<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<style type="text/css" style="display:none;"><!-- P {margin-top:0;margin-bottom:0;} --></style>
</head>
<body dir="ltr">
<div id="divtagdefaultwrapper" style="font-size:12pt;color:#000000;font-family:Calibri,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;">
<div>"The US should exercise restraint before launching a new war in Syria”? We’ve been at war in Syria for some time, utilizing proxy’s, known as ISIL and never exercised restraint. </div>
<div>Yes, our so called moderate rebels formerly known as Al Nusra, now rebranded as Fatah al-Sham admitting they
</div>
<div>depend on US and our allies for support, are intent on fighting the Syrian government on our behalf, but this was never really a civil war. This has always been a US intervention.
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Reference to the democratically elected government of Syria as the “regime of Syria” rather telling, especially since that is the US goal, " regime change". </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>A "no-fly zone", referred to as a “safe zone”, an oxymoron at best.</div>
<div>A no-fly zone means bombing the airports and all infrastructure in the vicinity. A lot of people get killed. Then what happens when other than the US enters the no-fly zone, yes likely war with Russia.</div>
<div>Most egregious is the statement that the US is concerned with legalities, then saying the Russians don't. The US has invaded and is currently at war with 8 nations just since 9/11. </div>
<div>Russia was invited in to Syria by the Syrian government. Assad may not be a "nice", we may not like him but he is a problem for the Syrian people who are being killed and displaced by the thousands as a result, of the US invasion. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<br>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents" style="direction:ltr">
<blockquote type="cite">
<div>On Oct 4, 2016, at 07:42, Robert Naiman <naiman@justforeignpolicy.org> wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr">
<div><a id="LPlnk93394" href="http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-the-united-states-should-exercise-restraint-before-17919" target="_blank" previewremoved="true">http://nationalinterest.org/<wbr>feature/why-the-united-states-<wbr>should-exercise-restraint-<wbr>before-17919</a>
<div id="LPBorder_GT_14756002365910.6939221248867662" style="width: 100%; text-indent: 0px; overflow: auto; margin-bottom: 20px;">
<table id="LPContainer_14756002363880.00849603876195415" style="width: 90%; overflow: auto; padding-top: 20px; padding-bottom: 20px; margin-top: 20px; border-top-color: rgb(200, 200, 200); border-bottom-color: rgb(200, 200, 200); border-top-width: 1px; border-bottom-width: 1px; border-top-style: dotted; border-bottom-style: dotted; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr valign="top" style="border-spacing: 0px;">
<td id="ImageCell_14756002363900.84113693604646" style="width: 250px; padding-right: 20px; display: table-cell; position: relative;" colspan="1">
<div id="LPImageContainer_14756002364890.5418618807002306" style="margin: auto; width: 250px; height: 154px; display: table; position: relative; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
<a id="LPImageAnchor_14756002364930.4701871003893204" style="text-align: center; display: table-cell;" href="http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-the-united-states-should-exercise-restraint-before-17919" target="_blank"><img width="250" height="154" id="LPThumbnailImageID_14756002365050.5016163210829987" style="border-width: 0px; width: 250px; height: 154px; vertical-align: bottom; display: inline-block; max-height: 250px; max-width: 250px;" aria-label="Preview image with link selected. Double-tap to open the link." src="http://nationalinterest.org/files/main_images/1200px-sergey_lavrov_vladimir_putin_and_john_kerry.jpg"></a></div>
</td>
<td id="TextCell_14756002365070.974597843654899" style="padding: 0px; vertical-align: top; display: table-cell; position: relative;" colspan="2">
<div id="LPRemovePreviewContainer_14756002365070.3933772206503339"></div>
<div id="LPTitle_14756002365070.27942940162775115" style="top: 0px; color: rgb(0, 120, 215); line-height: 21px; font-family: "wf_segoe-ui_light","Segoe UI Light","Segoe WP Light","Segoe UI","Segoe WP",Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 21px; font-weight: 400;">
<a id="LPUrlAnchor_14756002365860.8737468617906603" style="text-decoration: none;" href="http://nationalinterest.org/feature/why-the-united-states-should-exercise-restraint-before-17919" target="_blank">Why the United States Should Exercise Restraint Before
Launching A New War in Syria</a></div>
<div id="LPMetadata_14756002365870.17422896922548375" style="margin: 10px 0px 16px; color: rgb(102, 102, 102); line-height: 14px; font-family: "wf_segoe-ui_normal","Segoe UI","Segoe WP",Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: 400;">
nationalinterest.org</div>
<div id="LPDescription_14756002365890.20893935929232266" style="color: rgb(102, 102, 102); line-height: 20px; overflow: hidden; font-family: "wf_segoe-ui_normal","Segoe UI","Segoe WP",Tahoma,Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-weight: 400; display: block; max-height: 100px;">
The Russians might not be willing to back down in a confrontation with American forces.</div>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</div>
<br>
<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Why the United States Should Exercise Restraint Before Launching A New War in Syria<br>
</div>
<div>
<div>The Russians might not be willing to back down in a confrontation with American forces.</div>
<div>Dave Majumdar</div>
<div>October 3, 2016</div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
Tensions between Russia and the United States are coming to a head over the civil war in Syria. Washington has <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2016/10/262704.htm" target="_blank">suspended
