Hey Joe,
Let me ask you a question.
Do you think when I post seemingly outrageous things that I do so ignorantly?
Or do I do it because I actually WANT someone to challenge me on that seemingly outrageous topic?
- That I can bring MORE attention to it at the expense of someone else ignorantly challenging me on it?

Well which is it?

Are you aware of the information shared by Vanessa Beeley during and after she was in Syria?
Or perhaps the the information gained by Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-Hawaii) when she went to Syria last year?
Have you looked George Webb's youtube video series where he looks at the people behind the White Helmets?
Do you even know what George Webb's video series is about?

How much do you actually know?
Should I post my links now or give you a chance to find out a little more on your own?

- And here I was just reading your Trump comments and quietly pleased thinking that you were really starting to get it.
Well, Life is a journey isn't it; Two steps forward, One step back.

So which side if any do you prefer in the M/E Muslim mess?
Saying you oppose Assad, could simply mean you support Wahhabists...
What's your position and why?

I've posted a lot of questions, but it's veering off topic, not really related to Patricia's article other than the Oscar win.
We can save Syria for another day, it's not going anywhere.
I suggest you do your homework, I've shown you where to look.

Hi AC,

Q1: Yes.

Q2: No.

As for my position, many times over the past three or four years, I've suggested that we need to identify who we think our worst enemy is, in such a complex situation as Syria. In my view, ISIS is the worst enemy. Therefore, the anti-ISIS forces should hold their noses and work together, democratic rebels with Assad, the Russians, the Turks, Iran, the West, etc.

Once ISIS is defeated (until its successor Islamist-fascist group comes along), then other wars can begin, democratic forces against Assad, Turkey against the Kurds, eventually Iran and Assad against Saudi Arabia, i.e. the big one: Sunni vs. Shia.

Joe

Well, I'd like to think I'm not that careless.

The problem with it all, and what essentially makes it confusing for everyone is that what the US State Department says is often totally different to their intelligence agency objectives.
In this regard the US is much like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde.
I agree with you completely in getting rid of ISIS top-priority and I think the US should work with Russia and Assad to pursue those ends.
Could it be that this 'Narrative against Russia' is simply an effort to prevent Trump from concluding these wars and making peace whilst the intelligence agencies (and other parties in the conflict) objectives have not been met?
It should be noted that Syria did willingly support the US on the 'War on Terror' in Iraq.

My position is that I'm not going to support the overthrow of a democratically elected leader simply based on the rhetoric of her enemies (The West and it's allies) when its a proven fact that Syria has long been the target of US regime change anyway.
I'm not going to criticise Assad for simply trying to defend his nation against covert foreign operatives, terrorists and proxy armies seeking to overthrow him.

Hi AC,

I'm sure that Russia has done all those terrible things I mentioned, BUT if the worst enemy is ISIS, then the US and Russia and Iran and Turkey and the Saudis (yeah, right) should all hold their noses and co-operate in defeating ISIS. Then the fun can start.

Cheers,

Joe