There's a twist. This time, Putin is Rambo.
An excerpt from, "'Shut out': Turkey finds itself 'in a very difficult position' with the Russian moves in Syria" by Natasha Bertrand, Business Insider, October 2, 2015:
Turkey's plans for a safe zone may be scuttled for now, but Ankara will most likely compensate by doubling down on its support for anti-Assad rebel groups such as Jabhat al-Nusra and Ahrar al Sham as the situation escalates.
"Ankara would be extremely concerned if the Russians took their campaign into Aleppo, because it opens up the possibility of another massive refugee flow into Turkey, which is already at its limits," Stein said.
There are over 1 million Syrian refugees in Turkey, about 30% of whom live in 22 government-run camps near the Syrian-Turkish border.
To prevent another refugee surge, "there will be considerations of providing the rebels with surface-to-air missiles to blunt the efficacy of Russian aircraft," Stein said.
In any case, the Russian intervention will lead to a hardening of battle lines on all sides.
In the wake of the increased Russian intervention in Syria there has been a lot of dangerous talk coming out of the United States, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and other countries in the pro-ISIS coalition."The Russian intervention could prompt a new phase in this conflict that could make things even bloodier," said Schanzer. "We ignore that possibility at our peril."
The most extremist elements in this evil coalition such as the editorial board of The Washington Post, Saudi princes, and Senator John McCain want to provide ISIS terrorists with anti-aircraft missiles in order to give Putin a black eye. Here are articles in Reuters and The Washington Post that are advancing this very dangerous course of action.
Why would anyone want to give Putin a black eye for taking on terrorists? Putin should be commended for his heroic, though late, decision to intervene in Syria on the side of civilization against the savage forces of Salafist and Wahhabi terrorism that have laid waste to many diverse communities from Afghanistan to Libya.
Since the U.S. doesn't want to strike ISIS, why shouldn't Russia? They are closer to their neighbourhood. Plus, the U.S. was given a year to "degrade and destroy" ISIS, and nothing has happened. No degrading has gone on.
Syria and the world cannot play with time. The clock is ticking. The next Osama bin Laden is right now in US-Saudi-Turkish training camps in Syria. Each day they are allowed to operate under NATO's umbrella, ISIS gets stronger.
A lot of people are drawing comparisons between Syria today and Afghanistan in the 1980s, especially with Russia getting involved so aggressively. And there are a lot of similarities, but this time the CIA-backed warlords and savage terrorists will lose.
Why is Washington so upset at Putin? The reason is obvious to many of us who have been paying attention to events in Syria and Libya. ISIS, as the embryo of the U.S., Saudi Arabia, Turkey, UK, France, and Israel, has to be protected and nurtured. Putin is disrupting ISIS's development from a terrorist group into a Caliphate. This is one abortion that the leaders of America don't want.
In the eyes of the criminal leaders of these nations, ISIS is still in its infancy and has to be allowed to grow and mature into a large transnational state with vast territories and numerous Arab capitals under its control. President Obama, Erdogan, King Salman, and Prime Minister Netanyahu would like nothing more than to see ISIS be victorious in the battlefields in Syria and Iraq.
The plan of the pro-ISIS coalition is for the Muslim Brotherhood to rule Damascus, and ISIS, as the ruthless and barbaric foot soldiers, are helping to accomplish that goal. If they win their terrorist crimes and atrocities will be erased in history's books, while Assad will be put on a show trial at the ICC for war crimes.
The many falsehoods that are being pushed in the Western media are helping to universalize the narrative that Assad is responsible for everything that has gone wrong in Syria in the last four and a half years.
But Assad has managed to survive the onslaught from ISIS, the depletion of his army's resources, and the exodus of millions of refugees out of his country because his main allies, Russia, Iran, and Hezbollah, have not buckled.
If Gaddafi had the allies that Assad is fortunate to have then Libya wouldn't be the catastrophe it is now. If Russia and China had stood firm against NATO's aggression then Libya would be more stable today. Right now it's a jungle without a Caesar so there is no order, no peace, no law, and definitely no prosperity.
But a collapsed Syria would be a whole different level of crazy. If Assad were to be overthrown or assassinated, leading to the collapse of his regime, then the number of refugees going to Europe will triple overnight. That's a disaster that Russia will hopefully avert by hitting ISIS as often as it can.
If that disaster is not averted, if ISIS comes to rule the majority of Syria in the wake of a military victory under NATO's guidance then the possibility of genocide and even greater mass exodus in Syria is not far off.
The reality is that only five to ten percent of Syrians want to live under strict sharia ISIS rule because Syrians are naturally a multi-cultural and multi-religious people who embrace a diversity of faiths. So without government protection from ISIS's barbarism they will flee.
That's the truth that countries like the UK, France, US, Turkey, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Israel who are all supporting ISIS don't want to admit to because they want to overthrow Assad so badly. They don't want to admit mistakes, and they don't care about the humanitarian costs of their reckless, misguided, and criminal policies.