Syria under Bashir Assad (closed end 2014)

[Bill Moore]

Given the history of the last 25 or so years relying upon "the professionals" for almost anything is a sure fire recipe for disaster.

Can't argue the facts you presented, but what is the alternative? To have passionate bloggers with personal agendas influence the voters and then have the voters influence the politicians to take action which may be rash and unwise, or rely on all-source intelligence analysts to provide the closest proximity to truth we can obtain, and then see what we should do based on "our national interests," if we need to do anything?

Everyone with a Smartphone can now be a propagandist and push a narrative out, and even support it with tidbits of truth to support it. The truth in the Middle East is exceedingly complex and shifting, so to assume simple answers like provide support to rebel group X will work is overly deterministic. It may or may not achieve whatever our objective(s) are, and there are certainly risks of it going bad based on our history of grossly mismanaging most UW efforts we have been involved in at the strategic level.

http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/au...s-and-billions

The video at this link is sadly hilarious, it was Jon Stewart supporting Obama during his election run in 2007, obviously Obama didn't do any better. It is roughly 4 minutes long after the 30 second commercial, and it is focuses on foreign policy in the Middle East. Sort of sums up why I'm hesitant for any grand schemes the home team may be dreaming up.

[Bill Moore]

The article on Qatar supporting extremists covers much more than Syria and probably should be posted under threads also, but the purpose of putting it here to contrast the two articles and perhaps show some hypocrisy. I know, shocking.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/08/wo...ref=world&_r=1

Qatar’s Support of Islamists Alienates Allies Near and Far

In many cases, several analysts said, Qatar has sought to balance a wager on the future of political Islam as a force in the region with a simultaneous desire not to alienate the West. It has turned a blind eye to private fund-raising for Qaeda-linked groups to buy weapons in Syria, for example, but it has not provided direct government funding or weapons. At times, Mr. Stephens and other analysts said, Western pressure has moved Qatar to at least partly suppress some of the overt fund-raising.

“All the gulf intelligence agencies are competing in Syria and everyone is trying to get the lion’s share of the Syrian revolution,” Sheikh Shafi al-Ajmi, also recently identified by the United States as a fund-raiser for Al Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate, said in an interview on the Saudi-owned Rotana television network last summer.

So much for claims the rebels aren't getting external support.

http://www.latimes.com/world/middlee...ry.html#page=1

Syria rebels, once hopeful of U.S. weapons, lament lack of firepower

Congress has yet to approve a $500-million arms and training program proposed by Obama in June, and the rebels — Western-backed as well as other groups — continue to mostly rely on outdated spoils of war seized from the Syrian army in their fight against the government of President Bashar Assad.

If they're getting support from several other countries how much of our own treasure should be spend?

One concern on the part of the Obama administration is that the Syrian rebels could lose advanced Western-made weaponry to Islamist extremists.

Those concerns have intensified since July, when a Malaysian airliner was shot down over war-racked eastern Ukraine, most likely by a pro-Russia separatist who had come into possession of a sophisticated antiaircraft missile. Nearly 300 people died.

Another issue is that the reliability of Syrian rebel groups allied with the West is sometimes not clear-cut, particularly when the groups must frequently make compromises with groups blacklisted as terrorists by the U.S. to remain viable.

"They said they want to give us [antiaircraft] Stingers but they need to trust us first," Abu Matar said.

Abu Matar, who like Zeidan was trained in Qatar by Americans, said he had already spent more than two years fighting, and didn't learn anything new.

The great game continues.

[CrowBat]

Nobody said they're not getting support: just that they're not getting support from the USA, and - much more importantly - that the USA are curbing support they're getting from other parties.

...and, of course, that the Jihadists are getting more support than the insurgents.

... If they're getting support from several other countries how much of our own treasure should be spend?

Effectivelly: nothing (and if they get anything, then most of that is provided by private groups - sanctioned by official DC).

But, the US should stop curbing support the insurgents are getting from other parties. That would prevent the following from happening:

Another issue is that the reliability of Syrian rebel groups allied with the West is sometimes not clear-cut, particularly when the groups must frequently make compromises with groups blacklisted as terrorists by the U.S. to remain viable.

Namely, these 'unreliable' insurgent groups are forced to do what they do because they're not getting support they've not only been promised, but they need in order to continue their fight too.

On the other hand: curbing support for Jihadists might be not only much more effective, but also in the higher interests of the USA too.

(That is: unless there is interest to let the ISIS spread...?)

[davidbfpo]

This short report, with sourced data and photos by Conflict Arnaments Research popped up yesterday on a US origin emailed daily briefing and in The Guardian today.

Link:http://conflictarm.com/images/dispatch_iraq_syria.pdf

I've never heard of them and their website has no named staff. Anyway this is their explanation:

Conflict Armament Research identifies and tracks conventional weapons in contemporary armed conflicts. Established in 2011, it was created in response to the growing need for informed, on-the-ground reporting on weapons proliferation in modern wars and insurgencies.

I have added this post here in view of the exchange in the last few posts.

[CrowBat]

...and that there was next to no interest to stop the spread of such elements like the ISIS so far, and that for reasons of 'political correctness' is rather 'obvious' (after all, we can't go demanding Saudis to clean up the mess they've created through private sponsoring of such groups since 60 years, can't we, they're our friends, or aren't they...?), can be read here (ignore the title, it's rather sensationalistic, as usually in the media):

Iraq crisis: How Saudi Arabia helped Isis take over the north of the country

...Western governments traditionally play down the connection between Saudi Arabia and its Wahhabist faith, on the one hand, and jihadism, whether of the variety espoused by Osama bin Laden and al-Qa'ida or by Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi's Isis. There is nothing conspiratorial or secret about these links: 15 out of 19 of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis, as was Bin Laden and most of the private donors who funded the operation.
...

[CrowBat]

Something else to keep in mind in the future too...

Pit Weinert from ACIG.info has reviewed all the videos he could find on the internet that were taken at recently captured Tabqa AB, in northern Syria. As should be known, this was overrun by the ISIS in August. Pit came out with following numbers of aircraft captured there:

- 1 MiG-21bis
- 11 MiG-21MF
- 1 MiG-21M (probable M; if so, then ex-East German example; if not, then another MF)
- 10 MiG-21UM

Note: it is possible that additional examples are around, then Google Earth photos are showing more MiG-21s around Tabqa than these 23.

Obviously, most of are derelict and there is no chance of them ever being returned to service - at least not without really a complete rebuilt and replacement of most important parts.

But, there is some uncertainty about the exact status of at least the above-mentioned bis. Plus, a photo surfaced of an 'extra' MiG-21U-400, supposedly taken inside one of maintenance hangars at Tabqa, and showing it as captured while still in a very advanced state of overhaul...

So, theoretically - and provided they might ever find enough personnel with the necessary knowledge and experience, plus enough spares and weapons (the latter should be possible) - the ISIS might now be able to make at least 1, perhaps even two MiG-21s airborne.