Syrian War: Russian Airstrikes Alone Will Not Destroy ISIS


Randi Nord | The Pontiac Tribune

Last week Putin launched a series of airstrikes targeting ISIS in Syria. A Kremlin-owned media outlet is reporting that 40% of ISIS infrastructure has been destroyed by Russian airstrikes — but who trusts Russian sources?


THE MEDIA PROPAGANDA WARS

As reported by Russian government-controlled Sputnik News:

“Syria’s Ambassador to Russia Riad Haddad said that around 40 percent of Islamic State infrastructure in Syria has been destroyed since Russia began its military operation in the country.”

Syrian-War-MapI think most would agree that someone needs to destroy ISIS, but before breaking out the champagne — a couple of fundamental questions must be answered.

Considering the source, what are we to make of this information?

And, perhaps more importantly, could Russian airstrikes alone ever be enough to destroy ISIS — a global terrorist organization?

QUESTION EVERYTHING

Most of the information that claims Putin has ISIS on the ropes comes straight from Russian news sources.

Should we assume all information coming to us from Russia has been skewed?

Of course not.

Just like the corporate media in the US, you should never assume that mainstream news — the primary weapon of choice used by most governments — can be trusted.

On the morning of October 7th, for instance, when Russian warships launched twenty-six missiles from the Caspian Sea to destroy ISIS in Syria — passing through both Iraqi and Iranian airspace — Asia Times reported that these airstrikes took place without risking civilian lives:

“Four missile ships launched 26 cruise missiles at 11 targets. According to objective control data, all the targets were destroyed. No civilian objects sustained damage,” claimed Russia’s Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu.

Al Jazeera, however, reported otherwise:

Civilian deaths are being reported from apparent airstrikes by Russian fighter jets in the Syrian province of Hama and in areas bordering the Idlib province.

A video of the purported raids uploaded to YouTube by activists said at least four people were killed and dozens injured, and that the death toll was expected to rise.”

The article went on to say that they could not independently verify the reports and that the Syrian Observatory has “no information about casualties.”

Syrian-War-Map-2CONSIDER THE CONSEQUENCES

Perhaps it’s true that there were no casualties as the Russian Times claims. But if Al Jazeera has it right, then it makes sense that Syria and Russia would want to keep that information hidden.

Again, as reported by Sputnik News:

“‘According to our data, about 40 percent . In addition, a lot of terrorists have been killed. Now, they are retreating toward the Turkish border, as this country has traditionally provided them with protection,’ Haddad said.”

Less than half of ISIS’ infrastructure — in Syria alone, mind you — was destroyed, and now ISIS militants are simply moving to locations that are not being bombed by Russian fighter jets.

ISIS is mostly concentrated in Syria, yes.

The truth is that — such as Boko Haram in Nigeria — nearly every other militant group of terrorists in the region already pledges allegiance to the Islamic State.

This means that in order to destroy ISIS with airstrikes and only airstrikes, scores of fighter jets must drop bombs on much of the Middle East and surrounding areas.

This would only accelerate the global refugee crisis (yes, it could get much, much worse) and push the global economy to the brink. It actually forces ISIS to migrate away from the Middle East — and would send millions of people on a life-long mission of revenge.

Adaptation is the key to evolution.

If our global leaders continue down this path — neither the US or Russia will destroy ISIS — and such an event could unleash an entirely different breed of militant terrorist monster.

http://pontiactribune.com/un-speeches-russia-bombed-isis/

HOW TO DESTROY ISIS

At this point, the only way to defeat the Islamic State is by ground invasion — and that’s exactly what Syria is doing. To help in the offensive against ISIS Assad’s regime looked towards the Kremlin — so, Putin sent Russian warships and fighter jets.

Putin rejuvenated Syrian forces with Russian airstrikes on ISIS — all of which made one thing clear to NATO — Russia will go to war in defense of Syria.

One last time from Sputnik News:

“Syria’s army has begun a full-scale operation against the Islamic State in the country’s Hama province on Wednesday, a Syrian military source told RIA Novosti.

‘A ground military operation began with artillery support and will head toward Idlib to the north. The goal is to cleanse the territory of ISIL and other terrorist groups,’ the Syrian officer told RIA Novosti.”

A ground invasion by the Syria military alone likely won’t be enough — although, considering its current military commitment in the region, the idea of Russian ground troops in Syria in the near future might not be all that far-fetched.

With the way events have unfolded in Syria many geopolitical experts now believe the US could soon send ground troops of its own — not to destroy ISIS — but to help the “moderate Syrian rebels” trained by the CIA, many of the same terrorists Russia is bombing in Syria.

Today Jens Stoltenberg, NATO’s secretary-general, announced the alliance plans to double its Response Forces to 40,000 troops — and there are two brand new headquarters coming to Eastern Europe so that NATO forces can move quickly and effectively if they need to deploy.”

Someone Finally Explained How ISIS Was Created, and it Will Make You Question Everything

Even if CIA-trained Syrian rebels can survive this, the US stands no chance of overthrowing Assad’s government — the only goal of the neocons and Saudis.

Unless, of course, NATO does something drastic.

If it does, we might see the world war we’ve heard many whispers about —  ever since Russia dropped the first bomb on ISIS.


The Pontiac Tribune encourages you to republish this article (Russian Airstrikes Alone Will Not Destroy ISIS) under a Creative Commons license, with attribution to Randi Nord and PontiacTribune.com


 

3 Comments

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published.