Peti oktobar na bliskom istoku i arapskom svetu

[Gandalf]

Aha, ok. Ja sam mislio da je arhaičan arapski izraz za Zapadnjake ,,franci" pa sam mislio da se ovo odnosi nešto na papu il šta već

vizantijski carevi.

[mackenzie]

[Hella]

 

 

meni ovo super izgleda ali nažalost kada je u pitanju putinova propagandna mafija valja uzeti anketu sa 100% rezerve 

[iDemo]

meni ovo super izgleda ali nažalost kada je u pitanju putinova propagandna mafija valja uzeti anketu sa 100% rezerve 

Ko 'to' nije naucio do 1999te - mogao je da naucio od Vesli Klarka - ono - "informaciju analiziramo prema tome iz kog je izvora, za 

 

pocetak"...

[Bane5]

Washington (AFP) - Jihadist group the Islamic State can be contained and eventually defeated, the top US general said Thursday, but only if it is engaged in Syria and not just in Iraq.

 

"This is an organization that has an apocalyptic, and of days strategic vision that will eventually have to be defeated," said General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. "Can they be defeated without addressing that part of the organization that resides in Syria? The answer is no."

[iDemo]

I njihovi novinari ono - 'malo levo pa desno', ne?

 

 

 

and of days

 

vs

 

 

 

end of days

[Lord Protector]

 

US and UK should back Assad to defeat ISIS - senior UK MP

 

The US and UK must work with Bashar Assad’s Syrian regime if they are to defeat the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), the chairman of Britain’s intelligence and security committee warns.

Sir Malcolm Rifkind, one of the UK’s most senior MPs, told the Financial Times (FT) in an exclusive interview that the horrific murder of American journalist, James Foley, highlights the urgent need to take action against the extremist group Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL), whose swift rise to power in the Middle East has remained largely unchecked by Western intervention.

While the militants have annexed vast swathes of territory in northern Iraq, their central power base remains in Syria.

“ISIS need to be eliminated and we should not be squeamish about how we do it,” Rifkind told the FT on Friday.

Although he made it clear he does not support the Assad regime in principle, Rifkind reluctantly emphasized that “sometimes you have to develop relationships with people who are extremely nasty in order to get rid of people who are even nastier.”

Following a brutal civil war that has devastated and divided Syria while providing a breeding ground for the Islamic State, the Assad regime has faced isolation from myriad world powers.

Prior to Rifkind’s interview, Western states expressed no willingness to work with Damascus. On Wednesday, President Obama’s deputy national security adviser, Ben Rhodes, said Assad was “part of the problem.”

Following the Ghouta chemical attack, which killed up to 1,729 people in August 2013, Rifkind was one of most vocal members of Britain’s parliament calling for the UK to intervene against the regime. But as the Islamic State continues to wage aggression in the Middle East, the chairman has urged the US and Britain pursue a strategic shift.

 

An image made available by Jihadist media outlet, al-Itisam Media, on June 29, 2014, allegedly shows members of the IS (Islamic state) (AFP Photo)

 

“We have to deal with facts on the ground, not as we would want them to be but as they are,” he said, conceding the prospect of working with Assad would be a deeply unsavory choice.

In an effort to justify his tactical proposal, Rifkind referenced the manner in which allied states worked alongside Joseph Stalin during the Second World War in pursuit of a greater good.

It’s unthinkable that a military operation in Iraq, spearheaded by America and its allies, can exist without some sort of “Syrian dimension,” Rifkind said. “For Syria to become an ISIS safe haven – that is ludicrous,” he continued.

Working in tandem with Syria, throughout the duration of this military operation, has almost become inevitable, the chairman concluded.

The Assad government has recently increased its efforts to defeat the Islamic State, following months of relative passivity. But many Western political analysts and critics have viewed this recent resurgence in military activity as a tactical ploy to regain leverage over the region.

 

Syrian President, Bashar al-Assad. (AFP Photo / SANA)

 

As the Islamic State continues to gather momentum in the Middle East, an increasing number of intelligence and military analysts reportedly endorse Rifkind’s perspective.

Commenting on ISIL’s ongoing aggression in Northern Iraq the Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO) recently said the situation remains “deeply worrying.” “We condemn the barbaric attacks waged by ISIL terrorists across the region. Hundreds of thousands of people are displaced across the region and in need of aid supplies,” it added.

The FCO emphasize the UK government response is focused on “alleviating the humanitarian suffering of those Iraqis targeted by ISIL terrorists”, “promoting an inclusive, sovereign and democratic Iraq that can push back on ISIL advances and restore stability and security across the country”, and “working with the international community to tackle the broader threat that ISIL poses to the region and other countries around the world”.

With pressure mounting for decisive action against the IS militants who brutally beheaded James Foley this week, Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond stipulated the only way to address the threat they pose is by working closely with the Iraqi government. Tentative talks with Assad would not be helpful, he added.

