So we’re agreed that bombing schools and hospitals is A Bad Thing, right ?
Can you point me to a quote where someone suggested it was a good thing?
I see our government is reviewing HTS' terrorist designation. Our enemy's enemy is our friend doesn't often work out well
I see our government is reviewing HTS’ terrorist designation. Our enemy’s enemy is our friend doesn’t often work out well
History tells us this. I'd substitute 'friend' for 'casual acquaintance' to be accurate. 😉
One of the challenges with partnering with indigenous militias/armed groups/etc is they change hands in terms of leadership frequently so they can go from being batshit crazy zealots to moderate & disciplined and then back to fire & brimstone in short order.
I've been out of the loop since 2020 but I very much doubt anything has changed in that regard, I do find it curious we're reviewing our current arrangement but the USA are still firmly anti regard HTS. That would make the five-eyes arena a little more challenging to work in.
Of course, but al-Assad is demonstrably worse by many orders of magnitude
Given the track record of hardline islamists when they get in power, I’d be reserving judgment on that one for a wee while yet
I very much doubt that al-Jawlani's HTS (still sounds like a delivery company) will still be in charge in a year's time as these kind of revolutions devour their children.
They could be jumping out of the frying pan into the fire, but if you're sizzling away in a pan, jumping out is a reasonable first step.
Generally if a regime is being supported or propped up by Putin, or if it harms Putin's interests for it to fall, that's a good thing. It's like looking at whatever Farage's position is on an issue and assuming the reverse is the correct one.
One of our friends is Syrian, now living over here. It sounded bloody awful over there - she worked at a university in Lebanon and was a divorced Muslim woman (which obviously made things much harder), and her ex-husband had her kid. Driving back to Damascus to see her child she'd be stopped at three or four checkpoints along the way and you'd never know if they were government forces or rebels or IS, and they'd ask questions which you'd have to answer the right way or risk being shot.
She's anti-Assad, but also of the same ethnic group as him which means both the rebels and Assad saw her family as an enemy.
She's not sure what to think. The downfall of Assad is a massive relief, but HTS aren't really who she'd have chosen. She said this to me-
I have very mixed feelings. I can't bring myself to be optimistic or pessimistic. Damascus is the oldest place in history - home of the first alphabet, the first written piece of music. It has long been a vibrant, multi-faith and multicultural dynamic society. But for 54 years it's been ruled by the Ba'ath Party, which has systematically destroyed political life. This is the end of their dictatorship but I'm sure the American-Israeli agendas and their allies Turkey and Qatar will capitalise on this situation.
The Islamist troops interned the coastal cities today. New flags are everywhere. The old regime flags and images have been destroyed. They took photos and videos to show that they're coming with peace, but 80% of the shops were looted and the central bank in Damascus was looted last night. There's total economic crisis.
So, even the Syrians don't know what to think. But, immediately, they think the war is over and that's why so many are returning to their homes. If they have one left - I know my pal doesn't, it was bombed years ago by Assad's forces.
God only knows what is going to fill that vacuum.
Can't see it being much better, all those different factions will soon start fighting each other.
God only knows what is going to fill that vacuum.
I'm guessing Turkey will try to.
Trump has no interest in Syria, so there’s that - but also he lies constantly so there’s that ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
ISW reporting on Israeli troops in Syria
4/ The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) deployed forces to establish a buffer zone in Syria along the Golan Heights. The IDF stated that these deployments are a defensive and temporary operation to protect Israel from possible instability in Syria resulting from the fall of the Syrian regime.
— Institute for the Study of War (@thestudyofwar.bsky.social) 2024-12-09T02:05:45.503Z
Given the track record of hardline islamists when they get in power, I’d be reserving judgment on that one for a wee while yet
Very much this... 'a change of management' is just that.. Could be better, more likely likely a free for all in the short term with various factions killing each other.
So probably the same or worse for the average citizen just trying to get by in life.
The IDF stated that these deployments are a defensive and temporary operation to protect Israel from possible instability in Syria resulting from the fall of the Syrian regime.
Israel have long wanted to add the Golan heights to their territory. Looks like they just have.
The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, is holding a news conference in Jerusalem.
Speaking about Syria, he says "the Golan Heights will forever be an inseparable part of the state of Israel".