bilateral talks</a> with Russia to end the five-year old war. <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://publication.pravo.gov.ru/Document/View/0001201610030004" target="_blank">Moscow has suspended an agreement</a> to
destroy 34 tons of weapons-grade plutonium that was reached during the year 2000, using especially harsh rhetoric. Meanwhile, Syrian regime forces—with the backing of Russian airpower—are <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-37542860" target="_blank">continuing
to mount a fierce attack</a> on the partially rebel-held city of Aleppo with Washington seemingly powerless to influence events on the ground.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
As a result of the <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-mideast-crisis-syria-idUSKCN11P146" target="_blank">recent collapse of a ceasefire</a> negotiated by Secretary of State John
Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov and the subsequent Syrian regime offensive, there are many in Washington clamoring for firmer U.S. action—a so-called Plan B. However, President Obama and his National Security Council staff are faced with limited
options. <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://thehill.com/policy/defense/298800-four-military-options-for-obama-in-syria" target="_blank">Among the four options</a>that may be under consideration are a no-fly-zone,
safe zones, attacking the Syrian air force and arming the Syrian rebels with additional weaponry. But each option carries with it significant risk of escalation or blowback.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
While the United States has the capability to defeat Russian and Syrian regime air forces and air defenses, which is necessary to establish a no-fly zone or safe-zone, or to destroy the regime’s airpower, there are several risks from a legal and military standpoint.
The legal problem comes from the fact that the United States is not technically at war with the Syria, nor is there a UN resolution authorizing American forces to operate inside that nation.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
Even ongoing U.S. military operations inside Syria are acts of war—and are technically illegal. The Obama Administration is aware of this technically as Secretary Kerry noted during conversations with Syrian rebel activists. “The problem is the Russians don’t
care about international law, and we do,” Kerry told the rebels in a <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/30/world/middleeast/john-kerry-syria-audio.html?_r=0" target="_blank">recording
published by the New York Times</a>. “We don’t have a basis—our lawyers tell us—unless we have a U.N. Security Council resolution—which the Russians can veto or the Chinese—or unless we are under attack from folks there or unless we are invited in. Russia
is invited in by the legitimate regime.”</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
A no-fly zone or safe zone would require U.S. combat aircraft to intercept and possibly shoot down Russian and Syrian warplanes entering into the area designated by Washington and its allies. U.S. policymakers would have to make the gamble that Moscow—which
is likely eager to avoid war with the United States—would back down and acquiesce to the American imposed no-fly zone. However, Washington is equally averse to fighting a war with the Russia, which, despite possessing only a fraction of the military might
of its Soviet forbearer, remains the only power on Earth that can reduce the United States to charred radioactive cinders.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
It is highly unlikely that any U.S. President would be willing to risk war against a nuclear-armed power with only four months left in office in a conflict with few—if any—vital American interests at stake. The Russians know that and might not be willing to
back down in the event of an air-to-air confrontation with American forces because too much national prestige—and even Mr. Putin’s personal prestige—would be on the line. Thus, such an encounter could escalate in unpredictable ways. One only needs to look
to history to demonstrate the unforeseen consequences stemming from relatively localized events—no one could have predicted that the <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/obituaries/archives/archduke-franz-ferdinand-world-war" target="_blank">assignation
of Archduke Franz Ferdinand</a> would have precipitated the events leading to the First World War in 1914.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
Indeed, no less an authority than the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Joseph Dunford <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.armed-services.senate.gov/hearings/16-09-22-us-national-security-challenges-and-ongoing-military-operations" target="_blank">testified
before the Senate Armed Services Committee</a> on September 22 that a no-fly zone—such as the one being proposed—would lead to war with Russia and Syria. “Right now, Senator, for us to control all of the airspace in Syria it would require us to go to war against
Syria and Russia,” Dunford <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://dailycaller.com/2016/09/26/clintons-syria-strategy-would-require-war-with-russia-congress-hears/" target="_blank">told the Committee</a>. “That’s
a pretty fundamental decision that certainly I’m not going to make.”</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
A worse option still would be for the U.S. military to attack the Syrian air force and its bases directly since it would an overt act of war against Syria—even more so than a no-fly or safe zone. As Secretary Kerry pointed out, without a U.N. Security Council
resolution, the United States does not have legal grounds to go to war. But moreover, the military difficulties with directly attacking Syrian forces are more problematic.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
The United States Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps could easily annihilate Syrian and even Russian air defenses—and airpower—inside Syria. Moscow—even with the fearsome capabilities of its S-400 air and missile defense system—is not able to defeat the U.S.
