Civil War in Syria

[ingemann]

Let me get out the world's smallest violin...

Those 80+ troops are part of a force which defend several hundred thousands civilians from ISIS.

[ingemann]

Let me get out the world's smallest violin...

Those 80+ troops are part of a force which defend several hundred thousands civilians from ISIS.

Who have killed just as many, and spend more time fighting the main people who actually fight ISIS than ISIS themselves.

These soldiers defend the Deir ez-Zor besieged (enclave). This is like celebrating the death of Russian soldier in St. Petersburg while the Germans besieged it, because Russian troops behaved badly on other fronts. Many of these soldiers are likely conscripts, and defend a city, those (Sunni) population wil be butchered in the thousands (because they belong to a tribe hostile to ISIS) if ISIS wins, while the soldiers will likely be tortured, raped and murdered if they're taken alive by ISIS.

So unless you're really into the snuff porn videos ISIS produce, this is potential a pretty horrible thing. Of course in a greater political context this city matters very little. Assad defend it to keep a stronghold in east Syria and because it would send a wrong signal, if he let a city loyal to the regime fall in ISIS hands.

[ingemann]

So what's the deal with the Raqqa offensive?  Are the rebels going to knock out IS just so that they can in turn be knocked out by Assad?  Or is there some viable path forward for a Raqqa that is held by rebel groups in the long term (not IS or Assad)?

No to all it.

The whole Raqqa offensive is a excuse for Turks to set up a territory in Syria, which will ensure the Kurds doesn't connect Afrin with the rest of Rojava. Unless it gives the Turks a excuse to attack the Kurds, they won't go after Raqqa.

[ingemann]

This could actually work out. If the Kurds break the back of ISIS by taking Raqqa, that gives solidifies the Kurds and potential gives forces non-Baathists and Western interests a potential solid leg to stand on. It will probably fall through but the Kurds seem to be the type of people we that we can have a lot less guilt dealing through. The only problem of course is Turkey but from what I have seen, the Kurds seem to have more western values than the Turks or anyone else there.

The Kurds don't want Raqqa, the only reason they made noises about was to keep their American sponsors happy, and outside some easy targets, the Kurds will likely avoid further expansion. The reason being the Turkish threat against further Kurdish expansion to the west and the American support of the Turkish threats.

[ingemann]

I've heard that the Al-Nusra Front (or something like that) is making a comeback in the West.

Al Nusra or whatever they call themselves this week (Tahrir al-Sham) have always been strong in Idlib, the reason it haven't end the other rebel in the region, was because they served as a "moderate" "alternative" for the Gulf Countries and Turkey to fund. But with the losses elsewhere, the fall in foreign funding and the influx of rebels from enclaves which Assad allow them to leave, Al Nusra have lost the reason not to end the other rebel groups, which in general are deeply incompetent and those fighters are barely qualified to be cannon fodder.

What do ths mean in a greater context? They're losing and they're losing badly, I would be surprised if the rebel survives to 2019.

[ingemann]

I think the Ba'athist regime will stay, but it would be for the best if the Assad figurehead is allowed to shuffle on. You can't really lead a country when a significant portion of the population think you are literally Hitler.

Why can't you lead a country? Hitler literally managed to do it until the day he died.  If Assad actually were a figurehead, he'd have been eased from power back in the days before the Russians  went all in and it looked like the best the regime could hope for was a stalemate.

It's more complex, Assad have real power, but it's very much limited by other actors in the Regime. What we need to understand about the Assad family is that they're a compromise candidate. The Assad represents the air force, which are dominate by the Sunni middle class, these knew that the Alawite and pretty much every other minority group would start fight to the last man to avoid a Sunni leader of Syria, so when the air force couped Salah Jadid in 1970, they used Hafez Assad to show, they didn't want to establish a Sunni dominated state, and this was accepted.

So the Assad family are important, and Bashar Assad is pretty much the only possible choice in that family, because the rest of the family are either in exile (his uncles and cousins), a mad dog (his brother), stupid thugs (the extended family) or underage. So in case Assad suddenly died, they had to find another compromise candidate (Suheil al-Hassan would be the most likely candidate, when we look at the Regime from outside, which is likely the reason he seems to avoid politics with all his might).

[ingemann]

East Ghouta almost fully liberated from the rebel forces.

That's one word you could use, I suppose.

I in general doesn't use it, mostly to avoid dcomment like this. But honestly it's the correct word to use. It wasn't freedom loving freedom fighters who hold East Ghouta, it was a mix of genodical Islamists and bandits, who have had controlled over it. So compared to that I guess the people have been liberated, because while it's a repressive Regime which replaced the Rebels, it was still vastly preferable.

[ingemann]

East Ghouta almost fully liberated from the rebel forces.

That's one word you could use, I suppose.

Ah, the clean, unique smell of freedom...
Wait, no. It's actually sarin nerve gas

Maybe we should also just accept any news we get from Palestinians as the truth without checking up on it.

[ingemann]

Once again, the free world has failed to protect Syria, just as we failed to protect Ukraine, Georgia, Kurdistan, Libya, Egypt, and so many more.

Hillary Clinton would have.

Yes which was a pretty good argument in favour of Trump.

Iraq before the American intervention was home to several ancient religious communities, the Christian community are believed to have been reduced to 1/3 before the American intervention, while the Mandaeans have pretty much disappeared and their uprooted diaspora may disappear in our lifetime. A American intervention in Syria would have had worse results, as Gulf countries would support the worst possible version of Islam and USA would have givewn them a free reign, because for unknown reasons the American establishment are in love with the worst versions of Islam.

The Syrian people can thank God daily that it wasn't Clinton who won the American election.

[ingemann]

Once again, the free world has failed to protect Syria, just as we failed to protect Ukraine, Georgia, Kurdistan, Libya, Egypt, and so many more.

Hillary Clinton would have.

I'm not sure. A no-fly zone may have provoked Putin and lead to a broader military confrontation. Neither is or has been the removal of Assad a real option. Don't get me wrong, he's a terrible dictator, but if he was overthrown, we'd likely to see ISIS and other radicals taking over large portions of the country, with thousands of deaths, enslaving of women and many other cruel things.

I'm talking about back in 2012, at which time there was no ISIS, and the Free Syrian Army led the rebels. In 2017, she would have made some noises but ultimately done nothing significant, as is right.

The Free Syrian Army never existed at least not in the context you talk about, there was no ideological, political or military coherence, it was a random mix of bandits, tribal militias, Islamists, Al Qaeda and proto-ISIS with a few of the more acceptable groups representing them abroad.

The Siege of Aleppo as example began in 2012 with a rural btribal militias invading the city, the working class eastern suburbs rose up in support, while the western Sunni and Christian middle class city centre and suburbs stayed loyal, the "FSA" then looted the northern industrial areas from machinery, which was sold to across the border in Turkey. FSA in Aleppo stayed disunited and dominated by these tribal militias.

In Raqqa other tribal militias took also power before ISIS, here "FSA" established Jizya taxes on the local Christians (who when decided to leave, because they knew what way it was going) and in general established a reign of terror, which made the locals welcome ISIS as liberators, when they took power and stopped the random violence, plundering and murdering.

In the Idlib province Al Qaeda (Al Nusra/Tahrir al-Sham) was welcomed for similar reason, because they established weak state-like structures which "FSA" had "failed" to set up (in reality, there was no wish to set them up, as it would limit local "FSA" warlords ability to act as they pleased).

A American intervention in 2012 would have been disaster, it would have been Libya again, just with more genocide and slavery.

[ingemann]

Syrians forces shot down a Russian jet while Israel was dropping bombs on Iranians and we didn't talk about it?

Syria and the Russians should just down every aircraft the Israelis send into Syrian airspace.

Israel has no fu**ing business in Syria and stay the fu** out of there.

The only legitimate way for them to attack is if something is going on really close to their border, otherwise they should stop meddling there.

Israel has about as much right to be in Syrian airspace as all the other foreign powers, including Russia and the United States.  If you're going to be demand that Israel stay out of Syria, that should apply to everyone else.  

