Syria Cease fire to start Feb 27 at midnight

** disclaimer **
Before anyone says anything, this is an RT.com link. If that offends you click on the red X in the top right corner and reopen with foxnews.com and stay out of this discussion (read that, discussion - not a nonsense filled anti whoever rubbishathon)

www.rt.com...

The US and Russia have adopted “Terms for a Cessation of Hostilities in Syria” and propose that a ceasefire start on Saturday at midnight Damascus time. Terror groups, such as ISIS and Al-Nusra, are not part of the truce.

So, what exactly is the point of a ceasefire if the main people fighting aren't included?
This is very strange.. yes, I know ISIS and Alnusra etc wouldn't abide by it anyway but - whats the point?

Putin noted strikes on terror targets are to continue.

so this was agreed by Obama and Putin..

So, who exactly is the ceasefire, ceasing against?

Moscow and Washington are to work together to determine which groups will not be targeted.

ahhh, so either Moscow has given up on targeting ''cia'' groups, or the US has turned its back on the people it was training..

interesting..

So tell me, who is the first country that will accuse the other of breaking the ceasefire?

Who is the going to be the first ATS member to scream bloody murder when a bomb drops?

I think, Obama and the US are being setup for a trap.

Russia and Putin know the US will try to reinforce its CIA backed rebels.. hey fella's smile to the camera while you deliver weapons and ammo to the bad guys.

perhaps the ceasefire is for Turkey to stop shelling Kurdish positions, and for the Kurds to scale back their ground operations. I figured when I read about the strike in Libya a few days ago, and the fact that Syrian forces have already chased the Daesh scallywags back to the border of their Turkish masters, that an official cessation of hostilities would come soon.

I don't think the Turks are going to give up those 200 meters or so that they took and started fortifying. They will use that as a buffer zone of stolen land, kinda like the Israelis when they steal Gaza land to increase their buffer zones.

For the most part, Syria will be old news starting in the second quarter. I have a feeling Libya is just getting started for our viewing audience though, and maybe a return to Afghanistan.

a reply to: Agit8dChop

In essence this joint statement aims at bringing about a Syrian-led political transition process, and a climate in which it can succeed - meaning it doesn't end in a caliphate.

A good thing for once.

*

originally posted by: Agit8dChop
so either Moscow has given up on targeting ''cia'' groups, or the US has turned its back on the people it was training

Both.
Looks like radical Islamists have outlived their usefulness for the U.S.

The ceasefire is mostly between Assad the powers propping him up and many of the other rebel groups. Some backed by the West, some by the Turks and some but the Arab states. A cease fire makes sense for the moment.

The US the rebels it backs have ISIS as the first priority and are planning on ending ISIS in Syria and Iraq as a military force by the end of the year. They have secondary objective of Assad. So a being able to focus on ISIS makes sense for them.

The Arab backed rebels have an Assad first and ISIS second plan. They have been taking a beating by Russia's bombings and the addition if Iraqi Shia militias added to Iran, Hezbollah, Russia, Lebanese Shia militias and what is left of the Syrian Army. The rebels have a surge of support coming from the Saudi's and their 34 nation alliance of Mid-east, African and Asian Muslims states who along with the Turks have teased at direct action but, mostly will focus on re arming, re training and supporting those rebel forces with Special Forces. So for these rebels a ceasefire makes sense as well. They can rebuild and come back bigger and stronger and have the US backed rebels and Kurds beside them for a final push on Assad.

For Russia and Assad other supporters they have given Assad some breathing room. And while he can not hold onto those gains or pretty much anything on his own, he is safe as long as the Russians and others stay to defend him definitely. For Russia pushing any further risks more aggressive actions and possibly ending up in a war with most of the Muslim countries on Earth. Not something even the US would want to try and take on. And Assad would not be able to hold it without help anyway. And Russia can not afford a decades long war in Syria. So a cease fire makes sense for them.

Mostly the Russian hope to be in a better position for a peace deal instead of being near collapse when they arrived Russia has at least some bargaining chips now. Notice I do not say Assad, he is going out one way or the other. No peace will come with him in power. So he is Russia's biggest chip. They can use him in return for some arms and trade deals with the new regime. He will either do as the Russians say or he will have an accident. The Russian might even get some arms deals with Saudi's and Arab states if they it right. Of course Iran has been getting more more angry with Russia taking over Syria and replacing them when they have been their much been bleeding much longer for Assad who would have been gone without them. So they would be happy with none of this but, neither the Russians, West or Arabs will really care what Iran has to say about it.

originally posted by: MrSpad

For Russia pushing any further risks more aggressive actions and possibly ending up in a war with most of the Muslim countries on Earth. Not something even the US would want to try and take on. And Assad would not be able to hold it without help anyway. And Russia can not afford a decades long war in Syria. So a cease fire makes sense for them.

Mostly the Russian hope to be in a better position for a peace deal instead of being near collapse when they arrived Russia has at least some bargaining chips now. Notice I do not say Assad, he is going out one way or the other. No peace will come with him in power. So he is Russia's biggest chip. They can use him in return for some arms and trade deals with the new regime. He will either do as the Russians say or he will have an accident.

I have to take my hat off for Putin ... the guy is intelligent, it's as simple as that. He's taken Russia out to become a basic superpower, out of the cold dark corners of nowhere ...

But, I think Russia would be better off with providing "aid" to the Saudi and Turkish oppositions, than to make any trade agreements with them. Russia isn't capable of changing the "climate" between Saudi/Turkey and EU/US ... that's not a possibility, not unless they take on NATO and prove, that Russia can win on that front. OR, alternatively, use a nuke to enforce the rest to comply to their demands. (And don't even say the word, that NATO or others have the option to retaliate with Nukes, that is a miscalculation on your part ... they don't, the US won't risk it, NATO can't afford it, and any other players would be signing their death sentence permanently ... Russia has a unique position, one facilitated by NATO, inadvertently).

So, I agree hostilities will continue ... Russia will continue to take the territory all the way to Raqqa, but they won't go further to Iraq is my guess. The US will be there, instead. Neither Turkey or Saudi Arabia will be happy with the deal, and they are a real threat to any permanent peace in the region. Both nations know, that they are next in the order of "regime changes".

So, there is only one way to handle them ... push the regime changes.

originally posted by: MrSpad
Notice I do not say Assad, he is going out one way or the other. No peace will come with him in power.

Your dreaming if you really think Assad will be out of their in under a decade, unless that is what you were alluding to. Also, the unspoken agreement is that USA will not help Turkey if they violate the ceasefire and go into Syria (remain there in the current fortified positions) past Saturday. That should make for some interesting Russia vs. Turkey air combat though, if Ankara has the cojones, which they do not without NATO. No USA means no NATO. Europeans may say the US does not make NATO, but without US nobody in NATO will go into a land with modern air defenses.