Syria under Bashir Assad (closed end 2014)

[Bill Moore]

CrowBat, I agree we have information asymmetry here, but I'm not saying who is at the disadvantage. While not my intent, I suspect this post is going to make you want to pull your hair out. You may have a much better understanding of nuances of who's who and what group is more dominant, but there is little in the media to support your counter arguments, at least as I understand them. It does seem based on your comments I am misreading some of your posts, so my apologies if I'm misconstruing your intent. Using media sources I'm going to attempt to make a link between AQ affiliated groups in Libya and AQ affiliated groups in in Syria.

I'll will digress to Libya briefly, and then back to Syria. I'll caveat the following statements with first I agree with your comment that this is all gray, never black and white. I'll add it is my observation (my perception) that the relationships between these groups and its members change frequently. It is a bloody kaleidoscope, and if you focus on day to day reporting instead of the trends it is beyond comprehension. I think the trends are currently positive for AQ, but I also think AQ will pull defeat out of the jaws of victory in short order like they always do because the bottom line is no one really wants their form of oppressive governance. It still leaves open the question in my pea brain on how they're so successful in exploiting these existing conflicts and rapidly gaining a dominant position, even if it is ephemeral.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/201...-group-leaders

The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group – from al-Qaida to the Arab spring
The Libyan anti-Gaddafi group with past links to al-Qaida has been the focus of British intelligence interest for 20 years

Founded in 1990 in eastern Libya and accused of attempting to kill Gaddafi three times – according to unconfirmed claims with help from MI6 – the LIFG was effectively defeated on its home turf by 1998. Its cadres fled first to Sudan and Afghanistan and Iraq where hundreds joined al-Qaida. It was officially disbanded in 2010.

Other top ex-LIFG figures remain in al-Qaida. Its chief of operations, Atiyah Abd al-Rahman, a Libyan, was killed two weeks ago in a CIA drone strike. His likely successor, Abu Yahya al-Libi, is also Libyan.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...eda-links.html

Libyan rebel commander admits his fighters have al-Qaeda links
Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime.

In my opinion there are clear links between many Libyans and Al-Qaeda, and some Libyans actually became part of Al-Qaeda core. Now I'll transition to linking them to Syria.

The following article on AQ is actually worthy of its own thread, so I'll probably start one focused on this article without focusing on Syria, but a couple of excerpts to facilitate the promised transition from this article are helpful.

http://www.eurasiareview.com/2612201...-qaeda-primer/

The Three Versions Of Al Qaeda: A Primer

Ansar al Sharia in Libya: 2012 – 2013

In the wake of Muammar al Gaddafi’s fall, the security vacuum in Libya not only enabled the rise of AQIM in the Sahel but also freed previously suppressed extremist elements in the country. Ansar al Sharia, a grassroots extremist group sharing the name of AQAP’s insurgent organization in Yemen, emerged in the former bastions of eastern Libya previously home to the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) and known for supplying numerous foreign fighters to Iraq. The group rose to international prominence after being connected to the 2012 attack on the U.S. embassy in Benghazi, killing a U.S. ambassador, among others. The group has been challenged locally but appears a natural conduit for al Qaeda activities in Libya.

Jabhat al Nusra and the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham in Syria: 2011 – 2013

No battlefield presents a greater opportunity to al Qaeda than Syria. Syria’s revolution has endured for two years allowing a small group of al Qaeda-connected extremists to emerge as a dominant force against the Assad regime. To date, the Syrian jihad has likely produced the largest migration of foreign fighters in history, eclipsing the supplies of both Afghanistan in the 1980s and Iraq and Afghanistan during the 2000s. Jabhat al Nusra initiated the first jihadist effort in Syria but has since been matched by a creeping al Qaeda in Iraq that has challenged both Nusra and al Qaeda’s leader Zawahiri by creating the Islamic State of Iraq and al Sham (ISIS) in an attempt to take control of the jihad in Syria. This public rift provides the only buffer to a jihadist movement unmet by Western counterterrorism efforts.

http://www.longwarjournal.org/threat...ar_al_sh_1.php

Social Media Jihad: Ansar al Sharia Libya's new Twitter feed

Ansar al Sharia Libya, the al Qaeda-linked group that was involved in the Sept. 11, 2012 terrorist attack in Benghazi, has a new Twitter feed. The Twitter page, which can be found here, was apparently launched in the last 24 hours. The group announced its new Twitter presence on its Facebook page.