Speaking about Syria, he says “the Golan Heights will forever be an inseparable part of the state of Israel
Yeah, but his territorial ambitions are so ridiculous that in another couple of years he could be saying the same thing about Alderly Edge. It’s not actually that far from Prestwich
So war continues, we have presumably just entered the next phase:
The US Central Command (CENTCOM) said on Sunday that it had struck more than 75 targets, including ISIL (ISIS) leaders, operatives and camps, to ensure that the armed group does not take advantage of the end of al-Assad’s rule.
So war continues, we have presumably just entered the next phase:
Makes sense though, keep those utterly batshit crazy zealots occupied so hopefully some slightly less batshit crazy zealots fill the power vacuum...
...won't be holding my breath for moderates though.
The kurds in eastern Syria are 'overseeing' about 4000 prisoners/refugees from the isis caliphate, in degraded conditions, theres a lot of worry that its a likely breeding ground for terrorism.
I believe that Trump's commitment to Israel is highly questionable, unlike Joe Biden's whose commitment I don't question at all.
If Trump "supports" Israel then imo it is because he believes that it is in his benefit to so, I don't believe for a moment that he has any ideological or emotional commitment to Israel, or anything else for that matter.
And if he doesn't like something Trump just won't do it. Israel won't force Trump to get involved in Syria imo, if he does it will be because he wants to.
Personally I think Trump will dramatically accelerate the current US policy which seeks disengagement from the Middle East as he puts all his focus on China.
Trump's appointing some of the most hawkish pro zionists to his cabinet.
hes also very against Iran (he armed some of the Kurdish groups that have been involved in this takeover, to try and contain Iran )
Israel's land grab in Golan will hopefully be the end of it, but i wouldn't be surprised if netenyahu pushes for more
The human race is the victim here.. we are doomed. Even I'm starting to not care any more, from wars to climate etc.. what's the point in caring any more?
Trump’s appointing some of the most hawkish pro zionists to his cabinet.
Undoubtedly, I wouldn't dispute that at all. What I am suggesting is that Trump's commitment to anything is not set in stone. All those hawkish pro zionists in his cabinet could all be gone in a year or two. Indeed Trump has a history of falling out with former allies.
And can you imagine Joe Biden standing in front of the Israeli American Council and saying this?
"A lot of you are in the real estate business because I know you very well. You’re brutal killers. Not nice people at all. But you have to vote for me; you have no choice.” - Donald Trump
By "brutal killers" and "not nice people at all" Trump was clearly referencing Israel and zionists.
All I am saying is that no one can predict with any confidence what Trump will do. He might well involve the United States in further military adventures in the Middle East, but based on his anti-interventionist Republican core base I suspect that is unlikely.
I believe that Trump’s commitment to Israel is highly questionable
Hang on, there is this:
BBC.COM worth it for the memes alone....
Personally I think Trump will dramatically accelerate the current US policy which seeks disengagement from the Middle East as he puts all his focus on China
He's tried that before; there's a whole world of difference between seeking disengagement and actually disengaging safely
He wanted to withdraw US troops from Syria in 2019 and was roundly criticised, while the losers would have been the US-backed Kurdish fighters and population
Clearly we'll have a new dynamic in 2025, a different Congress, different governments in the middle-east, etc. but here's a Chatham House 3-minute read on events in 2019
Iran, for example, is accelerating uranium enrichment, "After pulling the United States out of the 2015 nuclear deal between Tehran and world powers, Trump pursued a "maximum pressure" policy that sought to wreck Iran's economy. He is staffing his planned administration with hawks on Iran."
I think that he'd be well-served to engage diplomatically more, look at bringing Iran's escalating nuclear capability back into discussions to remove sanctions, etc. https://theconversation.com/will-trump-renew-maximum-pressure-against-iran-or-could-there-be-an-opening-for-dialogue-243478
It's not a question of Trump trying, disengagement from the Middle East is current active US policy under Joe Biden. That is one of the primary reasons why Biden has pursued the policy of normalisation of relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia, which is simply an extension of Trump's Abraham Accords policy.
At the heart of the new Israel-Saudi Arabia relations would be a military alliance which would help contain Iran and protect United States interests in the region with less US presence.
Ironically although Joe Biden is still actively pursuing this policy of Israeli-Saudi normalised relations, despite the enormous setbacks that the Hamas attack had on the situation, the US are less likely to be successful under a Trump presidency than the current one because of Saudi distrust and dislike of Trump.
The reason this Saudi dislike/distrust of Trump is because despite blaming Iran for the September 2019 attack on Saudi oil processing facilities he refused to take any action against Iran. The Saudis pleaded with Trump to take retaliatory action against Iran, Biden would have very likely obliged with something like a cruise missile strike, but Trump refused publicly claiming that he did not want war with Iran.
