Quote Originally Posted by OUTLAW 09 View Post
In some aspects it is exactly the German mistake...Putin and his military somehow think that by literally flattening and turning to dust all Arab Sunni towns and villages as well as the major points held by FSA this will reduce the will of the Syrian Arab Sunni to support FSA and they will eventually cave to the Assad and Putin demands........

It did not work against the Brits and if anything it outright failing now in Syria...AND if anything it is forcing the EU to realize that to end the refugee flows is to finally end Russian bombing BUT EU politicians and Obama have not figured out that piece of logic yet.............
Indeed.

Another thing that's kind of 'stunning' for me in this case: Russians have quite fresh experiences from making similar mistakes elsewhere.

They did the same in Afghanistan; they (yes, Russians) attempted the same in Mozambique; they attempted the same in Angola; their Ethiopian protegees attempted the same in Eritrea etc..

Except in Afghanistan, it never worked. And Afghanistan is something like the 'best example' - because it is best known, and then primarily because through their links to al-Qaida, the emerging extremists turned that one into a 'global conflict'.

Results should be more than 'well-known', and are always the same: de-population of the country; millions or refugees; replacement of locals through foreign extremists; never-ending conflict.

Sure, Russians claim such approach was 'successful in pacifying Chechnya'. Many are more than happy to agree. Ask around a lil' bit, and quite a few are going to tell you, 'that's the way one should fight al-Qaida'.

But, what is reality? Chechnya was de-populated too, and what is left is run by a maffia-style gang of opportunists that made 'peace' with Putler. OK, no foreign extremists came in instead. But there are plenty of refugees. The conflict spilled over into neighbouring Russian states, or even further abroad (yup, all the way to Syria). And foremost: it's another 'never-ending conflict'.

Any at least semi-serious military students, certainly all the professional intel blokes, should be aware of this. In theory, their job would be to warn the politicians about this.

But, no: nothing of this is the case.

In some way the Islamic religion gives the Arab Sunni a certain stubbornness to resist just about anything and still fight...
I haven't been to Syria since nearly 10 years, so it could be that some things have changed. But, from what I get to hear from my sources there: they didn't.

Correspondingly: it's not the religion. Religion is helping them a lot, but it's different: 'diehard' Syrian Sunnis are not turning extremists. I would in their place under given circumstances, and - no doubt: others are turning extremists (see the Shi'a and Sunnis in Iraq) - but they do not.

It's rather a similar kind of stuborness - like that of genuine Afghans.

Tragically, these were meanwhile overrun by foreign extremists: let's hope it's still not too late to prevent this from happening in Syria.