Obama rules out ground troops for Syria

London, April 24 (IANS) US President Barack Obama has ruled out deploying US ground troops in Syria and said military efforts alone cannot solve the country’s problems.

“It would be a mistake for the US or Great Britain… to send in ground troops and overthrow the (Syrian President Bashar al-) Assad regime,” he told the BBC on Saturday night.

He also said he did not think the Islamic State (IS) militant group would be defeated in his last nine months of office.

Obama, who was in London on a three-day visit, said Syria was a “heart-breaking situation of enormous complexity”.

Obama said the US-led coalition would continue “to strike IS targets in places like Raqqa and to try to isolate those portions of the country and lock down those portions of the country that are sending foreign fighters into Europe”.

But he said the international community would have to continue to apply pressure to all parties, including Russia, Iran and moderate opposition groups, “to sit down at the table and try to broker a transition”.

Obama criticized those countries whose parliaments had not approved of action in Syria but still “want the US to do something about it”. He said: “You can’t have it both ways.”

Talks in Geneva between the Syrian government and opposition delegations will continue into next week.


  1. America will have to invade Syria and get rid of Bashar Al Assad and install a popular person as its leader and the government of that leader has to be backed till stability returns.

    No war is won just by air strikes and naval bombardment. Ground troops have to be used. If America is not willing to commit ground troops, then they can get the job done by Pakistanis and they should be paid on job basis, rather than being paid in advance. Pakistanis will take the money and run away.

  2. @Nelson,
    Your suggestion of US troops invading Syria and install different leader may be a good idea, but the past experience in Afghanistan and Iraq proved that this strategy doesn’t work. Middle East situation is very complex. US has already lost $2 trillions and thousands of soldiers in past two wars in an effort to bring the democracy and peace. In return, US got only “Salyanathill” from them and others.

    It’s a cock fight in the Middle East. Peace will come only after both the cocks are either seriously injured or dead.

    • US has already lost $ 2 Trillion and thousands of soldiers past two wars in an effort to bring THE democracy and peace” – Lawrence

      You kidding me, Lawrence? The US “lost” trillions because of US ‘mis-adventurism’! (Oh well, in Kannada, it is called Adhikaprasanga). And you call them ‘wars”? Can you begin to imagine HOW it all started – some IDIOT sitting in London & another, sniffing some perfume in France dreamed of the Sykes-Picot Agreement – should the ‘Ottoman Empire’ be defeated! A simple line resulted from the Agreement (1916)! And LOOK….. now….! (Oh, the designs on oil go as long back to the start of the 1st World War). Need help? Ask me, pl.

      The London boys had no clue about the Middle East. And as usual, the frogs have no clue about anything even now. And then some 75+ years later, some TX cowboy Prez decided he needed FREE butane for his cigar lighter! And lo… you saddle-up Bessie, Tessie… ride off. You guys thought it would be ‘shock & awe’ or ’90 minutes at Entebbe’?

      So, just LOOK at “THE” peace and “THE democracy” prevailing in the Greater Levant NOW!

      Rodeo time is LONG over, sir. The US created the Al Qaeda & ISIS monster. Now, go… finish off unfinished business. Or, do the ‘boys’ have ‘nervosa-maximosa’?

  3. For over 15 years the US is fighting a war on “terror”, and I am still to figure out how the most formidable fighting force in the world i.e the US Army, is fighting this war with an abstract enemy (terror).

    And now to add to confusion there has been talk for quite some time on how to overthrow an elected head of state on the insistence of the Saudi ruling family, who have appointed themselves as rulers in a Kingdom whre there is zero human rights.

  4. Dear Mr. Lawrence,

    I agree with your views.

    As regards Saudi Arabia, it is an amazing country, flush with oil money but with a medieval mindset. China, Saudi Arabia and North Korea are the countries with no human rights at all.

    In Saudi Arabia, there are no cinemas, no intermingling of males and females. No dancing, parties, alcohol, bars, churches, temples and other things that we take for granted in civilized societies and countries. However, the Saudi royal family are enthusiastic in building or funding mosques in other countries.

    The royal family that used to number over 4,000 in 1977 and 1978 and must be much more today, enjoy the cream and the men folk indulge in all vices and the religious police do not stop them. In return, the religious police have unfettered powers over other people.

Leave a Reply