Steve Rosenberg has done a couple of 3-minute-ish Youtube "Reading Russia" pieces on the the Russia newspapers reporting of the Syrian rebellion for 9th and 10th Dec
Yup, it’s difficult to be optimistic when the dominant rebel faction is designated terrorist by the United States government and Israel has already both invaded and bombed Syria since the collapse of the Assad regime.
It's difficult to be optimistic when the UN's Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons supposedly destroyed all of Syria's chemical weapons in 2013 and yet Syria continued to use chemical weapons, including Sarin, for several years afterwards on over 100 occasions. Perhaps the al-Assad regime fibbed because production of Sarin was banned in 1997
Israel's actions have hopefully put an awful chemical agent out of reach of the various factions that might want it
Occupation of the Golan Heights has been contentious, even in the Knesset, for years. Member of the Knesset, Ahmad Tibi tweeted in 2021, “It doesn’t matter how many cabinet meetings are held on the Golan, it is occupied Syrian territory.”
Trump Heights was officially named by Israel in 2019 following his recognition of the Golan Heights as being Israeli-controlled. Any bets on the DMZ remaining a DMZ?
Syria continued to use chemical weapons, including Sarin, for several years afterwards on over 100 occasions. Perhaps the al-Assad regime fibbed because production of Sarin was banned in 1997
Or maybe the rebels fibbed, is that possible?
Or maybe the rebels fibbed, is that possible?
Dude, there are a lot of reports from external observers that have documented the alleged attacks. I'm sure both (all/multiple) sides of this conflict have been liberal with the truth and the application of the rules of war, but there does seem to be quite a bit of independent consensus that both side lobbed some spicy smoke bombs about, the Syrian regime a little more than the others.
there does seem to be quite a bit of independent consensus that both side lobbed some spicy smoke bombs about
That's the point, whilst UN weapons inspectors did regularly carry out detailed forensic examinations on the ground and sometimes concluded that chemical weapons were used they were usually not prepared to say which side used them. Certainly there were occasions when it looked highly suspect that the rebels were responsible.
To dismiss the possibility of Al-Qaeda affiliated rebels being in anyway responsible would be strange imo. Indeed Israel uses that possibility to justify some of the hundreds of air strikes it has carried out against Syria since the fall of Assad.
I maintain that it is hard to be optimistic when you look at the situation and you see parallels with Libya only on a much larger scale and with far more regional consequences. I heard claims yesterday that Israeli troops were 12 miles from Damascus, I have no idea how reliable that claim is but it is clear that the peace and stability are not around the corner.
Israel’s actions have hopefully put an awful chemical agent out of reach of the various factions that might want it
Without straying into other forums territory, I have no doubt this action was motivated by self-interest. They're not interested in the people of Syria, just it not falling into the hands of a Shia/Iranian aligned group.
Tbh I would take Israel's claims that they have targeted chemical weapons sites with a pinch of salt. It sounds like a good justification for carrying out air strikes against Syria but firstly they are unlikely to know where any alleged chemical weapons are kept (why wouldn't they have targeted them when Assad was in power?)
And secondly Israel is openly boasting that they have allegedly destroyed the Syrian naval fleet. Israel is simply attacking Syria (as well as invading and annexing chunks of it) the chemical weapons stuff is just the usual red herring by Israel to cover up what they are really doing.
That sort of stuff plays well to Western audiences.
Ive n0 doubt that Israel will do whatever they want with minimal regard for civilians, Im not sure that blowing up chemical weapons is the best idea either, certainly not for people nearby.
Or maybe the rebels fibbed, is that possible?
But Syria absolutely has been using chemical weapons despite Syrian (& Russia's ) denials
The reports from Syrian civillians are pretty harrowing and they now want those that carried out the attacks brought to justice
https://www.bellingcat.com/news/2020/04/21/the-open-source-hunt-for-syrias-favourite-sarin-bomb/
who knows how big the Syrian chemical weapons programme was?
With 1000s of ISIS members being held in camps in NE turkey by US backed Kurdish rebels, that are currently being attacked by the Turkish backed rebels..... getting rid of Syria chemical weapons stockpile should be a priority, but the UN should be doing it on the ground rather than israel by air
(why wouldn’t they have targeted them when Assad was in power?)
Well, because they wouldn't care if Assad was using them. Assad was unlikely to use them against Israel, some factions within the rebels not so much.
To me (far from an expert!) it looks fairly straightforward: mostly it's actually as Israel is saying for once - they don't want the rebels to have the military stuff, chemical or otherwise. Maybe chemical's a red herring, maybe not, guaranteed if they do know where any is then they're targetting it. Also it's a good opportunity, from their point of view an unfriendly neighbouring country without a military is a Good Thing, whoever's in charge. Of course as a bonus they get to grab more of the Golan.
Hopefully from the Israeli side of things this is where it'll stop for a while, the last thing we need is this flaring up further. I daresay Syrian civilians would agree with this.
Hopefully from the Israeli side of things this is where it’ll stop for a while
im hoping for more hair and a bigger dick. I’m not sure which of us is more delusional.
im hoping for more hair and a bigger dick. I’m not sure which of us is more delusional.
"Hopefully" is not the same as "I think this is what's going to happen" *rolleyes emoji*
I don't like Israel's policies any more than you but also don't think posting "evil Israel is trying to take over the world and kill all civilians!!!" at every opportunity is the best attitude.
the UN should be doing it on the ground
Yes, they should, but why don't they? (And also, why didn't the U.N. step in and destroy all the chemical weapons stocks when Assad first started using them against civilians?)
don’t think posting “evil Israel is trying to take over the world and kill all civilians!!!” at every opportunity is the best attitude.
Which I guess is why no one does that. What is reasonable, honest, and important, though, is to point out that Israel kills civilians, including women and children, by the tens of thousands. And that Israel relentless takes over land which it isn't entitled to and in gross violation of international law.
Which I guess is why no one does that.
I was exaggerating slightly for effect, as I think is pretty obvious.
What is reasonable, honest, and important, though, is to point out that Israel kills civilians, including women and children, by the tens of thousands. And that Israel relentless takes over land which it isn’t entitled to and in gross violation of international law.
Yes agreed. I think it's fair to say that the 2 posters most outspoken against Israel on this forum are you and DrJ, but while you seem to have some depth of knowledge about the subject and write interesting posts with relevant facts and opinions, DrJ just seems to write short snippets filled with hatred and not much beyond "Israel are murderers!" (exaggeration/simplification again). True or not, it's exhausting, predictable and reduces the impact of the message.
Yes, it needs to be known. It doesn't need to be hammered over our heads when anything slightly relevant is mentioned.
That's of course only my personal opinion and perception.
but while you seem to have some depth of knowledge about the subject and write interesting posts with relevant facts and opinions, DrJ just seems to write short snippets filled with hatred and not much beyond “Israel are murderers!”
Thanks for the patronising commentary. I’ll be sure to file it in the appropriate place.
why wouldn’t they have targeted them when Assad was in power?
I would suggest two main reasons.
Firstly he was rather unlikely to attack Israel with them vs some of the groups who might acquire them now.
Secondly the air defence (both ground and aircraft) has vanished.
So the risk reward is far more in Israel favour now.
but while you seem to have some depth of knowledge about the subject and write interesting posts with relevant facts and opinions, DrJ just seems to write short snippets filled with hatred and not much beyond “Israel are murderers!”
I don't know any details but I suspect that the difference which you perceive in attitude between me and DrJ is probably based on DrJ having a direct and personal connection with events in Palestine which is something that I don't personally have.
As a consequence it is undoubtedly easier for me to suppress my anger and revulsion and sense of hopelessness of the situation than it is for DrJ
I am active on several local WhatsApp groups in support of Palestine which are very much dominated by the Muslim community, including many actual Palestinians (diaspora). They do unfortunately but not surprisingly dwell on the most harrowing aspects of the truly desperate situation. DrJ's posts are very similar in attitude to many of theirs, which apart from also a few snippets of information makes me feel fairly confident that he has a personal connection with the situation.
It is difficult to lecture someone who has been a victim of islamophobia, or has been brought up in a refugee camp, or has had family or friends slaughtered by the IDF, to be more tolerant and less angry. Or to discuss new developments in a totally objective manner, so I have discovered.
The only way I can get away with it is to remind them that I am 100% on their side, and TBF I do walk the walk. If I was doing it from a neutral position, and obviously even more so from a hostile position, it would be a whole different ballgame.
You might well say "I don’t like Israel’s policies any more than you" to DrJ but he is not going to believe you. It is obvious that you like Israel's policies a lot more than he does.
