do the same against ISIS in Syria? NATO certainly has recent war experience now .... dealing with killer sand goons in Syria should be more the same as it was in Libya. I just know that once we 'go into' Syria, officially, that opens the big door to the big one. Not that we're all that far from the big one as it now stands .... but it's a genie very hard to put back into the bottle once out. The ole ''you broke it now own it' theory. Next stop .... Russia. Unless Assad and Putin gives the US their blessings and military cooperation, making us all happy allies, then we could do the Syria dance for a couple of yrs.

[NamVetMike69]

Messiah was against Asad before he was with him now

[A159]

I'm not so sure that God takes sides .....

Just think, Assad had pretty much control of his country before the West backed ISIS & Friends in order to overthrow/destroy him. Much like Saddam had pretty much control over his difficult country before the West turned against/killed him. Much like how the West backed bin Laden and his terror expert murderers before the West ignored/turned against him. Once again, a nasty gasket (ISIS) has blown up in our faces. Assad is in position to keep fighting them just as Iran has pitched in to do. Yet, we want to hate them so much ..... Syria and Iran but fear ISIS more. Ever get a mental picture of a dog ate up with the mange chasing his own tail until it drops from self inflicted wounds? Welcome to the West.

[countryguy]

The gist of our foreign policy, for decades, and under democrat and republican administrations ...........
     
     "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Until, that is, that "friend" becomes our next enemy.  Then, we have some hard choices to make.

[Plato Potato]

These days, it gets mighty complicated. The enemy of my enemy is often just as nesty a bestid as my enemy. The enemy of my enemy's trading partner's friend is, well, us!

[A159]

Not only that but, there's no light at that end of the tunnel either. We may defeat disperse ISIL in the next 10 yrs or so ..... but guaranteed, there will be more groups established and ready to fight just to wear down the mighty deflating western giants. The longer we play the longer we pay.... dearly.

 

[NamVetMike69]

Armchair Generals 

[A159]

GOP skillset
 

[NamVetMike69]

General Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is saying, either is U.S. policy, or foreshadows U.S. policy, then I think it's fair to say we have begun the third Iraq war.”