US and Syria: "You Haven't Succeeded Once"

[Virgil Showlion]

Largely due to a US news blackout over the past two years, many here may not know that the US just lost a proxy war with Russia in Syria. It's one of the reasons why the US media is lately blanketed with stories of human rights abuses in Aleppo. It's also likely one of the reasons the CIA is leveling allegations of election interference at Russia at this cosmic moment in time.

Apparently one AP reporter wasn't willing to hold his piece at a recent press conference, and it's as good a story as any to bring readers up to speed on why Russia is going to be in the news a lot in the coming months:

[W]hile Syria and Russia enjoy the spoils from his biggest victory since the start of the Syrian conflict, the US State Department is being slammed for losing the Syrian proxy war. Meanwhile, after three years of backing and arming rebels brought no major progress in the Syrian war, Washington has accused Moscow of “failure” to achieve peace. Yesterday, the State Department was finally called out by AP on the lack of progress in Syria, forcing department spokespersons John Kirby to once again blame Russia.

As caught on the recording below, the daily briefing at the State Department started off with a verbal sparring match between AP reporter Brad Klapper and department spokesman John Kirby. Klapper asked Kirby why the US was “laying all the blame” for developments in Aleppo on Russia, while also questioning what Washington was doing different than Moscow. The US, Klapper said, “failed repeatedly, doing the same thing over and over again” but continued to accuse Russia of war crimes “when things go badly.”

“You [the US] haven’t succeeded once,” Klapper said.

Kirby did not answer the latter of Klapper’s questions, instead offering his explanation of why Russia bears responsibility. “The failure is on Russia for not putting the proper pressure on the Assad regime to stop the brutality, the gassing, the surrender, the starvation of their own people. That’s the real failure here,” Kirby said, claiming that the US, unlike Russia, has been pursuing only political solutions.

“You don’t think the US has failed?” the reporter continued to press on.

Refusing to take any blame for America’s actions, Kirby continued to dodge the question.

“You talked about the United States failure. What I would say is the international community has remained focused on trying to bring about a better outcome in Syria,” he said, stressing that the US “is a leader in that effort.”

...

After his response did not seem to satisfy Klapper, Kirby commented: “Look, you can shake your head in disgust about the answer all you want.”

Showing a sense of humor, Klapper argued that it was “too late” for any changes to be made given that the Obama administration and Secretary John Kerry’s tenures are coming to an end in just over a month. "You’re not describing any different kind of approach or anything you’re going to do to somehow change the equation,” he said. “It’s too late for that. You have no time left and you’re saying you’re not going to telegraph something that we know is not going to happen."

As an FYI to our American brethren: the rest of the world is aware the US was fighting a proxy war, that your leaders are every bit as guilty as Russia (perhaps even more so) for the bloodshed in Syria, and that you just lost the war. So whether or not you believe Mr. John "pursuing only political solutions" Kirby, be warned that the truth is out there.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

The worst part about this? The assessment that the US lost is inaccurate. We all lost. Due to Russia entering the Syrian civil war and turning it into a proxy war, while fermenting unrest across Europe as the refugee crisis exploded, Putin has allowed a regional war and the jihad to go global. Now, Central and SE Asia, large swaths of Africa, Shitte Militia,......

It could be argued that if Obama hadn't have pulled out of Iraq....

It could be argued that if Bush hadn't gone in, in the first place...

It could be argued that if Charlie Wilson wouldn't have lobbied for weapons in Afghanistan to fight the Russians....

It could be argued that the US funding Saudi Arabia..... That Russia supporting Iran.....

We could argue the conspiracies around it all, we could argue, argue, argue all we want; still won't change the fact that the eastern hemisphere is FUBAR and nobody won anything in Syria.

Ah, world government bodies; old world relics bringing real world pain to the masses everyday.‎  

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 15, 2016 23:51:12 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

The worst part about this? The assessment that the US lost is inaccurate. We all lost. Due to Russia entering the Syrian civil war and turning it into a proxy war, while fermenting unrest across Europe as the refugee crisis exploded, Putin has allowed a regional war and the jihad to go global. Now, Central and SE Asia, large swaths of Africa, Shitte Militia,......

It could be argued that if Obama hadn't have pulled out of Iraq....

It could be argued that if Bush hadn't gone in, in the first place...

It could be argued that if Charlie Wilson wouldn't have lobbied for weapons in Afghanistan to fight the Russians....

It could be argued that the US funding Saudi Arabia..... That Russia supporting Iran.....

