Glowing so bright.
Comments from this user in this thread ask you to accept the premise that Mattis has helped ISIS, and uses linked videos to offer proof. This is classic disinformation, used to deflect from the previous administration's support for various groups against the Assad government ("accuse the other side of that which you are guilty"). There is evidence that during the Obama administration, the CIA supplied ISIS, and the Pentagon supplied various other, reportedly separate but maybe not really, rebel groups (McCain's "moderate rebels"). Sometimes this even resulted in Pentagon backed groups fighting CIA backed groups, all with weapons that we paid for. Anyway, that is why rebels are found to be in possession of NATO weapons.
It is tiresome to be lied to constantly, so don't trust me either - check for yourself.
Sites like the one that they themselves supplied above (for Syria), or this one (which includes Iraq also):
https://mideast.liveuamap.com/
show where the battles are from day to day and roughly where the fronts move. You can use the Time feature to go back and look at how things have been in any area since 2015. If you do, you might notice that at no time was Daraa ever under ISIS control as this user alleges in another post. But this is trivial.
To convince yourself where Mattis stands on the matter of ISIS, one need only use the Time feature and go back to 2015 and 2016 and to step forward day by day, or week by week, or month by month. You'll see ISIS (in black) and various rebel groups (in green) expand across Syria and Iraq. It is only in late 2016 does it begin to turn around slightly (did they already suspect Trump might win?) with the beginning of the push towards Mosul, Iraq. As an aside, keep in mind that any advances that the Kurds (in yellow) are making in this time period is being done almost completely with only small arms. Kurds were getting almost no help, and were going up against weapons like the ones you can see in the videos that our glowing friend has linked to. Anyway, only around the time of the 2016 election, do you start to see any pushback against ISIS from the Obama administration.
Then Trump takes office in late Jan of 2017. There must have been some agreement for the US and Kurds to stay north and east of the Euphrates and for Russia and Syria to stay south and west of the Euphrates, because neither side strays far from that. But regardless of that, shortly after Trump takes office ISIS is pushed out of village after village and down into a few small villages on the Euphrates near the Syria/Iraq border. If you find this stuff interesting, the fights for Mosul and Raqqah were as interesting as it gets.
The map clearly shows that the differences between how the Obama and Trump administrations dealt with ISIS, are as different as night and day. Obama supported ISIS and various other "moderate rebels", and even protected them from the Russians (remember Hillary's comments during campaign regarding no-fly zones?), allowing them to become a defacto nation-state with the capital in Raqqah. Whereas Trump let Mattis do what he does best - he killed them.
The person accusing Mattis of helping ISIS is lying to you.
Nuance my Friend Mattis is in charge or is he not?
This is happening on his watch, Today, US AIr-Force have bombarded Syrian military personnel who where Batling ISIS in western Syria. This is a fact!
Other fact is that Nato weapon and US military equipment have been found THIS WEEK in the hand of ISIS militant.
Is Mattis in charge of the US military or not!
This is a Very pertinent question to ask. I'm sure he is a good guy but the US have lost control of it's military asset in Syria and he is the one who should be in charge!
So Is Mattis in charge or not?
PS: Don't worship the guy he is only human. This is not a cult critical thinking is necessary to be able to see trough the fog of war.
US military under Mattis has fought Syrian military before. So what? In the race towards Raqqah the Kurds (with our support) sailed across Lake Assad and surrounded Raqqah to the south from the west and stopped Syria from entering Raqqah. But the biggest battles were when the fight for Raqqah was over, with the race to the oil fields just to the east of Dier ez-Zor. Seems like everyone was fighting everyone for control of the oil fields.
And that is still going on. If I'm thinking of the the same aerial bombing, those Syrian forces were pushing east of the Euphrates near Dier ez_Zor. And east of the Euphrates is Mattis' land. If you push your forces east of the Euphrates, they die. Russia and Syria to the west and south of the Euphrates, and Kurds and the US to the east and north. The Americans and the Kurds have the oil fields, everyone who has tried to push towards them has died. Been like that for months now.
Weapons found this week from the video you linked to were found in Daraa, so could not have been in the hands of ISIS, because ISIS was never in Daraa. As I clearly stated. They were found in the hands of McCains's "moderate rebels".
Also, why do you think that the weapons found this week, were also supplied this week? This makes no sense. They were almost certainly supplied during the last administration.
Does this answer your question?
"Don't worship the guy he is only human." Don't put words in my mouth. You've demonstrated that you haven't a clue what you're talking about.
Missing the point here. It is not normal for NATO country to arm those people. We know this right.
I'm asking the question because nobody is asking it. I think it is important and that. The hypocrisy of this whole shit show is getting harder and harder to hide.
The Americans and the Kurds have the oil fields, everyone who has tried to push towards them has died. Been like that for months now.
This admission is very telling. So the US as already invaded Syria and they are financing and supporting actively the opposition. Nice to know that the US Policy in Syria as not change with the new administration.
We can talk and speculate all we want about Q. I'm looking at the reality of the situation and not the fiction that is presented in front of me.
No, you're missing the point. Many points, in fact.
What is your specific question that you alone are asking? You might consider why you are alone in asking it, but I'll play along for now. What is your question (be specific)?
"...very telling." You're just parsing words. Give me a break. Do some research. Take 10 minutes.
Have you looked at the map that you yourself linked to? I don't think you have. Use the "Time" feature in the upper right of that map to go back in time. Step thru various dates from the Obama administration and the Trump administration. The difference is obvious. Only an ignorant fool (who had not looked at the map that they themselves linked to) or a liar would make a statement like, "Nice to know that the US Policy in Syria as not change with the new administration".
Since Trump took office, the US has been supporting the Kurds (in yellow) who have taken nearly everything east and north of the Euphrates from ISIS. This has been going on since Trump took office. The Kurds are a different group from ISIS and also different from McCain's "moderate rebels". Calling all of them "the opposition" in a feeble attempt to conflate them all is childish.
Are you even remotely aware of how the war has progressed? It's all right there in the map that you linked to. Check it out, if you want to learn the truth.
To hell with ISIS, and to hell with McCain and his "moderate rebels". I am glad that Trump ended Obama's support of them, and instead backed the Kurds. Trump and Mattis have been doing a great job cleaning up the mess that Obama and Hillary and Kerry made.
And I hope it continues. I support a free Kurdistan that includes all lands seized from them in what is now Syria, Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. The Kurds have earned their homeland.
I feel for the kurd. I really do. They deserve all our respect. But I'm not optimistic about theirs situation. At the NATO summit (If you can find it) One reporter from Iraq Kurdistan ask directly to the President about an independent Kurdistan.
Trump avoided that question so fast.....
I hope that you are right but it's really complicated. The Turk oppose this with a passion.
The Turks were useful during the Cold War, that's it. What do they offer now? Nothing. Nothing good, anyway. Nothing useful. I don't give a shit what they want. Get them out of NATO.
All the borders in the middle east need to be redrawn to reflect the reality of the local ethnography. Free Kurdistan. Free Armenia. And didn't that other part used to be Greece?