It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Iran sends 15,000 troops to support Assad in Syria

page: 1
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
According to a news source from Lebanon, Iran has sent 15,000 troops to Syria to help the Assad government.

If true, this could be an indication of continuing Assad/Syria setbacks.

This could put additional dampers on the nuclear negotiations.

The stakes are high in the Middle East.



The Iranian government has sent 15,000 fighters to Syria to help the Syrian government.

The force, made up of Iranians, Iraqis and Afghanis, arrived in the Damascus region and in the province of Latakia, a Lebanese political source told The Daily Star

The fighters hope to reverse recent setbacks Syrian government troops have experienced on the battlefield by the end of June, the source said. The fighters are expected to spearhead an effort to seize areas of Idlib province, which has been taken over by a rebel jihadi-coalition.

Iran sends 15,000 troops to support Assad in Syria







posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:18 AM
link   
Oh boy! If true. Good ol fashion war creep.....
a reply to: xuenchen



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:21 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

Yes this is BIG news but our UK media sources in the UK will be more interested in feeding us news about a rollercoaster accident.

What will Israel do about this? Blimey is this not what the Mossad wanted all along? To draw Iran into war? The whole thing is mental. This can now become a regional event rather than a localised one. I wouldn't be surprised to see Putin fly 15,000 in too.

Things are getting mental, I heard about this Iranian incursion proposal the other day on SANA, wow Assad must be in real trouble for them to agree to foreign troops intervening.

Israel by backing the revolutionaries will now get ISIS on its borders..................... Unless the Iranians stop the ISIS and take up on Israels borders instead. How can the Israelis have wanted this when they had a defacto truce with Assad?



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:24 AM
link   
a reply to: xuenchen

This is a good thing.

With Iran and Syria appearing to be the only ones willing to fight ISIS, everyone should be jumping for joy. Unfortunately most people have been indoctrinated to believe if it is Iran and Syria then IT MUST BE BAD AND WE MUST BOMB IT!

I can see it now, the war-hawks frothing out the mouth using this as a "LOOK we need to bomb the whole #ing area!" excuse. With absent regard that their true intention is to topple Assad then move on to Iran. The West has no intention of stopping ISIS as they benefit the West and their agenda of destabilizing the ME.

Any action by the West in the area will be claimed as a reason to stop ISIS but in reality there are many other cards at play. I see too many possible outcomes of this, none of them are good.

Expect a "Gulf of Tonkin" type episode in the ME sometime soon.

Alllllll aboaarrrrrrrddddd!



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:28 AM
link   
There shou;d be a coalition to aid in the defence of thier national borders.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: xuenchen
According to a news source from Lebanon, Iran has sent 15,000 troops to Syria to help the Assad government.

Could this headline just as easily have read "Iran sends 15000 troops to fight ISIS in Syria"?
In a scenario that quite obviously functions in shades of grey, are you unable of making that assessment all by yourself, or are you just trying to get the Ditto-heads all a-twitter?



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 11:41 AM
link   
a reply to: JohnnyCanuck



It's my fault how somebody writes an article.

Yes, OK if it pleases you.




posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 12:00 PM
link   

…a Lebanese political source told The Daily Star.


Those politicos… someone source this or just rumor? How did they arrive at that figure, let alone arrive in country, from Iran?

Did they sail both Gulfs (bristling with US warships and blockades) and the Suez canal as stowaways, arriving in Lebanon or the Syrian coastline and do an amphibious assault?

Maybe they marched directly from Iran , through the US of Iraq into Syria from the East?

Maybe they flew over all those no fly zones and para chuted in ?

ETA: Sorry, not buying it. More like more Iran bashing and justification for ramping up US operations in Syria. Imagine that.