SITE reports:

Although the Facebook posts did not document the content of the speeches or reading materials passed out at the event, the group's past publications and statements have resolutely rejected democracy and praised al Qaeda. Furthermore, evidence suggests that the group is helping to funnel foreign fighters to Syria where they link up with al Qaeda's affiliates there.

http://freebeacon.com/u-s-al-qaeda-l...-rebel-groups/

U.S.: Al Qaeda-linked Group Behind Benghazi Attack Trains Jihadists for Syrian Rebel Groups

Ansar al-Sharia running training camps in Benghazi and Darnah

U.S. intelligence agencies believe Libya has produced more jihadist rebels for the Syrian conflict than any other outside nation. Some 20 percent of foreign jihadists in Syria came from Libya and that several hundred are currently in the country.

Over 100 Libyans were reported killed in Syrian fighting for such rebel groups as Al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, Umma Brigade, Muhajirin Brigade, and Ahrar al-Sham, an Al-Nusra offshoot.

Now some good news as you pointed out above.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25606370

Al-Qaeda-linked Isis under attack in northern Syria

Isis is fighting Free Syrian Army groups as well as the Islamic Front, a coalition of Syrian rebel factions which also wants to build an Islamic state in Syria.

Other rebel groups say Isis has attempted to hijack their struggle for its own ends.

This makes perfect sense since the U.S. and other nations will put pressure on foreign donors to limit support to the resistance if it is perceived to be linked to, or dominated by AQ. Killing off the ISIS operatives in Syria may open the flood gates for effective military aid to the resistance.

I'll end with a commentary from the Washington Post today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...df2_story.html

The slow-motion conflagration around Syria

STATE DEPARTMENT officials have been warning for nearly two years that Syria’s civil war, if not brought to a prompt end, could blossom into a regional conflagration that consumes Iraq and Lebanon and threatens vital U.S. interests. Their predictions have been coming true, but in slow motion, enabling those who hope to ignore the growing danger — notably President Obama — to remain complacent.

This week brought another potential wake-up call, in the form of a disturbing escalation of terrorist violence in both countries. In Iraq, al-Qaeda launched an offensive to take control of two cities, Fallujah and Ramadi, that U.S. troops sacrificed heavily to clear of terrorists between 2004 and 2008. In Lebanon, a car bomb exploded in a Hezbollah-controlled suburb of Beirut just days after a prominent critic of the Shiite movement was assassinated in another bombing.

[carl]

It still leaves open the question in my pea brain on how they're so successful in exploiting these existing conflicts and rapidly gaining a dominant position, even if it is ephemeral.

I wonder if is mostly an effective PR campaign that allows them to scratch the itches of three groups of people, the rich Gulf Arabs who feel guilty about not being pious enough, the frustrated young men who want some action but also need to feel pious when they get it and the wild eyed true believers who again need to feel pious. AQ it seems to me relies very heavily on the idea that supporting them make one more Muslim than thou. That self-conferred religious imprimatur is vital to their success. It underlies everything. If they didn't have it, they would just be another group of soreheads trying to gain power.

When they do get power for a time in a local place, that image they rely on falls away quickly. Beheading people for eating the wrong kind of salad tends to sour the locals on their rule. The reality quickly overshadows the promise and they get kicked out, or have been and hopefully will be again. But even if that happens, that image of piety is still there and so the money and the men keep coming.

I hope they will get kicked out again. But is it certain they will be? That is really a rhetorical question but there have been some regimes whose rule is as bad as that of AQ would probably be that have lasted a long time, the Kim dynasty in North Korea being a good example.

[Bill Moore]

I wonder if is mostly an effective PR campaign that allows them to scratch the itches of three groups of people, the rich Gulf Arabs who feel guilty about not being pious enough, the frustrated young men who want some action but also need to feel pious when they get it and the wild eyed true believers who again need to feel pious. AQ it seems to me relies very heavily on the idea that supporting them make one more Muslim than thou. That self-conferred religious imprimatur is vital to their success. It underlies everything. If they didn't have it, they would just be another group of soreheads trying to gain power.

When they do get power for a time in a local place, that image they rely on falls away quickly. Beheading people for eating the wrong kind of salad tends to sour the locals on their rule. The reality quickly overshadows the promise and they get kicked out, or have been and hopefully will be again. But even if that happens, that image of piety is still there and so the money and the men keep coming.

I hope they will get kicked out again. But is it certain they will be? That is really a rhetorical question but there have been some regimes whose rule is as bad as that of AQ would probably be that have lasted a long time, the Kim dynasty in North Korea being a good example.