Russia are there on invitation from the legal government of Syria, USA are far less justified to there, but they can at least justify their presence in eastern Syria on the fact that ISIS declared war on them.

Israel are there because Israel are run by drooling morons who buy their own Kool-Aid. Early Israel was run by very intelligent and political savy people, who had a good idea of what they could get away with and was great at propaganda, but after several victories over the world's most incompetent armies, modern Israel politicians have begun to buy their own propaganda, which make they take decisions, which badly thought out and disasterous for Israel.

The Syrian Regime was happy with a cold war with Israel, the Syrian-Israeli border was stable. The Syrians supported Hezbollah, but that had nothing to do with Israel, but because Syria sought control over Lebanon, Hezbollah also care little about Israel outside the fact that their hostile relationship with Israel gives them a excuse to not demobilise. Since the last disasterous conflict with Hezbollah, which only ended because Hezbollah was forced to end the conflict by the other Lebanese parties/militias (who Hezbollah fear far more than IDF), the Lebanese border have been silent too.

But as the Syrian Civil War broke out the Bibi the Mouth Breather saw a opportunity to redo the same mistake as Israel did in the Lebanese Civil War. Israel decided to push for the Syrian Civil War becoming never ending to secure their northern border. This build on a very badly thought out analysis. Because the result of the conflict in Lebanon was the birth of Hezbollah, which may be the best military force in the Middle East (IDF included), in Syria Hezbollah was invited in by the Regime, and have been used to remake Syrian minority militias in its own image. So Israel risk the birth of a new bigger Hezbollah-like group in Syria the longer the conflict last, a group which would be a far larger threat toward Israel than Hezbollah are.

[ingemann]

Israel has about as much right to be in Syrian airspace as all the other foreign powers, including Russia and the United States.  If you're going to be demand that Israel stay out of Syria, that should apply to everyone else.

Technically false.

Explain.  We all know Russia has been effectively serving as Bashar al-Assad's air force. 

Exactly, they are there with government permission.

I'm glad you two think Russia should never have invaded Georgia or Ukraine.

It shouldn't.

[ingemann]

The Syrians supported Hezbollah, but that had nothing to do with Israel, but because Syria sought control over Lebanon, Hezbollah also care little about Israel outside the fact that their hostile relationship with Israel gives them a excuse to not demobilise.

you said some other crazy sh**t, but this is by the far the craziest.  Hezbollah had nothing to do with Israel?  Are you kidding?  Then, in the same funking sentence, you say "their hostile relationsip with Israel"?  What the hell man?  Which is it?  Does Hezbollah have a hostile relationship with Israel or do they have nothing to do with it?  It can't be both.

Obviously the answer is hostile.  link

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That's pretty much the problem with you entire perspective in the Middle East, it build on the fact that you're obsessed with Israel, and think the entire world orbit the things you obsess over, and you fail to see why the different actors acts as they do.

Hezbollah want to control Lebanon, they don't care about Israel, but they gain their legitimacy from the fact they defended Lebanon against the Israeli invasion and occupation. Which means that by having a antagonistic relationship with Israel, they can argue, they can't disarm, because that would open Lebanon up to Israeli dominance and invasions.

Hezbollah don't give a f**k about the Palestinians, who they despise, both as a hostile actor in Lebanon and because the Palestinians are mostly Sunni, who have speand the last millenium lording it over Shia (the sect Hezbollah represent).

This is pretty obvious for anyone, who spend a moment to read up on the issue, but I guess it easier to pretend to be a cynical realpolitik observer and not spend a moment getting the fact, that foreign actors have interest, which have nothing to do with you or your obsessions.

[ingemann]

What do you think will happen to the Kurds in Syria under Rojava after the Government defeats the rebels?

I suspect that it’s Turkey Rojava should fear not the Regime. But if Turkey doesn’t crush them, Assad will likely negotiate a deal where the Kurds get some degree of autonomy. They’re simply a too useful future tool to be destroyed by the Regime.