4 ms·

Your story is nonfactual. The first US airstrikes in Syria were in 2014[1], the first US airstrikes against the Syria Government were in 2017[2]. Both long afte

Your story is nonfactual. The first US airstrikes in Syria were in 2014[1], the first US airstrikes against the Syria Government were in 2017[2]. Both long after the Syrian Armed forces had lost control of the situation. The mass defection of Syrian Army soldiers and officers to the Free Syrian Army guaranteed that the conflict was going to a bloody mess with arms falling into hands of all parties, long before the US started supplying arms. And no, you can't for certain say that Iraq would have fared better, as Iran would have fueled Shia sectarianism all the same in Iraq as it did post US invasion. Iran in fact was Sadam's greatest concern before his WMD bluff backfired. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American-led_intervention_in_t... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_attacks_on_Syria_during_the_Syrian_Civil_War https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_attacks_...

sudosysgen 6y ago
>Your story is nonfactual. The first US airstrikes in Syria were in 2014[1], the first US airstrikes against the Syria Government were in 2017[2]. Both long after the Syrian Armed forces had lost control of the situation. Yes, and that has contributed to make the ISIS mess even worse. In that way the US is responisble for that. >The mass defection of Syrian Army soldiers and officers to the Free Syrian Army guaranteed that the conflict was going to a bloody mess with arms falling into hands of all parties, long before the US started supplying arms. The Free Syrian Army, which was also incidentally funded and armed by the US. >And no, you can't for certain say that Iraq would have fared better, as Iran would have fueled Shia sectarianism all the same in Iraq as it did post US invasion. Iran in fact was Sadam's greatest concern before his WMD bluff backfired. In which case either he would have been overthrown or the country would have fragmented. In both cases, the state or states would have been able to crush ISIS.
thrwway34 6y ago
His story is factual, but those facts are opposite to the truth.

sudosysgen 6y ago

>Your story is nonfactual. The first US airstrikes in Syria were in 2014[1], the first US airstrikes against the Syria Government were in 2017[2]. Both long after the Syrian Armed forces had lost control of the situation. Yes, and that has contributed to make the ISIS mess even worse. In that way the US is responisble for that. >The mass defection of Syrian Army soldiers and officers to the Free Syrian Army guaranteed that the conflict was going to a bloody mess with arms falling into hands of all parties, long before the US started supplying arms. The Free Syrian Army, which was also incidentally funded and armed by the US. >And no, you can't for certain say that Iraq would have fared better, as Iran would have fueled Shia sectarianism all the same in Iraq as it did post US invasion. Iran in fact was Sadam's greatest concern before his WMD bluff backfired. In which case either he would have been overthrown or the country would have fragmented. In both cases, the state or states would have been able to crush ISIS.

thrwway34 6y ago

His story is factual, but those facts are opposite to the truth.