I think your hypothesis has some merit. I their narrative/ideology has a powerful attraction, and it doesn't hurt to actually have a bad government or occupying powers to leverage your narrative against. If they weren't such a simple bunch of thugs who with very limited religious education in most cases who felt entitled to pass judgment and impose cruel punishments for the stupidest and pettiness of perceived wrong doings they might even become effective. Instead they keep repeating the same dumb mistakes, and people begin to see them for who they really are. I don't want to champion Pakistan here, but when the Pakistani Taliban took over a relatively peaceful and moderate part of Pakistan and imposed their stupidity upon that population the population was aching for the military to toss them out. A Pakistani military officer said that was the plan to begin with, let the people see whose these Taliban really are for a couple of weeks, and then they'll assist the government tossing them out which they did.

As to your rhetorical question, who knows. I am seeing a lot of reports of the locals in Fallujah preparing to fight Al-Qaeda there. While they have no love affair with the Shia government it appears they hate AQ even more which is telling.

[ODB]

I am playing catch up on Syria and Iraq as my focus has been elsewhere for some time now; however I would like to pose a few questions to those who have been focused on the situations.

My first questions involve a couple of names who have not been mentioned in some time: Mahammad Yunis al-Ahmad (MYA) and 'Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri. I wonder how much of a hand these two have in the fighting taking place in Syria and Iraq? I pose they are more involved in Iraq than Syria due to their ties with the Assad regime and having been in hiding in Syria for years. Do they simply want to reinstate the Ba'ath Party in Iraq and/or was there a falling out with the Assad regime? Doing some research on Google al-Douri (thought to have died) has reemerged http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rump-card.html. Interesting he plays on the "Persian" aspect. MYA has remained out of the spotlight as I cannot find any recent open source information regarding MYA's activities. I cannot overlook these two as having a role in the current situation in both countries and would appreciate other's opinions regarding their role.

I ultimately wonder who the wizard behind the curtain is playing puppet master in Syria and the desired end-state?

Lastly, regarding the reemergence of AQ I pose this question, has AQ grown that strong or is it the USG simply applying labels which are incorrect. I have seen this many times over the years, the mislabeling of groups or individuals to meet agendas.

[CrowBat]

So, the stuff is 'in the box', early, so here few additional things...

CrowBat, I agree we have information asymmetry here, but I'm not saying who is at the disadvantage. While not my intent, I suspect this post is going to make you want to pull your hair out. You may have a much better understanding of nuances of who's who and what group is more dominant, but there is little in the media to support your counter arguments, at least as I understand them.

There is usually next to nothing or only directly contradicting information to mine, 'in the media'.

If you like a classic example: when I co-authored Iranian F-14 Units in Combat, some 12-13 years back, people couldn't ridicule me enough because 'everybody knows that Iranian Tomcats are non-operational since 1979'. Guess that's life, and so I ceased pulling my hair long, long ago. Trust me, the life is better then. ;-)

...It is a bloody kaleidoscope, and if you focus on day to day reporting instead of the trends it is beyond comprehension. I think the trends are currently positive for AQ, but I also think AQ will pull defeat out of the jaws of victory in short order like they always do because the bottom line is no one really wants their form of oppressive governance. It still leaves open the question in my pea brain on how they're so successful in exploiting these existing conflicts and rapidly gaining a dominant position, even if it is ephemeral.

Yes, it's a 'bloody' kaleidoscope, in all shades of grey. It's a very grey zone, primarily because - and despite strenuous attempts to present itself as such - AQ is no homogenous group. Actually, it's easier for them to bunch together various idiots from Western Europe, than 'originals' from such different places like Algeria, Egypt and Pakistan...

Though, certain things always depend on your definitions of words 'successful', 'rapidly' etc.

In my opinion there are clear links between many Libyans and Al-Qaeda, and some Libyans actually became part of Al-Qaeda core.

No doubt about 'some Libyans' - including a few from the LIFG. But, not the 'LIFG' (as such).

This makes perfect sense since the U.S. and other nations will put pressure on foreign donors to limit support...

Doubt the US can do anything about this. It's not only about 'too late' or all the possible lack of will to get involved there. But, hell, the Sauds wouldn't let the FBI investigate 9/11 inside the KSA: you seriously expect them to let 'dumb Americans that empowered Fars in Iraq and Syria' to exercise pressure upon any private persons (whether in the KSA or anywhere else within the Persian Gulf, and especially those with any kind of links to local royals)?

