ISIS attacks Aleppo under watchful eye of Putin and Assad

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

While Putin is hailed by sycophants for supposedly ridding Syria of terrorists, the most dangerous terrorist group in the world is launching an attack on a major city.

So far, according to observers, Russia has only struck Isis held territories twice in Syria.

The territory held by ISIS is actually increasing thanks to Putins attacks on other Syrian Rebels.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Dutch amateur observer, @arabthomness on Twitter is covering latest developments in Syria.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Western coalition is not going near Russian bombers. They are keeping a 20 mile distance. While Russians are bombing Western Syria, they and the coalition are creating a safe zone for ISIS.

This shows how, deliberate or not, both sides are providing ISIS ground to expand and survive the airstrikes.

[Manzareh]

While Putin is hailed by sycophants for supposedly ridding Syria of terrorists, the most dangerous terrorist group in the world is launching an attack on a major city.

So far, according to observers, Russia has only struck Isis held territories twice in Syria.

The territory held by ISIS is actually increasing thanks to Putins attacks on other Syrian Rebels.

Exactly! they are attacking the groups that are fighting ISIS and Bashar, they are helping ISIS and making a pathway for them, Putin knows exactly what he is doing.

[khushal]

While Putin is hailed by sycophants for supposedly ridding Syria of terrorists, the most dangerous terrorist group in the world is launching an attack on a major city.

So far, according to observers, Russia has only struck Isis held territories twice in Syria.

The territory held by ISIS is actually increasing thanks to Putins attacks on other Syrian Rebels.

The immediate threat to Assad are the rebels in the North where syrian ground troops can take counter offensives. Putin knows that the US will not allow ISIS to take Damascus or Baghdad so he is not worried about ISIS for now.
The reason the Russians entered the war was because US together with Turkey was establishing a no fly zone from Syrian war planes which is why Turkey agreed with the US to use their air base. If you take away war planes and helicopters from Asad, his demise would be quicker and the strategy was that FSA would swoop down from the north and take damascus. The Russian entrance has changed that.

http://www.voanews.com/content/syrian-interim-government-prime-minister-calls-for-us-help-claims-assad-setback/2997147.html

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

The whole strategy chosen by Iran, Russia and Assad is to force internationaal community to choose Assad and ISIS.

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

Russia is ISIS' airforce ⁦http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...⁩

[Shapur]

Thats because Assad's stronghold is western Syria while ISIS mainly controls eastern Syria and Western Iraq. ISIS is not the immediate concern for Russia. Once Russia deals with rebels in the west such as free syrian army and other rebel groups closer to Assad's strongholds then I am sure they will concentrate further East where ISIS is. ISIS is trying to take advantage of this oppurtunity and try to push West but Russia will bomb them once they get too close for comfort and once Russia is done with other groups. ISIS is not friend of Iran or Russia, ISIS just killed a high ranking Iranian revolutionary gaurd member and Iran has woved to avenge that. ISIS doensn't even consider 12er Shias as muslim lol.

[randolph85]

I don't understand why Russia is not striking IS in the east. I can buy the theory that they would want an IS advance to the west in order to force the west to support the Syrian regime which they would prefer over an IS takeover. What I don't understand is why they don't strike IS in their strongholds to weaken them where they don't threaten the regime, I mean what is a few more missiles to them?

[Shamlawar Khurasani]

I don't understand why Russia is not striking IS in the east. I can buy the theory that they would want an IS advance to the west in order to force the west to support the Syrian regime which they would prefer over an IS takeover. What I don't understand is why they don't strike IS in their strongholds to weaken them where they don't threaten the regime, I mean what is a few more missiles to them?

Since the establishment of Isis and later the faux Khilafah oil fields of Syria produced millions of barrels of oil which Isis sells to Assad regime.

Why is nobody making fuss about that?

[Insight]

The whole strategy chosen by Iran, Russia and Assad is to force internationaal community to choose Assad and ISIS.

This is their strategy. the Conquest insurgent group which is backed by Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Qatar, is difficult to defeat since they enjoy base of operations in Turkey. The Southern Syrian rebels have their base of operations in Jordan.

[Insight]

The immediate threat to Assad are the rebels in the North where syrian ground troops can take counter offensives. Putin knows that the US will not allow ISIS to take Damascus or Baghdad so he is not worried about ISIS for now.

The current US strategy seems to be taking a backseat to the conflict. US airstrikes in Syria have tapered down since Russia got involved.

US official's yesterday highlighted that the death of Iran's top general is a psychological blow to regime supporters. This is an unusual statement. Together with the fact that US airstrikes have decreased in Syria, it looks as if US is stepping back.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/09/politics/iran-general-killed-syria-isis/

[DaZahroJaam.]

you know what's funny?? some afghans are soooo excited now that putin has taken such a noble stand against isis...he is simply showing off to usa. it's like, you took afghanistan, i am going to help myself to syria.. in a couple of years from now, russia will built it's bases in syria and fight isis for the next three decades.
people will never learn..

[Manzareh]

Putin n America same shiit, good cop bad cop routine

[khushal]

The current US strategy seems to be taking a backseat to the conflict. US airstrikes in Syria have tapered down since Russia got involved.

US official's yesterday highlighted that the death of Iran's top general is a psychological blow to regime supporters. This is an unusual statement. Together with the fact that US airstrikes have decreased in Syria, it looks as if US is stepping back.

http://edition.cnn.com/2015/10/09/po...ed-syria-isis/

US syria policy was a no win from the beginning:

http://www.wsj.com/articles/obamas-options-narrow-in-syria-1444438099

It is now becoming clear why the US never was serious about bombing ISIS to oblivion since they were always worried that Russia might enter the mix. They were keeping ISIS as a backup for balancing Iranian influence.