(this rumor is from the US)

Map

edit on 8-6-2015 by intrptr because: additional



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Muslims killing Muslims in the ME is hardly news



Really this is a good thing as it means more dead ISIS, always a good thing.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 12:18 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok
I just don't get what Israel is accomplisjing by doing this, I mean they have supplied and given hospital treatment to the rebel groups allowing Isis to emerge and thus drawing in Iran to save the day. They must want a confrontation with Iran in Syria on the battlefield. But why? The only answer I can think of (usually being very pro Israel) is Jerusalem wants more land from Syria, maybe a total war to depopulate south western Syria. I just don't get why they are drawing in Iran

edit on 8-6-2015 by ufoorbhunter because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 12:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: crazyewok
I just don't get what Israel is accomplisjing by doing this, I mean they have supplied and given hospital treatment to the rebel groups allowing Isis to emerge and thus drawing in Iran to save the day. They must want a confrontation with Iran in Syria on the battlefield. But why? The only answer I can think of (usually being very pro Israel) is Jerusalem wants more land from Syria, maybe a total war to depopulate south western Syria. I just don't get why they are drawing in Iran

Because it would be a easiest to try and get America to go against Iran because with Iran in Syria Iran is more of a threat to Israel than ever. Now we can look forward to the Israeli firsters in Congress to push more than ever to get boots on the ground in Syria. Because no matter how many Americans gets killed Israel must be protected.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Of course Israel wants more land.
Unfortunately, due to an uncorrected typo error in the original draft documents, we have always understood that there was something called the "Peace" process, when in fact it was the "Piece" process. The ongoing plan by which Israel takes a "piece" of that land, a "piece" of that land over there, and a large "piece" of the other neighbours land too!



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 01:33 PM
link   
This is nothing new Iranian troops, Lebanese Militias, Hezbollah, and Loyalist Syrian Militias have been propping up Assad since the beginning. Assad can not use the Syrian Army against the traditional rebel groups because they change sides. And while they may not go over and join ISIS or other radical groups they do not want to die fighting them for Assad either so they tend to turn tail.

So mostly the Syrian Army defends the capital. While the other are off fighting the dozen other factions all fighting each other. When ISIS first got going in Syria Assad and ISIS avoided fighting each other and focused on the biggest threat to both the Free Syrian Army and their allies the Kurds. To Assad this made sense at the time. However once the his forces and ISIS had beaten back the FSA and the Kurds ISIS turned broke the unofficial cease fire with Assad and moved on him.

Syria is a hard to understand conflict with so many sides it is all just a complete mess.

You have the Free Syrian Army who are allied with the Kurds. They are Western and Arab League backed and will soon have Turkish air support as well. Their primary opponents are Assads Forces and ISIS. They on occasion join forces with and fight against the other radical groups in Syria.

You have the Kurds who are traditionally Israeli backed and now western backed as well. They are allied with the FSA. Their primary opponents are ISIS and Assads forces, on the rare occasions they meet now. They also side with and fight other minor radical groups as needed.

You have ISIS. Their primary opponents are the FSA, Assads forces, the Kurds and most other radical or militia groups in Syria.

You have the other radical groups. They fight everybody including each other and ISIS. They will also on occasion team up with any other group when a threat to the small areas they control comes along.

You have random town and tribal militias. They fight against or ally with whoever they need to just to stay alive.

You have Assads Forces, The Syrian Military, Iranian forces, Hezbollah, Syrian/Iranian backed Lebanese militias, and militias formed out the coastal part of Syria where the population is pro Assad. They fight everybody. Their primary opponent is the Free Syrian Army. After teaming up against the FSA, ISIS turned on Assads forces and they have feen fighting since.

Across the Lebanese border where ISIS has crossed on occasion you have Hezbollah and Pro Hezbollah militias, you have the Lebanese Army and you have Israeli backed militias. None of these groups like each other but, they like ISIS even less.

To the south along the Syrian Israeli border you have a series of town militias, Druze militias, and Bedouin tribes who have formed a buffer area between ISIS and Israel. These groups seem to have plenty of arms and training and have been holding off ISIS although a large attack seems to be in the making against them. They are no doubt being armed and supplied by Israel covertly. Both the Druze and Israel have asked for US air support. If ISIS makes a break through here you can expect Israeli forces to take an active role in securing a new buffer zone.
edit on 8-6-2015 by MrSpad because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 01:47 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad

Cool. I was going to say the same thing.


(thanx awesome explanation of a horrible event) !!!!



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 02:54 PM
link   
a reply to: MrSpad


Can you draw me a map? I'm lost.





posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:05 PM
link   
This is a slaughter in the making, IMO.

