Obama: Assad Shooting At American Planes Would Lead To His Overthrow

Great, another "red line" for Syria from Obama. We tried that line once already and did nothing.

So, hear is how this will go down. The US will fly into Syria to bomb ISIS targets and either ISIS or another rebel faction will shoot at the planes. The US will see this as Assad firing on the planes and that will be the trigger to take him out. If I am a rebel group fighting against Assad, I am WAITING on a US plane to enter the airspace so I can shoot at it and bring down Assad, right? Makes perfect sense to me. (unless Obama is a $ussy and does nothing AGAIN with his threat) Obama is not a wartime President (he is not a peacetime President either, but anyway) and lacks the "brass" to make these decisions and routinely dismisses the assessments of his military planners.

Now, once that takes place what will Putin do? What will Iran do? I think Russia will use this conflict to keep expanding it's border to include the smaller former USSR states. Iran will complain and keep supplying Syria as long as Assad is in control but NOT get involved overtly. Iran knows it will lose if it pushes to far with the US.

And I thought Mondays were boring ?

First I read NATO boss Rasmussen coming clean on Russia not being a threat and now this...

What is wrong with The West...they aren`t even going to lie anymore about what they are doing?

The end must be near !

a reply to: CallYourBluff


Who is going to overthrow Assad again? American troops? Syrian Free Army? ISIS?

You people are doomed.

What ever happened about the gas attack in Syria that was quickly hushed up !!! nothing as usual .

Why does America not get Israel to do this they have the planes

a reply to: daaskapital

Why would the Assad regime shoot at planes attacking ISIS? The regime wants the US to attack ISIS! This will free up their forces to attack the so called "moderate" rebels. The Assad regime has reached out to the US govt to help them coordinate the air strikes!

Does the US govt have an understanding of who is fighting who? Not good.

a reply to: daaskapital

It's inevitable. Going into Syria after ISIS is just a set up. Something will happen that will "justify" the US attacking Assad's Syria. Then Israel may even take advantage and hit Iran a little while everything is crazy.

a reply to: daaskapital

All this theater has been in play to lead the public opinion and make it ready for discharging Assad.All the beheading videos,creation of ISIS, involving Arab allies is just to push back Iran and cut up their arms and to have the upper hand in the upcoming nuclear talks. At the same time this will result in getting rid of a bunch of evil terrorist that the elites themselves helped to organize to begin with,it will also weaken the economy and the credibility of Saudis and Turkey,s regime which is been a part of the plan for years...But this is going to be a very bumpy,sloooww and COSTLY process,just the way politicians like it...And at the end it might very well be another failed American foreign policy after all.

a reply to: daaskapital

So basically the FSA has to shoot down a plane? Last time they used chemical weapons the Obama admin was ADAMANT that it was Assad's military. He tried to go in, Americans opposed it, the truth came out. If the rebels shoot down an American plane (and they will so Obama will destroy Assad's air defense) action will be swift and no chance for the truth.

Pretty much, prepare for Syria to fall like Libya. I don't think Assad would be as stubborn about leaving as Gaddaffi and his wife is from the UK (i believe) so they will probably bolt to Russia.

a reply to: Feltrick

Obama said this as part of the script. It's the first act, second act is a plane is shot down, third act is the fall of Assad's regime. It's been the plan since this time last year and beyond.

originally posted by: crazyewok
So will Syria be allowed to fly its jets through USA airspace then?


It seems sovereign airspace means nothing now........

If we didn't have enough control of our country to stamp out crazy militant rebels that systematically killed syrian media... Yeah I guess Syria would be allowed. How could we stop them if we couldn't even control our affairs in house?

What's wrong with USA clearing it's missions with Syria like the president asked? US should not have a problem with that. It does because it's mission is not stopping ISIS like is says. USA lies.

It's a trap, by design.

I have an idea why doesn't Obama worry about what is going on in his own borders or lack of borders. Piss off to your own side of the world, you have done enough damage already by arming and funding these monsters while Assad was fighting them. The US has caused this mess (purposely) and now tells Syria what they can and can't do. You fly into another countries airspace you are a legitimate target.

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: Feltrick

Obama said this as part of the script. It's the first act, second act is a plane is shot down, third act is the fall of Assad's regime. It's been the plan since this time last year and beyond.

This "act" has the potential to go off script. If both the Assad regime and ISIS are being targeted by US forces in Syria, they could end up fighting against a common enemy... Together.

