world

Syria warns U.S. against unilateral strikes on Islamic State

21 Comments
By RYAN LUCAS

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2014 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

21 Comments
Login to comment

Assad and his gangs try to gain certain legitimacy regarding this crisis. Under your own sovereignty, and if you can not do anything; someone will. Assad has liability and responsibility over Syria, regarding ISIS. Your house is a mess, thus it is better to shut up.

0 ( +3 / -3 )

Bgood, get a clue! The radicals of ISIL/ISIS are the Assad's forces have fighting from the start and that US had been supporting to topple Assad.

Furthermore, the US would be flagrantly violating Syria's sovereignty by illegally conducting airstrikes in Syria. Syria would be well within their right to defend against any such invasion.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

The U.S. wouldn't do it anyway since it would be helping Assad's admin without concessions from them.

But what if humanitarian aid needs to be sent inside Syria....... should be able to do that without interference......

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Furthermore, the US would be flagrantly violating Syria's sovereignty by illegally conducting airstrikes in Syria. Syria would be well within their right to defend against any such invasion.

Oh, please! What sovereignty?! Technically, there is no such thing as an Iraq or Syria as we used to know it. Syria can't sit and call the shots, Assad's forces are losing, getting smaller and they desperately need much needed assistance. Now if Obama wants to get on board still remains to be seen. Apparently, he still doesn't take the threat of ISIS too seriously. Time is running out for everyone involved and beyond, but Syria ( or Assad ) isn't in ANY position to huff and puff on anything

-4 ( +3 / -7 )

The US should just stay out of it altogether. They're throwing good money after bad. Let the region clean itself up. If there is anything that decades/centuries of middle-eastern meddling have shown, it's that foreign actions in the region never lead to anything good.

4 ( +6 / -2 )

So we need to do this without Assad! Got it!

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Like Saddam, Assad should have been left alone. good odds that "The West" will end up supporting him in some form (no doubt covertly).

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The US needs to stop its zero sum game and work on a consolidated strategy to beat the ISIS.

The problem with the current strategy is not that nobody wins, but the fact that everybody loses.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The US needs to stop its zero sum game and work on a consolidated strategy to beat the ISIS.

Why?

1 ( +1 / -0 )

'The US should just stay out of it altogether. They're throwing good money after bad. Let the region clean itself up. If there is anything that decades/centuries of middle-eastern meddling have shown, it's that foreign actions in the region never lead to anything good.'

Common sense but there are still those in the US who think past 'interventions' in the Middle East were justified and a good thing. They are beyond reason.

4 ( +5 / -1 )

What a mess. What are the Chinese and the Rusians doing about this?

1 ( +2 / -1 )

President Barack Obama has long been wary of getting dragged into the bloody and complex Syrian civil war that the United Nations says has killed more than 190,000 people. He has resisted intervening militarily in the conflict, even after a deadly chemical weapons attack a year ago that Washington blamed on President Bashar Assad’s government.

May be he want but he was stopped by Russian Navy ....

1 ( +3 / -2 )

Assad has plenty of support from Russia and tons of Russians weapons.

Hmmm....on second thought, maybe the US should take over. Assad and Russia haven't been doing much except handing the country to extremists.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Western policy of supporting the Sunni Jihadis against the Assad regime was totally idiotic, and now they are scrambling to deal with the result in form of ISIS:

After villifying Assad for years, now they start to realize that they have to support him. Or will they?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Come on Bass, don't be a brick. Syria's sovereignty is as legitimate as US's or UK's or any other country, including Japan. If US even as much as engages is a surveillance fly-over without Assad's consent, then they should be shot down.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

The Americans might find themselves forced to cooperate under the table with the Syrians. But I don’t think Arab countries will accept Syria as a member of the club fighting the Islamic State.

The UAE, with Egyptian logistical help, was exposed as the mystery bombers against fundamentalist forces in Libya. A new paradigm is unfolding here, with Arabic secular states banding together to put down fundamentalist movements. While the ultimate results of these recent movements are impossible to predict - how successful or sustained they will be, and what types of governments will result - one thing is clear: America has its hands clean.

This is the Obama doctrine at work. It will take time, and it will cost many lives, but it will not be American time or American lives - and a home-grown solution is really the only viable future.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Jimizo

'The US should just stay out of it altogether. They're throwing good money after bad. Let the region clean itself up. If there is anything that decades/centuries of middle-eastern meddling have shown, it's that foreign actions in the region never lead to anything good.'

Common sense but there are still those in the US who think past 'interventions' in the Middle East were justified and a good thing. They are beyond reason.

Partly right, but this place is not capable of cleaning itself up, corruption, religion, nutters, live n die by the sword, tribal rulers, 1,000's of years of in fighting and bitterness amongst themselves will never be sorted.

Stay out, leave them to it, ring fence the place and let none of them out, and no one who is out now goes back in.

The place is costly trouble and always has been, it isn't going to change in our life time or our children's lifetimes.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Come on Bass, don't be a brick. Syria's sovereignty is as legitimate as US's or UK's or any other country, including Japan. If US even as much as engages is a surveillance fly-over without Assad's consent, then they should be shot down.

Syria is NOT that stupid, the fury and that would rain down on them would be legendary.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Bass, they would have to deal with the Russians,lol. The US would be in a mess and it would be bad for the world. I have one question what's the difference when the US unilaterally goes into a country to fight and kill for it's interest as opposed to another country like Russia, doing it but to a lesser extent just supporting it's interest.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Bass, imagine a XXX surveillance plane entering US mainland airspace or sending a drone to assassinate X. You'd be alright with that?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

'Syria is NOT that stupid, the fury and that would rain down on them would be legendary.'

That Hollywood/biblical rhetoric of the US rightwing always gets themselves weak at the knees. Knock it off. This isn't the book of Exodus or idiotic action movies. Talk like normal people.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites