The Times article lists some of Russia's national interests at stake in Syria:

Moscow considers Mr. Assad’s survival crucial to protecting its interests in Syria, which include combating jihadism, preserving intelligence and military assets, and asserting that Russia is a geopolitical player in the Middle East.

Russia, with Salafi Jihadists fighting in Dagestan and up the Volga River into the heart of Russia naturally wants to defeat Saudi Arabia's Salafi Jihadists in Syria. It also wants to protect its naval base in Syria, it's only direct outlet to the Mediterranean Sea.   These are rational national interests.

The article does not mention Iran's and Qatar's mutual and conflicting interests in a pipeline through Syria without which neither can deliver natural gas from the Pfs Natural Gas field, from which each nation could deliver huge amounts of gas to Europe.   

Russia's interest is to prevent Qatar from delivering Pars gas to Europe, undercutting the price of the oil it delivers to Europe, with disastrous effect on the Russian economy.  Russia is less concerned with Iran's delivering gas to Europe, believing it can cut a deal with Iran to protect its price monopoly.  Both Iran and Qatar have proposed gas lines through Syria.  See here.

Russia has vital national interests in Syria.

The United State's only national interest is protecting the Gulf Cooperation Council's oil monopoly from competition from Iran, an interest that has long outlasted its usefulness.

 Aleppo is full of heart-rending tragedy.  Yemen is worse.  The United States can do something about Yemen; doing something about Aleppo will require great diplomatic skill.  Bombast won't cut it. 

 The Times article, below, is rational.  One hopes that our next president, whatever the campaign rhetoric, will recognize it.  I believe Mrs. Clinton does.  Friends fear she is more war-like.

The Opinion Pages | OP-ED 

Don’t Intervene in Syria

By STEVEN SIMON and JONATHAN STEVENSON OCT. 6, 2016

 Credit Anthony Russo

The cease-fire in Syria that the United States and Russia tortuously negotiated has, like the one before it, fallen apart.

The trouble began when an errant American airstrike killed some 60 Syrian government soldiers. Then, Russia resumed its disingenuous grandstanding and the Syrian government, with Russia’s support, went back to indiscriminately bombing rebel-held areas of Aleppo. On Monday, less than a month after the agreement went into effect, Secretary of State John Kerry announced that the United States would break off talks with Russia on trying to revive it.

This failure, accompanied by images of suffering in Aleppo, has inspired renewed calls for a tougher American policy in Syria from liberal hawks and traditional conservatives alike. At the vice-presidential debate on Tuesday, both the Democrat, Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, and the Republican, Gov. Mike Pence of Indiana, advocated more aggressive American action.

But the truth is that it is too late for the United States to wade deeper into the Syrian conflict without risking a major war, or, at best, looking feckless by failing to fully commit to confronting Russia and President Bashar al-Assad of Syria and then backing down. The goal now should be reducing harm, saving lives and keeping prospects for a political deal alive. Cease-fire talks between the United States and Russia, tormented though they may be, remain the best way to achieve this.

Although Russia has denied it, it is clear that Moscow considers Mr. Assad’s survival crucial to protecting its interests in Syria, which include combating jihadism, preserving intelligence and military assets, and asserting that Russia is a geopolitical player in the Middle East. Russia has unflinchingly protected the Assad government both militarily and at the United Nations Security Council.

Indeed, Mr. Assad seems to enjoy practically unlimited leverage over Russia. Despite narrowly escaping American punishment for using chemical weapons by surrendering his stockpile of deadly nerve gas and other poisons in 2013, Mr. Assad has felt free to continue using toxic commercial chlorine gas. Even though Russia moved toward political compromise when it provisionally withdrew from Syria in March, Mr. Assad was not inclined to give peace talks a serious chance. In both cases, Russia fell back in line with Mr. Assad’s defiant brutality.

There are probably limits to Moscow’s deference to Mr. Assad’s blood lust, but it is unclear what they are. This is what makes an American escalation in Syria so dangerous.

American supporters of intervention, including the vice-presidential candidates, often say that the United States should create a no-fly zone in Syria to protect civilians from Mr. Assad and Russia’s bombs. But imagine how this might work: An American warplane enforcing a no-fly zone would risk fire from a Russian-made antiaircraft battery or fighter. (Just this week Russia shipped new antiaircraft systems to Syria.)

This risk clearly worries advocates for the use of force within the Obama administration. They are said to favor increased air support for the Syrian rebels that would avoid direct confrontation with the Russians. But small-scale, targeted bombing is unlikely to change Syrian behavior, so to be effective the strikes would have to escalate. (Alternatively, ineffective strikes could be ended, but this would make the United States look incompetent.) This would ultimately lead to a violent response, which would compel the United States to retaliate against Russian and Syrian government ground targets.

As conflict spiraled and casualties increased, so would international pressure for another costly, protracted and thankless American-led ground intervention to enforce peace, which domestic opinion in the United States would not support. While Russia’s real appetite for a political solution in the Syria conflict is unclear, it is wiser to test unknown political limits than unknown military ones.

Some of those advocating more intervention in Syria believe that as the so-called indispensable power, the United States has an ethical responsibility to reduce the suffering caused by Syrian and Russian bombing of civilians. Another camp of interventionists criticizes what it sees as President Obama’s weakness, heartlessness and strategic myopia, and wants the United States to stand up to Russia and assert its intention to remain a major geopolitical player in the region.

The liberal interventionists seem to have forgotten that it is no longer the 1990s. Disastrous forays in Iraq and Libya have undermined any American willingness to put values before interests. Meanwhile, the second group of interventionists seem to have forgotten that Syria has been Moscow’s client since early in the Cold War — a situation Washington was willing to live with when the geostrategic stakes were much higher.

The United States does, in fact, have a clear Syria policy: Roll back the Islamic State by way of the air campaign and American-supported Syrian rebel forces, coordinating with Russia to the extent possible; provide extensive humanitarian support; and continue to press for a sustainable cease-fire and a negotiated political transition involving Mr. Assad’s eventual departure. It may be frustrating, but against the alternatives, it is the only sensible course of action.

Certainly, the Syrian government and Russia have manipulated the cease-fires, using them as cover for continuing offensives. Nonetheless, fragile though they have been, these deals ratchet down the overall level of violence and save lives.

The deal struck by Mr. Kerry and his Russian counterpart, Sergey V. Lavrov, for the United States and Russia to coordinate counter-jihadist operations and restrain opposition and government military activity was intended to produce a durable cease-fire, promote more effective humanitarian operations and re-energize political talks. Although it has fallen apart, the next step, unsatisfying as it may be, is to try again.

Steven Simon, a professor at Amherst College, was the National Security Council’s senior director for the Middle East and North Africa from 2011 through 2012. Jonathan Stevenson, a senior fellow at the International Institute for Strategic Studies and a fellow at Cullman Center, was the council’s director for political-military affairs for the Middle East and North Africa from 2011 to 2013

United States should provide military aid to Syrian Kurds an Erdoğan be deamed

Erdogan Says US Arming Syrian Kurdish Militia

By Daren Butler and David Dolan

Posted 2016-09-23 17:28 GMT 

(Reuters) -- Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan accused the United States of supplying more weapons to Kurdish fighters in northern Syria this week, saying Washington had delivered two plane loads of arms to what Ankara considers a terrorist group.

Erdogan's comments are likely to add to the tension between Turkey and the United States over Syria, where Washington backs the Kurdish YPG forces against Islamic State. 

Turkey is part of the U.S.-led coalition against Islamic State but views the Syrian Kurdish YPG and its PYD political wing as an extension of Kurdish militants who have waged a three-decade insurgency on its own soil. 

