"... the American-aligned unit, known as Division 30, in fighting off the assault, according to an American military spokesman and combatants on both sides. The strikes were the first known use of coalition air power in direct battlefield support of fighters in Syria who were trained by the Pentagon.
The attack on Friday was mounted by the Nusra Front, which is affiliated with Al Qaeda. It came a day after the Nusra Front captured two leaders and at least six fighters of Division 30, which supplied the first trainees to graduate from the Pentagon’s anti-Islamic State training program.
In Washington, several current and former senior administration officials acknowledged that the attack and the abductions by the Nusra Front took American officials by surprise and amounted to a significant intelligence failure." NY Times
----------------
"a significant intelligence failure?" No! No! Based on my 34 years experience in government in the war-fighting, policy and intelligence fields I would bet you a month's pay that the intelligence community told the policy people (elected and appointed) that the Nusra Front are inherently and permanently enemies of the United States and the west in general.
What has happened in this is that the policy people, unable to find tools with which to bring down the Syrian government, (at Israel's behest) have been working for the last several months at the considerable task of convincing themselves that not all Nusra jihadis are "bad people." Some are now said to be "misguided" by policy people in the hope that the Nusra Front can be made into useful idiots willing to serve the interests of what they would call the Crusader and Zionist foe.
Well, pilgrims, if someone or some group of someones in the IC contradicted that idea I am quite sure that the response from the policy side would be to tell them to go play amongst themselves quietly whilst the grown-ups talk.
Contributing to this catastrophe visited upon the hapless 60 members of Division 30 (the Unicorn Army) is the willingness of Israel to support the rebels fighting the Syrian Government south of Damascus. Guess what! These rebels include Nusra Front elements. Israel is treating their wounded in Israeli hospitals and providing them close air support.
Well, pilgrims, if Israel thinks they are all right...
pl
gemini33,
just to be pointed: Irrespective of US law and legal bases - under international there is no case whatsoever to me made that the US or Turkey have any right to impose a no fly zone over part of Syrian teritory.
There is no UN mandate like the one for Libya which the US and her allies way exceeded when they started an actual close air support campaign for rebels on the ground, whithout which the rebels would have never won.
Syria has not attacked the US or Turkey or Israel, so neither country can claim to act in self-defence. It is, by proxy, very much the other way around, and under the Nicaragua precedent all of this conduct by the US, Turkey, the Gulfies and the Israelis is pretty clearly illegal.
http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/?sum=367&p1=3&p2=3&case=70&p3=5
Like it or not, Syria is still a sovereign country, even though by now such a weak one that it must endure such encroachments and routinely object (they have to, in order to prevent setting precedent by appearance of toleration).
Given that context, and the fact that the UN charter, which mandates non-aggression amongst UN member states, is as a ratified treaty law of the land in the US (since July 28, 1945 to be exact), I find that the musings about what exactly is the domestic legal basis for America's violations of international law falls somewhat short of what decent respect to the opinions of mankind would suggest.
But then I may be quaint.
Posted by: confusedponderer | 05 August 2015 at 04:36 AM
CP,
what is the number of immigrants we need in Europe?
Or from a more German POV: The issue are not the number of genuine
asylum seekers from MENA but the high number of asylum seekers from save Balkan countries, i.e. the low likelyhood of successful application.
OTOH we have in Germany an economic demand for at least 300000 immigrants per year.
The issue in Germany are IMHO not the number of immigrants but the flaws of the German system. A more fexible and pragmatic approach would reduce the number of asylum seekers by 80%, thisi with lower costs.
I live in an Austrian city in a neighbourhood with many former Yogoslavian citizen, they came around 1990 and their kids are perfectly integrated.
Posted by: Ulenspiegel | 05 August 2015 at 05:08 AM
Sorry, you are talking nonsense. I live in Austria in a neighbourhood with many former Yuggoslavian citizens from today Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia Herzogovina, they integrated very well and their kids are perfectly integrated, I bet Serbs even have a higher percentage tertiary education than the native population.
Colleagues from Sweden and Norway, some are immigrants from the Balkan states are not that unhappy with the performance of the former Yogoslavian citizens. :-)
Posted by: Ulenspiegel | 05 August 2015 at 05:16 AM
On the surface maybe.
Try to have a bit more than serious quarrel with them.
You will be REALLY surprised!
Posted by: Ursa Maior | 05 August 2015 at 02:18 PM