We could argue the conspiracies around it all, we could argue, argue, argue all we want; still won't change the fact that the eastern hemisphere is FUBAR and nobody won anything in Syria.

Ah, world government bodies; old world relics bringing real world pain to the masses everyday.‎  

The US went in to protect its interests. Three years ago, when Russia couldn't take any more, they went in to protect their interests.

It's no great victory for Russia, I'll grant you. Although Syria was stable under al-Assad before, it may well not achieve that again.

This was the problem with the proxy war in the first place. al-Assad has always been the lesser of two evils. The US kingmakers were hoping beyond hope that the rebels they armed would turn out to be a force for good, but as Mr. Klapper dared point out, their plans repeatedly failed. The groups defected to Al Qaeda and ISIS with such consistency it would have been comical had it not been so tragic.

It's the price you pay if you insist on waging war but refuse to put boots on the ground to do it. It's only marginally more tolerable than the price you pay if you insist on waging war but do put boots on the ground to do it.

The sad fact of the matter is that the US had no business being in Libya, Egypt, or Syria, and your leaders took you there anyway. That's on Pres. Obama's conscience.

Iraq and Afghanistan are Pres. Bush's sins, even past the end of his tenure. The bloodshed in Libya, Egypt, and Syria is on Pres. Obama's hands. I've never witnessed any man fall so far from what he started out as. He was supposed to be the one who brought peace.

[Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger]

This is what I mean, we can debate the details until the sun comes up, but the battle for Allepo was just that, a battle. This is by no means the end of this and that's what needs to be brought into focus.

The on going proxy war in Syria, mixed with the war in the Ukriane/the European punishing sanctions against Russia, and the refugee influx that is being held back a weaking damn in Turkey has been nothing but stage one. Now the Jihad is global because the "50,000" JV fighters were actually part of the larger Mujahideen network and they have been producing weapons on an industrial scale(most likely chemical ones as well). There is a massive army that has been building in the Punjab and Balkans regions that essentially no one wants to talk about(thank God for Arif Jamal).

So, while Allepo maybe being portrayed as some kind of end, or resolution; this is now far a beyond any region, and as you mentioned none of your leaders hands are clean.

PS. You know I am Canadian, right?

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 16, 2016 1:17:18 GMT -5 Aman A.K.A. Ahamburger said:

This is what I mean, we can debate the details until the sun comes up, but the battle for Allepo was just that, a battle. This is by no means the end of this and that's what needs to be brought into focus.

The on going proxy war in Syria, mixed with the war in the Ukriane/the European punishing sanctions against Russia, and the refugee influx that is being held back a weaking damn in Turkey has been nothing but stage one. Now the Jihad is global because the "50,000" JV fighters were actually part of the larger Mujahideen network and they have been producing weapons on an industrial scale(most likely chemical ones as well). There is a massive army that has been building in the Punjab and Balkans regions that essentially no one wants to talk about(thank God for Arif Jamal).

So, while Allepo maybe being portrayed as some kind of end, or resolution; this is now far a beyond any region, and as you mentioned none of your leaders hands are clean.

PS. You know I am Canadian, right?

I believe you mentioned once that you used to live in Saskatchewan. That's just a vague recollection.

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 16, 2016 9:31:58 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Um, isn't this what the President Elect suggested we do? Let Russia have it!


Please......

I hope he lives up to that.

He's about as stable as water, and there's going to be the same pressure on him that turned Pres. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner into a carbon copy of Pres. Bush. His casual attitude towards nuclear war is also deeply unsettling.

[Virgil Showlion]

Another good read on the topic:

[T]he official Western narrative about the Syrian war is finally being exposed on a glaring scale.

The exposure for the whole world to see is one of a systematic, fake propaganda cover that concealed a criminal enterprise – an enterprise involving terrorist proxies, or fake moderate rebels, whom the Western governments have sponsored for the past six years in a conspiracy to overthrow the government of Syria. The gravity of this systematic crime committed by Washington and its various partners is now unfolding.

Unable to cope with their own cognitive dissonance over the criminality, the Western governments and their complicit corporate news media are resorting to outright denial and to compounding lies with even more lies.

Instead of dealing with the reality that Syrian state forces have recaptured Aleppo from brutal, illegally armed groups, which the West and its regional clients have bankrolled and armed, the West distorts the dramatic victory as the «fall of Aleppo». One report on American channel CNN even referred to the victorious Syrian army and its allies as «persecutors».