Once the USA gets directly involved in Syria all bets are off. Going to be difficult to distinguish between enemies and moderate rebels... ISIS will attempt to force the USA to target Assad's assets.

I am with you. The US is far more of a threat to any Middle Eastern entity than vice versa. Under international law and basic ethics, all countries and legitimate governments, including Assad, have the right to defend themselves against violators of sovereignty or national boundaries.

Our government (my) have become the empire, the global chess players, and the pursuers of power at any cost.

Mark my words, the entire goal of everything you just said and this ISIS stuff is regime change in Syria.

originally posted by: daaskapital
The audacity of Obama and the US government is astounding. They want to violate Syria's airspace, but threaten to destroy the government's air defences if their planes are attacked.

President Barack Obama would seek to overthrow the regime of Bashar al-Assad if American planes were attacked upon entering Syrian air space, Peter Baker of The New York Times reports.

If Assad’s troops fired at American planes entering Syrian airspace, “Obama said he would order American forces to wipe out Syria’s air defence system,” Baker reports. “He went on to say that such an action by Mr. Assad would lead to his overthrow, according to one account.”

On Wednesday, Obama announced that he had authorised US airstrikes in Syria while laying out a four-part strategy to “destroy” and “eradicate” radical ISIS militants who have captured roughly a third of Syria and a third of Iraq.

www.businessinsider.com.au...

I do despise ISIS and its actions, but to violate a sovereign state's airspace and threaten to destroy the government's defences if they attack any infringing aircraft, is illegal. While the violation of nation-states and their airspace is not a new trend (the USA has been doing it for years), the very act of doing so is illegal if the offending state does not get approval from the United Nations Security Council first. Furthermore, a sovereign state has the ability to exercise its law in its own airspace, and is allowed to refuse entry to others, even the USA.

Obama's decision to attack ISIS inside Syria is illegal. This goes for both, the claims of 'humanitarian intervention' and 'the destruction of ISIS', the grounds of which Obama and his coalition are using to stage attacks on ISIS.

Is humanitarian military intervention against international law, or are there exceptions?

As a matter of international law, humanitarian intervention—such as the use of military force to protect foreign populations from mass atrocities or gross human rights abuses—is permissible if authorized by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). Although many Western governments have taken the position that such intervention may in some cases be morally justified even if not authorized by the Security Council, most states and international legal experts do not regard that as lawful.

www.cfr.org...

While it must be noted that some states view the legitimacy of interfering in the affairs of other states as morally just, many states and scholars argue that the UN still has the sole right of granting such privileges:

In recent years, states have reached general consensus that they have a "Responsibility to Protect" populations from mass atrocities, and that when a government fails in this responsibility towards its own people, international action is appropriate. Many states, however, maintain the position that only the UNSC can authorize armed intervention.

www.cfr.org...

Here is the gap in your view.

The ENTIRE GOAL of the US is to target Assad and get him out.

They will jump at the chance, including if Assad or someone else targets US planes, to then target Assad's capabilities and walk down the road of removal by either the US or by more empowered "moderate rebels."

Get it now?

originally posted by: ausername

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: Feltrick

Obama said this as part of the script. It's the first act, second act is a plane is shot down, third act is the fall of Assad's regime. It's been the plan since this time last year and beyond.

This "act" has the potential to go off script. If both the Assad regime and ISIS are being targeted by US forces in Syria, they could end up fighting against a common enemy... Together.

Once the USA gets directly involved in Syria all bets are off. Going to be difficult to distinguish between enemies and moderate rebels... ISIS will attempt to force the USA to target Assad's assets.

originally posted by: GogoVicMorrow
a reply to: Feltrick

Obama said this as part of the script. It's the first act, second act is a plane is shot down, third act is the fall of Assad's regime. It's been the plan since this time last year and beyond.

EXACTLY. Thank you brother. Spot on.

The plan though is longer than a year, it's since the start of the civil war.

a reply to: GogoVicMorrow

Yeah, I know, but govt incompetence makes me sleep easier. Seems their arrogance is going to get a lot of folks killed, now and in the future.

a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14

Whatever perspective works for you. It is what it is.

The Russians are heavily invested in Syria, and embedded with the Assad regime. There are much broader potential implications here... But, let's just wait and see what happens... Or not.

It's pretty scary the US can do what they want & and it's president even got the nobel peace prize.

I don't trust those beheadings movies either, the same as those Osama Bin laden ones we had before.

Iran is next on the list after Syria, that seems obvious.