Air Force’s fleet of stealthy Lockheed Martin F-22 Raptors, which are able to fly inside zones protected by those system and defeat them. In fact, defeating advanced air defenses is one of the Raptor’s primary missions. Nor would Russian Su-30SM or Su-35S
Flankers survive long against the Raptor, which was specifically designed to counter advanced next-generation Soviet fighters that ultimately never materialized.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
The problem is that the United States cannot know for certain if Moscow will idly stand by while American forces attack Syrian forces. Moreover, it is unclear how many Russian military advisors are embedded with Syrian forces and where those instructors are
located. Some<a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/03/29/how-russian-special-forces-are-shaping-the-fight-in-syria/" target="_blank"> Russian advisors are</a> present
and operating within the ranks of the Syrian military, and if Washington launches a strike, those forces could be caught in the crossfire. However, Russian rhetoric suggests that Moscow won’t simply allow Bashar al-Assad’s forces to be destroyed. Russian foreign
ministry spokeswoman <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/10/01/russia-warns-us-against-attack-syrian-forces/91390262/" target="_blank">Maria Zakharova was quoted by
the Russian media saying that U.S. intervention</a>against Assad “will lead to terrible, tectonic consequences not only on the territory of this country but also in the region on the whole.”</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
If the U.S. military does intervene in Syria, and Russian and Syrian forces fight back, American F-22s would likely be able to quickly eliminate the Russian S-400, Pantsir-S1 as well as Russia’s Su-30, Su-35s and Su-34s with relative ease. Conventional U.S.
fourth-generation fighters such as the F-15, F-16 and F/A-18 would have to wait until the Russian-built air defenses—which, given the S-400’s nearly 250 mile coverage radius, encompass nearly the entire Syrian landmass—were cleared by stealth aircraft such
as the Raptor and the Northrop Grumman B-2 Sprit strategic bomber. It is not clear if the long-range 40N6 is operational, but regardless, actions can have unintended consequences.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
Russia might not limit its retaliation to just American and NATO forces in Syria. Given Moscow’s arsenal of Kaliber-NK cruise missiles and long-range bombers and submarines, the Kremlin has options to strike back across a huge geographic range. It is not outside
realm of the possible that Russia would hit back at U.S. bases in Qatar, United Arab Emirates or Turkey using long-range precision-guided cruise missiles. The Russian Black Sea fleet and the Caspian Sea flotilla can easily hit such targets. Then there is Moscow’s
formidable bomber fleet which can target the continental United States itself.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
Thus, while it is easy to start a conflict with Russia and Syria, a shooting war could easily escalate out of control. It might be prudent to exercise restraint before launching a new war—against a nuclear-armed power—that the American people don’t necessarily
want to fight. That’s especially true in a conflict where the lines are blurry and there are no clear-cut good guys—where even <a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/07/19/u-s-backed-moderate-rebels-behead-a-child-near-aleppo.html" target="_blank">so-called
“moderate” rebels backed by the U.S. government are beheading</a> children. Under such circumstances, the best policy for the United States might simply be to leave well enough alone—there is simply no need to stick our fingers into yet another hornet’s nest.</div>
<div style="margin:0.5em 0px; line-height:1.65em; font-size:18.3px; font-family:georgia,baskerville,'times new roman',times,serif">
<em>Dave Majumdar is the defense editor of The National Interest. You can follow him on Twitter </em><a style="background-color:transparent; color:rgb(47,69,190); outline:0px" href="https://twitter.com/DaveMajumdar?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor" target="_blank">@DaveMajumdar</a><em>.</em></div>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>===</div>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">
<div><br clear="all">
<div>
<div class="m_-6100472261750381771gmail_signature">
<div dir="ltr">Robert Naiman<br>
Policy Director<br>
Just Foreign Policy<br>
<a href="http://www.justforeignpolicy.org/" target="_blank">www.justforeignpolicy.org</a><br>
<a href="mailto:naiman@justforeignpolicy.org" target="_blank">naiman@justforeignpolicy.org</a><br>
<div><span style="text-align:left"><a href="tel:%28202%29%20448-2898%20x1" target="_blank" value="+12024482898">(202) 448-2898 x1</a></span><br>
</div>
<div><span style="text-align:left"><br>
</span></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</font></span></div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
ufpj-activist mailing list<br>
<br>
Post: ufpj-activist@lists.mayfirst.org<br>
List info: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/listinfo/ufpj-activist<br>
<br>
To Unsubscribe<br>
Send email to: ufpj-activist-unsubscribe@lists.mayfirst.org<br>
Or visit: https://lists.mayfirst.org/mailman/options/ufpj-activist/karenaram%40hotmail.com<br>
<br>
You are subscribed as: karenaram@hotmail.com<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>