Trump drog tillbaka trupperna där ifrån förra året
Jo, US tog kontroll over Syriens Olja.
Esper sager:
Defense Secretary Esper says U.S. looking to increase humanitarian aid to NATO-ally Turkey as hostilities increase in Syria after 33 Turkish soldiers killed in airstrike.
Vet inte om jag någonsin länkat till denna källa men för den här gången då:
US Demands Russia ‘Immediately Ground Warplanes’ Over Syria
The situation in the northwestern Syrian renegade province of Idlib escalated again on Thursday after Syrian forces responding to a Nusra Front assault accidentally struck Turkish positions, killing 33 troops and injuring dozens more. The attack prompted the UN Security Council to call an emergency meeting on the situation in Syria.
1.Kanske för att det är Turkiet bla som såg till att dem blev flyktingar.
2.Det är närmaste grannland som är safe.
3.Europa är fullt redan med terrorister.
Ännu en Pantsir utslaget idag och turkiska drönare bombar Assadister i Serakib.
Det tror jag vad jag vill om:
AS-Source News / MILITARY
@As_SourceBrkNew
BREAKING: Units of the Russian military police entered the city of #Saraqeb at 5 pm on March 2 to ensure security, the Russian Center for the Reconciliation of the warring parties reports.
Du vet uppenbarligen inte vad du babblar om. 80% av Syrien är lugnt. Man behöver dock pengar för att bygga upp infrastrukturen.
Bashar är ett föredöme för hela regionen.
Idlib kommer nog ta till sommaren innan det är under kontroll. Sedan har du tre områden till att återta. Möjligtvis kommer de göra upp i godo med SDF men de övriga behöver antagligen återtas med våld. Sedan har du området som ockuperas av Turkiet. Kommer turkarna lämna frivilligt?
Turkiet har en hel del val att göra inför framtiden. Här en analys om det aktuella läget. Kan hålla med i det mesta:
Turkey in Syria: Down a Blind Alley in an Unwinnable War?
/.../Ultimately – Turkey’s decisions in the days, weeks, and months ahead – will further define the nation as it is perceived globally as its decades-long ties and subordinate role to the West fades and it forges a new position upon the global stage.
The malicious use of its lingering presence in northern Syria – a leftover of its complicity in the US-engineered proxy war that created the current conflict in the first place – would be unfortunate and would reflect poorly on Ankara and negatively impact its future international relations. It will impact not only its ties with the principal actors in the current Syrian conflict – but also its ties around the globe as nations seek to diversify away from aging and ill-intentioned hegemonies and toward nations of good faith.
Turkey faces a juncture where it must decide if it will move forward into the future with its increasing independence from the United States and NATO – but maintain the same style of malign statecraft as its Western allies – or find a constructive role to play among an emerging multipolar world.
Shelling and bombing Syrian forces inside Syrian territory is a poor start. It sets Turkey down another blind alley in terms of regional policy – making it more difficult for Syria and its allies to accommodate Turkey in any sort of constructive manner in a post-war regional architecture that will certainly favor Damascus and its allies. It will also complicate trust in the future should Turkey eventually accept this emerging architecture and seek to benefit from or contribute toward it.
Ankara has already come a long way from its initial support for US regime-change since the beginning of the Syrian conflict in 2011 to helping – even if sometimes reluctantly – end the deadly, protracted fighting in recent years. Only time will tell if Ankara will continue in this positive direction – meaning this recent confrontation in Syria is merely a temporary setback – or if Ankara is determined to cling to its increasingly untenable position in Syria at the cost of a risky conflict it will ultimately lose.