"We may very well find that we are aligned against a common enemy. But that does not make us able to trust them, it does not make us able to work with them and it would poison what we are trying to achieve in separating moderate Sunni opinion from the poisonous ideology of Isil [islamic State] if we were to align ourselves with President Assad", Hammond told the BBC on Friday.

Rifkind’s proposal for a US-UK tactical shift with respect to Assad follows Prime Minister David Cameron’s recent announcement that Britain must form a strategic alliance with Iran.

Emphasizing it was in Britain’s national interest to cast aside long-held antagonism with the Islamic Republic, Cameron urged Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to assist the international community in defeating the Islamic State.

The prime minister justified this move on the grounds of the grave need to thwart the “shared threat”of fundamentalist Sunni militants in Syria and Iraq who are endeavoring to cultivate “a terrorist state,”the boundaries of which could infiltrate “the shores of the Mediterranean.”

 

<_<

Edited August 22, 2014 by slow

[mackenzie]

Koji je sad pa ovaj. Ja znam samo za legendarnog Georgea Gallowaya, da odudara od zvaničnog establišmenta!

[Muwan]

Ministar spoljnih poslova u vreme Dejtona.

[dillinger]

^^e ne može to jer kao što je poznato Asad je saveznik ISIS-a već Ameri moraju da ulete i poraze obe strane odnosno jednu istu

[Bane5]

ideja rifkinda je nesotvariva, mozda i najmanje zbog politickog stava vecine zapadnih zemalja prema asadu.

[dillinger]

ideja rifkinda je nesotvariva, mozda i najmanje zbog politickog stava vecine zapadnih zemalja prema asadu.

 

Zašto je neostvariva i koja bi to druga strana, uz adekvatnu međunarodnu podršku lakše izašla na kraj sa ISIS-om u Siriji? 

[Bane5]

Neostvariva je jer je situacija u Siriji presla svaku granicu gde bi svrstavanje ne jednu stranu moglo da resi problem postojanja i ekspanzije IS-a.

Da bi se IS u najvecoj meri unistio u Siriji vise nije moguce osloniti se na jednu stranu u ovom ratu vec je za to potrebno nekoliko preduslova koji su u ovom trenutku apsolutno nemoguci.

Dakle, IS u Siriji (u ovom trenutku) moguce je u najvecoj meri unistiti samo ako bi na njega sinhronizovano nagrnuli i Asadu odane snage i vecina preostalih frakcija pobunjenika (uz Kurde, a bez Nusre) i jos da im tu u pomoc pritekne avijacija iz inostranstva i da im se doturi nesto oruzja. Naravno, pre toga bi trebalo obustaviti (privremeno ili stalno) sukob na njihovim linijima.

Samostalno, u ovom trenutku kada u svakoj provinciji ratuju jedni protiv drugih, oni to ne mogu. Korist od podrske jednima ili drugima bi bila delimicna, a cilj neostvaren.

[dillinger]

A zašto sad bez Nusre?Mislim ako si za to da valja naoružati i npr Ahrar Al Sham i slične salafiste za borbu protiv ISIS-a, onda vala mogu i ovi. Sa druge strane Asadove operacije u Tabki protiv ISIS-a pokazuju da se i dalje radi o koliko toliko ozbiljnoj armiji jedinoj sposobnoj da izađe na kraj sa ovim zlom.

[Bane5]

Napisao sam 'vecina preostalih pobunjenickih jedinica'. Situacija kod onih koji naginju dzihadistima je nejasna i malo se sta tu moze reci, deo ce ratovati protiv IS-a, deo nece tj. deo je vec ratovao, a deo ne. Ahrar je sve vreme 'na ivici' neki njegovi delovi su vec otisli IS-u, njega u ovom sukobu ne racunam kao ozbiljnog protivnika IS-a kao ni Nusru (njih iz nesto drugacijih razloga).

Ironija je da su i Ahrar i Nusra pretrpeli velike gubitke i svaku drugvu stetu u sukobu sa IS-om.

 

edit: Asadisti vise nisu armija u klasicnom smilu. Snage odane Asadu su se profilisale na vise nivoa - nije puno sunita ostalo u njoj, druzi se prilicno drze po stranai, alaviti su masovno izginuli za njega, pojacana je podela na verskoj osnovi - tu je deo lokalnih dobrovoljaca cija je disciplina slaba i obuka relativno slaba plus niz kojekakvih siitskih milicija koje su dovucene iz raznih delova sveta da se bore za njega (neke od tih milicija imaju tragove siitskog dzihadizma). Takva struktura je ipak sve samo ne armija koja ima siroku snagu. Osnova nekoliko udarnih jedinica je sacuvana i jeste snazna, ali nedovoljna za siroku akciju na dva fronta i protiv pobunjenika i protiv IS-a.

 

edit2: Potpuno isti zakljucak (povrsan) poput ovog o borbama za Tabku se moze izvesti na osnovu cinjenica da su IF i FSA zaustavili (bar privremeno) nadiranje IS-a ka Azazu ili jos bolje da se vratimo na rezultate sukoba pobunjenika i IS-a od zimus.

Edited August 23, 2014 by Bane5