U.S.: Al Qaeda-linked Group Behind Benghazi Attack Trains Jihadists for Syrian Rebel Groups...Over 100 Libyans were reported killed in Syrian fighting for such rebel groups as Al-Nusra Front, the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant, Umma Brigade, Muhajirin Brigade, and Ahrar al-Sham, an Al-Nusra offshoot....

The author lost me the moment he declared Ahrar ash-Sham (wonder when are they going to 'discover' there are such things like 'Moon letters' in Arabic?) an 'offshot' of the JAN...

For easier understanding:
- JAN (Jabahat an-Nusra) is JAN, so much is clear, I hope...

Harakat Ahrar ash-Sham al-Islami is an own organization, a coalition of Syrian Islamists and Salafists led by people released from prisons by regime in 2011 (out of hope they might create a badly-needed 'AQ off-shot in Syria'?), and a powerful, well-organized and armed ally of the IF, not some 'offshoot' of the JAN. Surely, the ISIS declared that the JAN and three of ISIS bands in Dayr az-Zawr area (Tajamu Mujahidee al-Qaqaa, Liwa al-Qaqaa, and Habib al-Mustafa Brigade) would be 'cooperating' with the Ahrar ash-Sham's battalion deployed there, but that's really nonsense (if Ahrar would've cooperated with them, they wouldn't let that band of Iraqi Salafists from Falluja, operating as Habib al-Mustafa Brigade, get overrun by the Mahdi-Army-offshoot, in al-Jufra, a week ago). Furthermore, contrary to the ISIS, Ahrar is not beheading western journos, but saving them from regime's claws, just for example (on the contrary, it had one of its brigade COs beheaded by the ISIS, few weeks ago).

Anyway, considering even Iranians are complaining the Ahrar killed 'a Saudi ringleader of the ISIL (ISIS)', it could be so that the author might want to learn a little bit more about situation in Syria.

- 'Umma Brigade'? Guess he means the Liwa'a al-Umma, that Libyan unit led by the guy from Ireland... They're inside Aleppo since more than a year and fighting the ISIS as much as the regime, all of that time.

- 'Muhajirin Brigade'? Guess the author means the Jaish al-Muharijeen wa al-Ansar? If yes, it's no 'Brigade', but 'Northern Front', i.e. the CORE of the ISIS in Aleppo Province (despite several statements about its 'separation' from the ISIS). If not... well, let's see...perhaps he means the Tajamu Mujahidee al-Qaqaa brigade, ISIS group fighting in Dayr az-Zawr...? Who can say...

The slow-motion conflagration around Syria...STATE DEPARTMENT officials have been warning for nearly two years that Syria’s civil war, if not brought to a prompt end, could blossom into a regional conflagration that consumes Iraq and Lebanon and threatens vital U.S. interests. Their predictions have been coming true, but in slow motion, enabling those who hope to ignore the growing danger — notably President Obama — to remain complacent.

Seriously: this is THE statement of the day, perhaps even the week.

Anyway, here something else - related to 'tactical' issues and 'surprising vitality' of an air force declared dead about two years ago:
Syria and Her Recently Upgraded Su-24MKs, Part 1

Syria and Her Recently Upgraded Su-24MKs, Part 2

[davidbfpo]

A short explanation by an expert:http://2paragraphs.com/2014/01/what-...s-destruction/

I noted the size of the chemical stockpile expected to be moved (1300 tonnes) and incineration at various commercial sites, plus one US ship.

The BBC has reported on two Scandinavian warships involvement, with reporters being welcome at first and then ejected at the OPCW & BUN's insistence - so I read with interest this:

However, the biggest challenge is getting the CW and precursors to the Port of Latakia on the Syrian coast to be picked up by Scandinavian cargo ships guarded by Russian, Chinese, Norwegian, Danish and British warships.

(Added) Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25547203

A curious flotilla. The Chinese navy have been in the Med before, including a "friendship" visit to Israel, this I expect is the PLAN's first combat mission.

[CrowBat]

Guess, the developments in Syria of the last few days are going to make many of those who are trying to track them - cry. Reason: this war really 'went ape'.

Where shall I start...?

Let's try it in this fashion...

The Western point of view regarding Syria is 'simple': 'If you're tollerating al-Qaida, even welcoming it, you're supporting al-Qaida, and therefore: you're a terrorist'.

