Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Syrian Civil War Developments

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by Bigfella View Post

    I seriously doubt HTS will be giving up control of government any time soon. That doesn't mean they will be as brutal & repressive as Assad, but there are plenty of shades of authoritarian rule. Additionally, they are still at war and have just absorbed millions of people who were implaccably opposed to them a few weeks ago. We won't know the ultimate shape of the new Syrian state for a while, but when it does emerge it won't be a democratic paradise. Not even close.
    Their problem is going to be that if they don't give the other groups a seat at the table in a few months time HTS will be where Assad was. A central government at war with several different militia groups with everyone controlling a patch work of territory. (And the wheels on the bus ....)

    Leave a comment:


  • Bigfella
    replied
    Originally posted by rj1 View Post
    Tried to dive into this last night but there was not much mainstream information out there regarding what Turkey are doing right now. (Go to Twitter and you can have your pick of the passionate Turkish take or the passionate Kurdish take. There also look to be Armenian volunteers aiding the Kurds and fighting the Turks in Rojava, although how large and effective no idea.) An American-brokered ceasefire between the Turkish-backed SNA and the Kurdish SDF that lasted 4 days ended yesterday and was not renewed. Appears the SNA goals are to take Manbij and Kobane.

    As far as HTS, there are starting to be murmurs in mainstream circles from Syrian opposition figures that are not HTS that HTS are controlling everything. The administration in Damascus were all brought from Idlib where HTS were administration prior to sweeping Assad out from power. All "official" diplomatic communications with other nations have been HTS only.
    I seriously doubt HTS will be giving up control of government any time soon. That doesn't mean they will be as brutal & repressive as Assad, but there are plenty of shades of authoritarian rule. Additionally, they are still at war and have just absorbed millions of people who were implaccably opposed to them a few weeks ago. We won't know the ultimate shape of the new Syrian state for a while, but when it does emerge it won't be a democratic paradise. Not even close.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Something ironic that many may not realize... Abu Mohammad al-Julani, real name Ahmed Hussein al-Sharaa, his father's cousin was a vice-president of Syria from 2006 to 2014, and the foreign minister before that from 1984 to 2006. The ex-VP, ex-foreign minister cousin is still alive, presumably still in Syria.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Farouk_al-Sharaa

    Leave a comment:


  • rj1
    replied
    Tried to dive into this last night but there was not much mainstream information out there regarding what Turkey are doing right now. (Go to Twitter and you can have your pick of the passionate Turkish take or the passionate Kurdish take. There also look to be Armenian volunteers aiding the Kurds and fighting the Turks in Rojava, although how large and effective no idea.) An American-brokered ceasefire between the Turkish-backed SNA and the Kurdish SDF that lasted 4 days ended yesterday and was not renewed. Appears the SNA goals are to take Manbij and Kobane.

    As far as HTS, there are starting to be murmurs in mainstream circles from Syrian opposition figures that are not HTS that HTS are controlling everything. The administration in Damascus were all brought from Idlib where HTS were administration prior to sweeping Assad out from power. All "official" diplomatic communications with other nations have been HTS only.
    Last edited by rj1; 17 Dec 24,, 14:37.

    Leave a comment:


  • rj1
    replied
    Originally posted by Ironduke View Post
    Everywhere was messed up from the beginning of history. Some of us have had the good luck to be born or live in nations where things like reason, the Enlightenment, and the concepts of the rule of law and natural rights more or less firmly took hold.

    Syria and Lebanon weren't quiet under Ottoman rule, there was constant internal warfare, massacres, rebellions, etc. French/British rule did not establish some new trajectory or introduce instability to the region, every generation that lived under the Ottomans experienced constant strife and fighting no different than the 20th/21st centuries.
    I need to watch Lawrence of Arabia one day.

    Leave a comment:


  • Amled
    replied
    The Law of Unforeseen Consequence
    The actions of people, and especially of governments, always have effects that are unanticipated or "unintended."

    This Law does seem to be especially applicable when it comes to Russia’s attempts to stick their noses into Islamic countries.
    In 1980 they attempted to meddle with the affairs of Afghanistan, and they departed; flags flying, but with their tails between their legs.
    Yet this led to the Taliban coming into prominence. Definitely not a good thing!
    Their latest endeavor in Syria has also come up short. Again they are sent packing, and they have lost their major bastion in the Med. A good thing!
    But unfortunately this means that the men and equipment they are withdrawing from Syria, can now be deployed in Ukraine! Again not a good thing

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post

    True, it has been messed up since Cain killed Abel. Yet during Ottoman rule it was fairly quiet until the British and French broke up the Ottoman rule. You know the quickest way to start a fight is to draw a line in the sand and the British weren't artists.
    Everywhere was messed up from the beginning of history. Some of us have had the good luck to be born or live in nations where things like reason, the Enlightenment, and the concepts of the rule of law and natural rights more or less firmly took hold.