"If you think you can finish off Daesh with the YPG and PYD, you cannot, because they are terrorist groups too," Erdogan said in comments in New York on Thursday that were broadcast on Turkish television. Daesh is an Arabic acronym for Islamic State. 

"Three days ago America dropped two plane loads of weapons in enthusiasm for these terror groups," he said, adding he had raised the issue on Wednesday with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden who he said had no knowledge of this. 

The United States, which sees the YPG as a major strategic partner in the fight against Islamic State in Syria, air-dropped weapons to the group in the largely Kurdish town of Kobani in 2014. Erdogan said that half of those arms were seized by Islamic State fighters. 

Kobani was besieged by Islamic State for four months in late 2014 and is about 35 km (20 miles) east of the Syrian border town of Jarablus, which Turkish-backed rebels seized a month ago in an operation dubbed "Euphrates Shield". 

That operation is designed to clear Islamic State fighters from Turkey's southern border area but it has also brought Turkish and Syrian rebel forces into conflict with the YPG. 

FOCUS ON ASSAD 

Much of Turkey's focus during the six-year Syria civil war has been on the need to oust Syrian President Bashar al-Assad rather than fighting Islamic State. Its recent push into northern Syria came after steady advances by the YPG.

Erdogan, who was on a visit to the United States this week, told broadcaster MSNBC that the blame for a deadly attack on a United Nations convoy rested squarely with Damascus. 

"The killer responsible for that attack is Assad's regime itself," he said, through a translator in an interview aired on Friday. 

He called again for the creation of a "safe zone" in northern Syria, an idea that has failed to gain traction with Western allies, who say it would require a significant ground force and planes to patrol. 

The top U.S. general on Thursday said the military was considering arming the Syrian Kurdish fighters, and acknowledged the difficulty of balancing such a move with the relationship with Ankara. 

"We are in deliberation about (what) exactly to do with the Syrian Democratic Forces right now," General Joseph Dunford told a Senate hearing, referring to a U.S.-backed coalition that includes the YPG. 

When asked whether he agreed that arming the Syrian Kurds fighters presented a military opportunity for the United States to be more effective in Syria, Dunford said: "I would agree with that. If we would reinforce the Syrian Democratic Forces' current capabilities that will increase the prospects of our success in Raqqa."

Raqqa is Islamic State's stronghold in Syria. 

Additional reporting by Susan Heavey in Washington and Tuvan Gumrucku in Ankara; Editing by Ralph Boulton.

Accord:  Times of Oman

__________

Here is  Raqqa, Syria

Koerden veroveren basis Islamitische Staat in noordelijk Syrië - NRC

The Battle for Raqqa in Syria and the coming battle for Mosel in Iraq are critical:  together they would amount to a defeat of the Islamic State.

From Turkey and Iraq's standpoint those victories would be major defeats in their campaigns against Kurds.

Turkey and Iraq have foolishly decided that the Kurds are their enemies.

The Kurds, who were promised an independent Kurdistan by the French, were assigned to Syria, Turkey, and Iraq, where they were treated abominably.  They are now poised to obtain partial freedom.  The jubilation is evident in the  enthusiasm with which they establish a free, multi-ethnic, non-sectarian, feminist state where no such state has ever existed in all of recorded history.

All freedom-loving peoples of the world should support them.

__________

Oman is ruled by a Greek philosopher-king, prescribed in Plato's Republic, as the ideal form of government.  Though a member of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Oman opposed the Saudi-United Arab Emirates' Yemen genocide on its helpless people, the only member of the council to refrai; and has done its best to end the genocide and bring peace to Syria.

Oman reminds me of Honolulu, if we were ruled by a philosopher-king, and if we had oil instead of tourists.

__________

Asyrans have lived in central Near East since the 25 Century BCE.  They have no empire now, and their great buildings and statues have been largely destroyed.  Per Wikipedia:

Islamic Terrorism (2003–present)

 

An Assyrian wedding in Mechelen, Belgium.