Syrian point of view is much more complex. Also because of all the isolation that country experienced in the last 60 or so years. Foremost, there is that issue of 'welcoming the guest', mentioned in one of articles I cited above. Traditionalists and conservative as they are, generally, the Syrians can't ignore the guest, or turn against him/her. They must welcome a guest.

Now, they'll not go as far as to offer him their wife, like in some other parts of the world, but a guest is always going to get a cup of tchay or coffee, a place to sleep if needed, and the host is going to patiently listen and talk with him/her. Sometimes the guest might have a diametrly opposite opinion, for whatever reasons, but that's going to be tollerated.

So, from their standpoint, when the AQ - aka ISIS - arrived there and said it's going to fight the regime, it was 'welcome' to do so. When the ISIS began to spread within liberated areas, in turn making insurgent units free to move to the frontlines of the war with the regime, it was 'welcome' too. And when it began to impose its dictatorship to these areas, it was still 'tollerated', although causing much dissent. Many of various native insurgent commanders experienced major problems while trying to get their fighters to move against the ISIS. Not few paid the ultimate price for this, which in turn caused plenty of concern between the others. Eventually, nobody trusted himself to make the first move...

So, now, the Saudis first created that Islamic Front (IF), last October. But, they couldn't move plenty of involved commanders against the ISIS, i.e. people that concluded that the ISIS has 'overstayed the welcome'. Eventually, they had to turn to what was left of the FSyA and various other - say 'moderate to Islamist' - groups, and group these into the Jaysh al-Mujahideen (JAM)...

On 2 January this year, the JAM and the FSyA launched a major offensive against the ISIS (or 'D'ash', in local parlance) in Aleppo and Idlib Provinces, and within the following three days overrun most of D'ash's HQs and check-points there, killing more than 200 (including several top commanders) and arresting around 100 of Jihadists. The ISIS reacted with panic (including complaints about 'excessive jamming of its telecommunications'), withdrawal and plenty of car-bombs (as usually, they can't 'fight'). Most of the IF and its allies spent the first two days just 'sitting and watching' what's going on. But then also groups like Jabhat al-Akrad, Liwa'a al-Tawhid and finally even Ahrar ash-Sham joined the fight - primarily because the ISIS began attacking them (apparently because it couldn't organize a counterattack against the JAM). Although they are not 100% precise, the two maps below are illustrating the results of their work... (hope, the links are going to work)





While this is going on, the regime exploited the near-collapse of the ISIS to rush several of (supposed) 'Syrian Arab Army' (SyAA) units into Aleppo and re-capture large swats of the city from the ISIS. 'Problem': although the units in question used to be parts of the SyAA (especially so various former special forces/airborne/ranger battalions), nowadays they are assigned to the NDF and not wearing their usual designations any more, but names like 'The Shield of Assad' and similar. With other words, and as mentioned several times so far, there is no 'SyAA' any more, rather a conglomerate of ex-SyAA units now run by the NDF and the Ba'ath Party Militia (in collusion with the IRGC, of course).

At the same time... 'in the lands beyond, beyond'...

Well, the JAM-FSyA-IF coalition from Aleppo and Idlib Provinces functions 'quite well'. But, it's limited to that area. Namely, in the Hassakah Province, in NE Syria, the ISIS, JAN and several IF groups or allies (like Ahrar ash-Sham) have launched a counteroffensive against the major Kurdish armed group, the YPG (military wing of the PYD), and have yesterday recovered the town of Tel Hamis. Reason: the YPG/PYD do not want to fight native insurgent groups, so they withdrew.

To make matters more complicated: the YPG's proxy in Aleppo, Jabhat al-Akrad, is fighting with the JAM and the IF against the ISIS (and the regime) and have forced it out of Manbij and Jarabulus...

[Bill Moore]

Well, the JAM-FSyA-IF coalition from Aleppo and Idlib Provinces functions 'quite well'. But, it's limited to that area. Namely, in the Hassakah Province, in NE Syria, the ISIS, JAN and several IF groups or allies (like Ahrar ash-Sham) have launched a counteroffensive against the major Kurdish armed group, the YPG (military wing of the PYD), and have yesterday recovered the town of Tel Hamis. Reason: the YPG/PYD do not want to fight native insurgent groups, so they withdrew.

Not crying yet, but this paragraph points something out that I addressed in other forums. It appears the only unifying factor for these numerous groups is the ISIS and Assad, once they're gone what will unify them? The group that has the largest coalition and garners the most support from external actors will be the strong group as long as it can retain that position, but I bet they can't and the sands will constantly shift. Doesn't bode well for a stable democracy if Assad falls.