    Syria and Lebanon weren't quiet under Ottoman rule, there was constant internal warfare, massacres, rebellions, etc. French/British rule did not establish some new trajectory or introduce instability to the region, every generation that lived under the Ottomans experienced constant strife and fighting no different than the 20th/21st centuries.

    Leave a comment:


  • Ironduke
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Looks like a lot of side deals going on.
    I think the Russians are just being allowed to leave, with their lives, in an orderly fashion. Convoys of vehicles and troops have been arriving and are being evacuated from Khmeimim Airbase, an S-400 system was shown in a satellite photo being dismantled for air transport. There's footage of rebel fighters giving the middle finger and waving their shoes at Russian evacuation convoys.

    Russia has also suspended grain supplies to Syria; Ukraine has offered to step in.

    Leave a comment:


  • Bigfella
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post

    Well we all know Trump doesn't believe in doing favors free of charge. However, I am not sure that Erdogan would want to push deep in the eastern half of Syria to push the Kurds into Iraq. That is a hell of a lot of territory.
    There is an alternative scenario where Turkiye provides heavy air & logistics support for its SNA proxies as they do the grunt work. Additionally, the new government wants & needs friends with resources. It already has good relations with Erdogan and, like everyone else in the Middle East, wants to stop the Kurds getting their own homeland. It doesn't seem a stretch that the new government might also do some grunt work on the ground with Turkish support.

    Even with the US supporting the Kurds this might succeed. If the US effectively withdraws support it would be even easier.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post

    Well we all know Trump doesn't believe in doing favors free of charge. However, I am not sure that Erdogan would want to push deep in the eastern half of Syria to push the Kurds into Iraq. That is a hell of a lot of territory.
    True but when you look at a map? It's mostly relatively flat, empty desert. Occupy the towns along the few main roads in the area and you've reduced any opposition to small groups trying to hide from overhead surveillance in whatever goat herders hamlet they can find.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Monash View Post

    If Trump is prepared to dump the Khurds unconditionally as he has stated in the past even though they have been a vital part of America and the west's anti jihardist strategy for decades now? Then Erfagan will have free reign to push away from the Turkish border and all the back into Iraq/possibly further.
    Well we all know Trump doesn't believe in doing favors free of charge. However, I am not sure that Erdogan would want to push deep in the eastern half of Syria to push the Kurds into Iraq. That is a hell of a lot of territory.

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
    Not fair. The region was a clusterfuck dating back to the Roman Empire with kingdoms vying for Roman, Persian, Arab, and Turk support against each other before the Brits and French got involved
    True, it has been messed up since Cain killed Abel. Yet during Ottoman rule it was fairly quiet until the British and French broke up the Ottoman rule. You know the quickest way to start a fight is to draw a line in the sand and the British weren't artists.

    Leave a comment:


  • Monash
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
    I would be very surprised if the state of Syria, as it has been known since 1946, remains in one piece. I suspect it would be more likely to break up into separate autonomous regions as in right after WWI. Kurds take northeast, then the Alawites in the west and the Druze, or whatever, in the south, with these rebel folks in the middle. Come to think of it Bibi might want the south as a massive buffer.

    In a sense Syria has never been a stable state after WW1 and it's formation. Competing interests all over and maybe we are back at square 1. Well the British and French were involved so go figure.
    If Trump is prepared to dump the Khurds unconditionally as he has stated in the past even though they have been a vital part of America and the west's anti jihardist strategy for decades now? Then Erfagan will have free reign to push away from the Turkish border and all the back into Iraq/possibly further.

    Leave a comment:


  • Officer of Engineers
    replied
    Originally posted by tbm3fan View Post
    Well the British and French were involved so go figure.
    Not fair. The region was a clusterfuck dating back to the Roman Empire with kingdoms vying for Roman, Persian, Arab, and Turk support against each other before the Brits and French got involved

    Leave a comment:


  • tbm3fan
    replied
    I would be very surprised if the state of Syria, as it has been known since 1946, remains in one piece. I suspect it would be more likely to break up into separate autonomous regions as in right after WWI. Kurds take northeast, then the Alawites in the west and the Druze, or whatever, in the south, with these rebel folks in the middle. Come to think of it Bibi might want the south as a massive buffer.

    In a sense Syria has never been a stable state after WW1 and it's formation. Competing interests all over and maybe we are back at square 1. Well the British and French were involved so go figure.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X