In recent years, particularly since 2014, the Assyrians in northern Iraq and north east Syria have become the target of unprovoked Islamic terrorism. As a result, Assyrians have taken up arms, alongside other groups (such as the Kurds, Turcomans and Armenians) in response to unprovoked attacks by Al Qaeda, ISIL, Nusra Front, and other Wahhabi terrorist Islamic fundamentalist groups. In 2014 Islamic terrorists of ISIS attacked Assyrian towns and villages in the Assyrian homelands of northern Iraq and north east Syria. Assyrians forced from their homes in cities such as Mosul have had their houses and possessions stolen, and given over to ISIS terrorists or Sunni Arabs.[67]

In addition, the Assyrians have suffered seeing their ancient indigenous heritage desecrated, in the form of Bronze Age and Iron Age monuments and archaeological sites, as well as numerous Assyrian churches and monasteries,[67] being systematically vandalised and destroyed by ISIS. These include the ruins of Nineveh, Kalhu (Nimrud, Assur, Dur-Sharrukin and Hatra).[68][69]

Assyrians in both northern Iraq, north east Syria and also central and southern Iraq[70][71][72] have responded by forming armed Assyrian militias to defend their territories,[73] and despite being heavily outnumbered and outgunned have had success in driving ISIS from Assyrian towns and villages, and defending others from attack.[74][75] Armed Assyrian militias have also joined forces with other peoples persecuted by ISIS and Sunni Muslim extremists, including; the Kurds, Turcoman, Yezidis, Syriac-Aramean Christians, Shabaks, Armenian Christians, Kawilya, Mandeans, Circassians and Shia Muslim Arabs and Iranians.

Wahhabi have much to answer for.

SEP

18

Kurdish participation in the Syrian Peace Talks 

The view from Erbil, capital of Iraqi Kurdistan:

From the article:

Russia stresses importance of including Syrian Kurds in Geneva peace talks - ARA News 

Kurds [who are the most effective fighting force opposing  the Islamic State and who have been excluded from the Geneva please talks] should be included in the intra-Syrian peace talks in Geneva, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov said on Friday.

• • •

“Some   members [of the ISSG] exert strong pressure, because they consider the PYD to be terrorists’ supporters or an unnecessary element, as Kurdish representatives from other political groups [Kurdish National Council] are taking part in the Geneva talks,” he said. 

• • •

Although Russian-Turkish relations have drastically improved after the failed military coup on July 15, Russia did not change its stance towards the Syrian Kurdish forces that have been the most effective element against ISIS. 

According to Akhmetov, there are several reasons Russia is still supporting the Kurds despite of Moscow’s new relations with Turkey. 

“First to not lose their support completely, and secondly to not provoke them to make any reckless steps like announcing secession from Syria,” he said. 

__________

The United States has taken contradictory positions on the YPG's joining the peace talks.  It formally opposes participation, out of deference to Turkey; and it funds YPG's fighters is Syria, over fierce Turkish objection. 

Erdoğan's government does not currently deserve international recognition (see Turkey Formally Arrested 16,000 People In Wake Of Coup Attempt | Huffington Post; Turkey plans to build dozens of new jails after post-coup crackdown - The Washington Post).  Saudi Arabia's dream of a Wahhabi state in Syria is a pipe dream -- to Syrians, it and to most people it is a nightmare. 

The United States should join Russia in supporting the YPG's inclusion in the Geneva peace talks.

 _________

After many months of work and cooperation with many Kurds both inside and outside Syria, YASA, the Kurdish Center for Legal Studies & Consultancy, has created a map of Western Kurdistan.YASA Releases Syrian Kurdistan Map 'Western Kurdistan': First stage

_________

Syrian Kurdish fighters

War is bad -- except when it is fought by an oppressed people against a brutal oppressor. 

Then, whatever the cost, the human spirit sings at Heaven's gate.. . . .  While the joyous high lasts.