With typical unhinged emotion, US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power cited unverified reports of civilians being executed in Aleppo, and slammed Syria and its allies Russia and Iran for having «no shame». It is Power and her Western partners-in-crime, including top UN officials, who should be hanging their heads in shame.

[Deleted]

Dec 15, 2016 15:22:45 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Largely due to a US news blackout over the past two years, many here may not know that the US just lost a proxy war with Russia in Syria. It's one of the reasons why the US media is lately blanketed with stories of human rights abuses in Aleppo. It's also likely one of the reasons the CIA is leveling allegations of election interference at Russia at this cosmic moment in time.

Apparently one AP reporter wasn't willing to hold his piece at a recent press conference, and it's as good a story as any to bring readers up to speed on why Russia is going to be in the news a lot in the coming months:

[W]hile Syria and Russia enjoy the spoils from his biggest victory since the start of the Syrian conflict, the US State Department is being slammed for losing the Syrian proxy war. Meanwhile, after three years of backing and arming rebels brought no major progress in the Syrian war, Washington has accused Moscow of “failure” to achieve peace. Yesterday, the State Department was finally called out by AP on the lack of progress in Syria, forcing department spokespersons John Kirby to once again blame Russia.

As caught on the recording below, the daily briefing at the State Department started off with a verbal sparring match between AP reporter Brad Klapper and department spokesman John Kirby. Klapper asked Kirby why the US was “laying all the blame” for developments in Aleppo on Russia, while also questioning what Washington was doing different than Moscow. The US, Klapper said, “failed repeatedly, doing the same thing over and over again” but continued to accuse Russia of war crimes “when things go badly.”

“You [the US] haven’t succeeded once,” Klapper said.

Kirby did not answer the latter of Klapper’s questions, instead offering his explanation of why Russia bears responsibility. “The failure is on Russia for not putting the proper pressure on the Assad regime to stop the brutality, the gassing, the surrender, the starvation of their own people. That’s the real failure here,” Kirby said, claiming that the US, unlike Russia, has been pursuing only political solutions.

“You don’t think the US has failed?” the reporter continued to press on.

Refusing to take any blame for America’s actions, Kirby continued to dodge the question.

“You talked about the United States failure. What I would say is the international community has remained focused on trying to bring about a better outcome in Syria,” he said, stressing that the US “is a leader in that effort.”

...

After his response did not seem to satisfy Klapper, Kirby commented: “Look, you can shake your head in disgust about the answer all you want.”

Showing a sense of humor, Klapper argued that it was “too late” for any changes to be made given that the Obama administration and Secretary John Kerry’s tenures are coming to an end in just over a month. "You’re not describing any different kind of approach or anything you’re going to do to somehow change the equation,” he said. “It’s too late for that. You have no time left and you’re saying you’re not going to telegraph something that we know is not going to happen."

As an FYI to our American brethren: the rest of the world is aware the US was fighting a proxy war, that your leaders are every bit as guilty as Russia (perhaps even more so) for the bloodshed in Syria, and that you just lost the war. So whether or not you believe Mr. John "pursuing only political solutions" Kirby, be warned that the truth is out there.

I do hope you meant hold his peace, because holding his piece sounds, well...not right for a press conference.   (Distraction over, carry on)     Edit; The Russkies made me do this, if asked.

[Deleted]

Dec 16, 2016 10:21:09 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Dec 16, 2016 9:31:58 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Um, isn't this what the President Elect suggested we do? Let Russia have it!


Please......

I hope he lives up to that.

He's about as stable as water, and there's going to be the same pressure on him that turned Pres. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner into a carbon copy of Pres. Bush. His casual attitude towards nuclear war is also deeply unsettling.

Have you heard of the concept of a countries leader trying to be perceived as "just crazy enough" to do something really bad.  It's the opposite of the destabilizing "apology" tour from eight years ago.  Whether it's Good/bad is yet to be seen.  Remember Iran releasing the hostages as Reagan took office?  He was another one portrayed as a "red button nut"  Quote;  the hostages were released on January 20, 1981, That day, at the moment President Reagan completed his 20‑minute inaugural address. 

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwja2Y_Bt_nQAhVMahoKHbolAsUQFggoMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIran_hostage_crisis&usg=AFQjCNG6ZkYiEFlJUD_DXsoG3a5rXWn89A

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 16, 2016 14:20:04 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Dec 16, 2016 10:21:09 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I hope he lives up to that.