[CrowBat]

...and the Kurds, obviously.

The Assyrians are probably the next on the list, then the Syriac Union Party's Military Council apparently joined the YPG, yesterday...

The point about the ISIS in NE Syria is quite simple: except for local oilfields, they've got only a few important places there, and thus didn't get an opportunity to kill and torture activists and oppositionals as they did in Aleppo and Idlib Provinces. Because of this, nobody there minds them.

We'll see if the car-bomb they set off in al-Mayadin (Dayr az-Zawr) yesterday might change anything.

It's entirely different in Aleppo, and even in Raqqah. Meanwhile, the ISIS is entirely out of Aleppo (the IF+FSyA have captured the ISIS HQ in the city, yesterday, and instantly found a mass grave with 100+ bodies), and was pushed - by Ahrar ash-Sham - out of Raqqah too (there the IF+FSyA liberated about 50 hostages, including scores of activists, journos and doctors). Because the ISIS meanwhile withdrew from Kweres AB, their only remaining stronghold in that province now is Azzaz.

Further east, the Jihadists are still holding out in Tel Abyad and east of Raqqah, but I do not expect them to survive there for very much longer.

(Guess, Zawahiri must be throwing up right now: he was calling for the ISIS to get the hell out of Syria since months...)

...once they're gone what will unify them?

Nothing. There are, like there always were, big differences between merchants, urban population and rural population in Syria. Like there are always differences between various segments of population in practically every other country on this spacecraft named 'Earth'. This is a matter of fact, and an issue that simply has to be respected.

Of course, you're right that the party with strongest support from abroad is likely to get most powerful. With most of support presently arriving from Saudi Arabia and Qatar, it's obvious we can't expect a lot there in regards of 'democracy'.

But, exactly that is the sad story here: because the West missed a great opportunity and the Syrians are unlikely to forget who has left them down, it's 'us' (West) who are going to be the biggest losers in this brawl.

[davidbfpo]

Citing Crowbat's last post's fin al paragraph:

But, exactly that is the sad story here: because the West missed a great opportunity and the Syrians are unlikely to forget who has left them down, it's 'us' (West) who are going to be the biggest losers in this brawl.

Yes what has happened to Syria for a long time has been a sad story, even if dictatorial rule had some material benefits and for the West (even Israel) Assad gave a strong element of stability - even if he was a "rejectionist".

The protests and the civil war that followed never gave the West 'a great opportunity' to effect change.

Who forgot the Syrians and let them down? Yes, the West did, but far greater damage may affect China, Iran and Russia plus Hezbollah. The big caveat is - who wins in the end (which is far away). If I was a Syrian who fled I would be angry that all those rich Arab nations were singularly absent from caring for them in the camps; instead they financed the war and factions that appear to be mainly not Syrians.

The biggest losers are first the Syrian people, then all its neighbours and then others further away - including the West.

[Dayuhan]

But, exactly that is the sad story here: because the West missed a great opportunity and the Syrians are unlikely to forget who has left them down, it's 'us' (West) who are going to be the biggest losers in this brawl.

A "great opportunity" to do what, exactly... and when did this "opportunity" arise?

[CrowBat]

A "great opportunity" to do what, exactly... and when did this "opportunity" arise?

The same like in Libya, for example, and there was more than enough opportunity during 2012.

Perhaps even less: with enough money, weapons and supplies on hand, the insurgents could've finished the Assadist regime already by late 2012 - in turn preventing the spread of the ISIS. And even later on: as of early 2013 they were still advancing and by April last year the regime was really within weeks of collapse. Instead, the West did nothing, offering the regime - i.e. the IRGC - more than enough time to organize (Iranian) intervention.

[carl]

Not crying yet, but this paragraph points something out that I addressed in other forums. It appears the only unifying factor for these numerous groups is the ISIS and Assad, once they're gone what will unify them? The group that has the largest coalition and garners the most support from external actors will be the strong group as long as it can retain that position, but I bet they can't and the sands will constantly shift. Doesn't bode well for a stable democracy if Assad falls.

The Mexican revolution of 100 years ago was pretty messy for a long time too, so this isn't very unusual. It eventually worked out. A difference then was that Mexico was sort of out of the way and not too many outside actors poured a lot of money in as they, some of them, are doing in Syria.

I should mention that lots and lots of innocent people got killed while it was working itself out.