Saudi Arabia and genocide in Yemen: the dead horse still has legs

Yemen's genocide is reported in many newspapers world-wide.  The United States loses respect, word-wide, as it continues to provide Saudi Arabia with cluster bombs and logistical support.

The New York Times

U.N. Condemns Airstrikes That Killed 106 in Yemen 

By NICK CUMMING-BRUCEMARCH 18, 2016 

The site of a Saudi-led coalition airstrike on a sewing workshop in Sana, Yemen, in February.CreditMohammed Huwais/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

GENEVA — The top United Nations human rights official condemned the Saudi-led coalition [For information on the participants in the coalition see Members of Saudi-led coalition in Yemen their contributions - Business Insider] fighting in Yemen on Friday, citing repeated attacks on civilian targets in airstrikes, including an attack on a crowded village market this week that killed 106 people. 

United Nations officials who went to the site of the attack on Tuesday in Hajjah Province found that airstrikes there had killed 106 people, including 24 children, making them the deadliest episode in the coalition’s yearlong intervention. 

The Saudis are backing the contested government of President Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi against rebels, known as the Houthis, who are aligned with former President Ali Abdullah Saleh. The Saudis have been pressuring the United States for support in the conflict, saying that their archrival, Iran, is backing the Houthis. [An odd and misleading statement.  See comments following 

this article.  For an article in Foreign Affairs Magazine opposing the Saudi clim that Ian backsthe Houthi, see  Iran not to hlame for Yemen] 

United Nations officials recorded the names of 96 people who died in the strikes, and they found 10 more bodies that were burned beyond recognition. An additional 40 people were wounded, “but that may be a low estimate,” said Rupert Colville, a spokesman for the high commissioner for human rights, Zeid Ra’ad al-Hussein. 

The Saudi-led coalition has repeatedly denied striking civilian targets during operations against Houthi rebels and affiliated forces. But United Nations officials said they had found no evidence of any military targets near the scene of the airstrikes, and Mr. al-Hussein said that may amount to a violation of international law.

Indiscriminate attacks by Houthi forces and their allies have also caused civilian casualties and could also qualify as international crimes, he said.

The coalition airstrikes came three weeks after its aircraft bombed another market, this time in a district of Sana, the capital, killing at least 39 civilians. The latest attack pushed the number of civilian casualties to close to 9,000, the United Nations said, with 3,218 killed and 5,778 injured. 

“It would seem that the coalition is responsible for twice as many civilian casualties as all other forces put together,” Mr. al-Hussein said, in a sharp rebuttal of the coalition’s denials. He was alluding not only to Houthis and the militias fighting with them but also to groups backing Al Qaeda and the Islamic State. 

The coalition has “hit markets, hospitals, clinics, schools, factories, wedding parties and hundreds of private residences in villages, towns and cities,” Mr. al-Hussein said, and it continues to do so “with unacceptable regularity.” 

At best, the coalition’s distinction between civilian and military targets was “woefully inadequate,” Mr. al-Hussein added, and “at worst we are possibly looking at the commission of international crimes by the coalition.”

 United States' and Great Britain's contribution to Yemen Genocide.

See Saudi Arabian-led intervention in Yemen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The United States provided intelligence and logistical support, including search-and-rescue for downed coalition pilots.[7] It also accelerated the sale of weapons to coalition states.[93] US and Britain have deployed their military personnel in the command and control centre responsible for Saudi-led air strikes on Yemen, having access to lists of targets.[94][95][96]

The Saudi ambassador to the United Nations, Abdallah al-Mouallim is a businessman, not a professional ambassador. 

  
Watch as he struggles to defend the indefensible Saudi bombardment of Yemen:

What does Saudi Arabia want for Yemen and Syria?   - Al Jazeera English

Two of the many images of he bombing, on google images:

Images of the thousands of  Yemeni in the Yemen capitol, protesting the bombing, many holding up signs supporting Abudahah Saleh, the billionaire former president  of Yemen, now a principal financier of the Revolution.