He's about as stable as water, and there's going to be the same pressure on him that turned Pres. Obama the Nobel Peace Prize winner into a carbon copy of Pres. Bush. His casual attitude towards nuclear war is also deeply unsettling.

Have you heard of the concept of a countries leader trying to be perceived as "just crazy enough" to do something really bad.  It's the opposite of the destabilizing "apology" tour from eight years ago.  Whether it's Good/bad is yet to be seen.  Remember Iran releasing the hostages as Reagan took office?  He was another one portrayed as a "red button nut"  Quote;  the hostages were released on January 20, 1981, That day, at the moment President Reagan completed his 20‑minute inaugural address. 

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwja2Y_Bt_nQAhVMahoKHbolAsUQFggoMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIran_hostage_crisis&usg=AFQjCNG6ZkYiEFlJUD_DXsoG3a5rXWn89A

I honestly don't think Pres. Trump is that cunning.

When he gave answers in that interview, his "Why can't we use them?" response was because he'd never given any serious thought to the implications of nuclear war. He was thinking, "We're America. We'll go in, kick ass, nuke Muslimistan into a glass crater, and come back smiling."

While that thinking might not have fatal repercussions with conventional weaponry, nuclear weapons are another story. I'm pretty sure he didn't 'get' that when he was being interviewed. Hopefully he's subsequently been educated.

[Deleted]

Dec 16, 2016 15:09:17 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Dec 16, 2016 14:20:04 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Have you heard of the concept of a countries leader trying to be perceived as "just crazy enough" to do something really bad.  It's the opposite of the destabilizing "apology" tour from eight years ago.  Whether it's Good/bad is yet to be seen.  Remember Iran releasing the hostages as Reagan took office?  He was another one portrayed as a "red button nut"  Quote;  the hostages were released on January 20, 1981, That day, at the moment President Reagan completed his 20‑minute inaugural address. 

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwja2Y_Bt_nQAhVMahoKHbolAsUQFggoMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIran_hostage_crisis&usg=AFQjCNG6ZkYiEFlJUD_DXsoG3a5rXWn89A

I honestly don't think Pres. Trump is that cunning.

When he gave answers in that interview, his "Why can't we use them?" response was because he'd never given any serious thought to the implications of nuclear war. He was thinking, "We're America. We'll go in, kick ass, nuke Muslimistan into a glass crater, and come back smiling."

While that thinking might not have fatal repercussions with conventional weaponry, nuclear weapons are another story. I'm pretty sure he didn't 'get' that when he was being interviewed. Hopefully he'WEs subsequently been educated.

It wouldn't surprise me if he didn't understand the actual power of a thermonuclear device, hence the response. Very few do. The war head on the old perishing 2 ICBM has 3 times the explosive force of all the weapons expended in world war 2. ( Perishing 2, auto pun by Kindle fire HD.) I'm sure he's been advised of certain details by now. Remains to be seen how sneaky he is.

[Virgil Showlion]

Look up "nuclear bomb simulator" in a search engine and you can find some sophisticated online tools for simulating attacks with real nuclear weapons that exist today.

The actual fireball only kills a tiny fraction of the total number of souls if the device is detonated at the "right" altitude. The shockwaves, radiation, and then the fallout claim the vast majority of lives.

Out of morbid curiosity, I dropped one large nuke on NYC and was able to wipe out 1.5 million people instantly and another 50 million over the next few days, including 90% of everyone living in Toronto.

"Why can't we use them?"

I truly hope he's crazy like a fox as you suggest.

[verrip1]

In his day, Theodore Roosevelt was supposed to be a loose cannon.  Mark Hanna, a major political force of the time, thought he was an extremely dangerous one.  How could TR have said all those outrageous things?! 

TR used the bully pulpit, and history rewarded him for doing so.  However the Democrats, today as it was a bit more than a century ago, hate the use of it by Republicans.  It is utilitarian.  And is effective when not entirely hot air.  Democratic Party governments failed in its' use because of the latter.

[Spellbound454]

Its not over just yet.... The regime have retaken Aleppo but there are still large tracts of Syria occupied by the opposition or IS (or a mixture of both)
but we have backed a losing horse and we knew that a long time ago....

...There never were any moderates willing to take on the role of governing Syria,, As soon as the "moderates" were trained, they turned their weapons over to Al Nusra or IS

I have never wanted any part of this mess.