If any of you follow anything I ever say, you know that i hate ISIS.

But to "invade" a small, hilly, rugged, desert country that's rife with new-age guerrilla war with "reinforcements" for another nation's army (totaling only 15,000 troops) is suicide.

Was that a run on sentence? I tried. Really hard.


I think ISIS are going to whoop these boys, really bad, just like they've been doing to the Iraqi Army.

What's been going on with U.S. / Arab Coalition airpower against ISIS in Syria lately? I wonder how these new boots on the ground will play into regional and world politics as soon as "friendly fire" casualties start taking place.

But wait a minute, is that even considered "friendly fire"? If a U.S. bomb kills Iranian soldiers?

What about if .. Saudi Arabia or the U.A.E. accidently kills a few Iranian-led Shiite militia men? What happens then?

Heheheh, and you thought Yemen was going to get ugly.
edit on 6/8/2015 by r0xor because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: buster2010
Because it would be a easiest to try and get America to go against Iran because with Iran in Syria Iran is more of a threat to Israel than ever. Now we can look forward to the Israeli firsters in Congress to push more than ever to get boots on the ground in Syria. Because no matter how many Americans gets killed Israel must be protected.


Israeli Zionist and Sunni Extremists seem to be closet friends, if you will.

Ironically, they typically end up having the same religious enemies.
Even though they claim to openly hate each other, and claim their direct goals to be the annihilation of each other.

I believe that Israel believes that it is ready to completely take Iran out militarily, and they're not going to back down.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Muslims killing Muslims in the ME is hardly news



Really this is a good thing as it means more dead ISIS, always a good thing.


True...its a Muslim civil war, Sunni ISIS v. Shia Iran, and I'd agree more dead the better, but....problem is that while this mess plays out, it creates more and more refugees and our crappy President is importing them into the US by the tens of thousands and considering they don't readily assimilate into a host society and considering the 100,000 or so illegal immigrants the US takes in each year, the last thing we need is more foreign refugees.

So....I'd suggest the sooner this is resolved, the better, at least as to the Syria portion and the way to do that is to force Assad and the rebels to a peace meeting to draw new national borders based upon their ethnic/religious leanings. So Assad would remain dictator for life of Alawite Syria; ISIS would have its Caliphate and could continue to prosecute its war against the Shia in Iraq. Then ISIS would effectivly control "Sunnistan" portion of Iraq, "Shiastan" portion of Iraq would be absorbed into Iran; Kurdistan would be given formal recognition and everyone's happy!



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: TonyS

originally posted by: crazyewok
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Muslims killing Muslims in the ME is hardly news



Really this is a good thing as it means more dead ISIS, always a good thing.


True...its a Muslim civil war, Sunni ISIS v. Shia Iran, and I'd agree more dead the better, but....problem is that while this mess plays out, it creates more and more refugees and our crappy President is importing them into the US by the tens of thousands and considering they don't readily assimilate into a host society and considering the 100,000 or so illegal immigrants the US takes in each year, the last thing we need is more foreign refugees.

So....I'd suggest the sooner this is resolved, the better, at least as to the Syria portion and the way to do that is to force Assad and the rebels to a peace meeting to draw new national borders based upon their ethnic/religious leanings. So Assad would remain dictator for life of Alawite Syria; ISIS would have its Caliphate and could continue to prosecute its war against the Shia in Iraq. Then ISIS would effectivly control "Sunnistan" portion of Iraq, "Shiastan" portion of Iraq would be absorbed into Iran; Kurdistan would be given formal recognition and everyone's happy!


That's a great idea, totally with you on (locals not Brits and French) redrawing the borders after a peace. Slight problem is this will require major population swaps like Greece and Turkey once did. Sunni and Shia plus Kurd divide is not neat but a patchwork quilt to give the Balkans a run for its money. Then even when those parties do get to settle down outside influences have got to refrain from stirring things up, you know, Israel, Russia, USA, UK, they have got to respect borders and stop playing out their football games in the proxy stadium in the Middle East.



posted on Jun, 8 2015 @ 05:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Did you hear about B2s landing at RAF Fairford?



new topics

top topics



 
14
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join