[tallguy]

Dec 16, 2016 15:09:17 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Dec 16, 2016 14:20:04 GMT -5 @jma23 said:

Have you heard of the concept of a countries leader trying to be perceived as "just crazy enough" to do something really bad.  It's the opposite of the destabilizing "apology" tour from eight years ago.  Whether it's Good/bad is yet to be seen.  Remember Iran releasing the hostages as Reagan took office?  He was another one portrayed as a "red button nut"  Quote;  the hostages were released on January 20, 1981, That day, at the moment President Reagan completed his 20‑minute inaugural address. 

www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwja2Y_Bt_nQAhVMahoKHbolAsUQFggoMAM&url=https%3A%2F%2Fen.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FIran_hostage_crisis&usg=AFQjCNG6ZkYiEFlJUD_DXsoG3a5rXWn89A

I honestly don't think Pres. Trump is that cunning.

When he gave answers in that interview, his "Why can't we use them?" response was because he'd never given any serious thought to the implications of nuclear war. He was thinking, "We're America. We'll go in, kick ass, nuke Muslimistan into a glass crater, and come back smiling."

While that thinking might not have fatal repercussions with conventional weaponry, nuclear weapons are another story. I'm pretty sure he didn't 'get' that when he was being interviewed. Hopefully he's subsequently been educated.

"Why can't we use them?"



I truly hope he's crazy like a fox as you suggest.

Pretty much zero chance of that, I would guess.  My recollection from the time is that he asked some variation of, "Why CAN'T we use nuclear weapons?  We HAVE them" three times in an hour-long meeting.  That indicates nothing other than complete ignorance on the matter.      

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 19, 2016 18:52:52 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Dec 16, 2016 15:09:17 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

I honestly don't think Pres. Trump is that cunning.

When he gave answers in that interview, his "Why can't we use them?" response was because he'd never given any serious thought to the implications of nuclear war. He was thinking, "We're America. We'll go in, kick ass, nuke Muslimistan into a glass crater, and come back smiling."

While that thinking might not have fatal repercussions with conventional weaponry, nuclear weapons are another story. I'm pretty sure he didn't 'get' that when he was being interviewed. Hopefully he's subsequently been educated.

"Why can't we use them?"



I truly hope he's crazy like a fox as you suggest.

Pretty much zero chance of that, I would guess.  My recollection from the time is that he asked some variation of, "Why CAN'T we use nuclear weapons?  We HAVE them" three times in an hour-long meeting.  That indicates nothing other than complete ignorance on the matter.      

He might be saber rattling, as Dio suggests. Nukes are admittedly a potent deterrent if the guy with the launch codes seems like he's one SNL skit away from hitting the button.

I'm hoping either that's the case or else the man gets firmly educated by his advisors.

[Virgil Showlion]

Dec 20, 2016 7:45:27 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

The first lesson should be a graphic representation of what happens to New York City and environs. That would make an impression.

"Y... You mean Trump Tower gets...?"
"Yes, Mr. President."
"And the statue of me in the lobby?"
"That too, Mr. President."
"No. No! Wh- I d- ... What have I been saying?"

[Deleted]

Dec 16, 2016 16:36:16 GMT -5 Virgil Showlion said:

Look up "nuclear bomb simulator" in a search engine and you can find some sophisticated online tools for simulating attacks with real nuclear weapons that exist today.

The actual fireball only kills a tiny fraction of the total number of souls if the device is detonated at the "right" altitude. The shockwaves, radiation, and then the fallout claim the vast majority of lives.

Out of morbid curiosity, I dropped one large nuke on NYC and was able to wipe out 1.5 million people instantly and another 50 million over the next few days, including 90% of everyone living in Toronto.

"Why can't we use them?"

I truly hope he's crazy like a fox as you suggest.

I've always put my money on the shockwave wave due to initial compression velocity.  The big hydrogen fusion devices are actually relatively clean compared to the old fission ones.  That would be "relatively clean" by the comparison of energy release. 

[zibazinski]

Dec 20, 2016 7:45:27 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

The first lesson should be a graphic representation of what happens to New York City and environs. That would make an impression.

I vote San Fransisco. 

[steff]

Dec 25, 2016 19:13:05 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Dec 25, 2016 18:00:18 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

I vote San Fransisco. 

My point being that NYC is his hometown. Hearing what utter devastation a nuclear explosion over his hometown would bring would hopefully impress upon him the seriousness of a nuclear exchange.

I doubt it would have much affect on him.  His reaction to 9/11 was to brag about how he had the tallest building now & how cool that was.