Five myths about Syria
1. President Bashar al-Assad’s departure would end the violence.
International efforts to stop the violence in Syria have focused on forcing Assad to step down. But even if he did, there would be no change in the government’s policy of crushing the Free Syrian Army’s activities and demonstrations with force.
Surrounding the president is a tightly knit group of military and security officials, mostly from the Alawite minority, who have grown enormously wealthy over the past two to three decades, beginning under the rule of Assad’s father, Hafez al-Assad. In regime circles, especially among the older men who were close associates of his father, Bashar al-Assad is seen as a figurehead with some credibility among parts of the Syrian population. But he is easily replaceable by someone much tougher and even more committed to repression and facing down international condemnation.
...
There have been a couple IED attacks in Idlib. Of course, I can't prove these were from Syria, so take them with a grain of salt.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JoGbDMK2W_Q
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GDgYyTT8MAk
edited 16th Mar '12 1:40:32 PM by kyfhv
In other words, you shouldn't treat an oligarchy as if it's an autocracy.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Oyah. That much was clear from the start; Assad still has plenty of supporters from the Alawites he recruited from. Unlike Gaddafi he's still got a substantial proportion of the population on his side.
Barring an absolute victory by the Syrian Army forces, I foresee a long, smoldering insurgency.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.Fear of becoming another Lebanon (along with the Arab Spring wave having now crested and started to fall), I wager Assad will survive. Because other than Syria, there is post-revolution instability in everywhere but Tunisia, but thats not nearly as sexy as the revolution itself. So coverage will fall away and things will go back to about normal in Syria.
Really, all this will prove is that Bashar is no better than Hafez.
edited 15th Mar '12 4:57:22 PM by FFShinra
I really thought this would turn into a Libya when the FSA shortly held those Damascus suburbs
But well, there's only so much Qatarian guns can do, eh?
Marq: It's the album cover of "Sleeping with Ghosts" by Placebo.
edited 16th Mar '12 7:33:50 AM by Octo
Unbent, Unbowed, Unbroken. Unrelated ME1 FanficThe article mispells Algeria's name... and the result is a word that is very similar to the Arabic word for this
.
Some news.
Fire fights in the Syrian capital. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17425062
In Libya two British journalists who were arrested have been released. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17424831
And everyone and their mother wants Gadaffi's old intelligence chief who has been arrested in Mauritania. The Libyan's want him for obvious reasons, the French want him in connection with a bomb attack on a plane and the ICC wants him as well. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17419575
Uh-oh.
I find it unlikely that those Naval Infantry are actually going to do any fighting, but it's a clear sign that Russia's throwing its lot in with Assad.
.... So, suppose that some of the anti-Assad forces decide that they've enough of the Russians' bullshit, and actually attack these Russian units? What are the most likely outcomes of such a debacle?
edited 19th Mar '12 3:09:59 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.If the Russians come in under direct attack, two responses are possible. Option One, they decide Syria's not worth it and withdraw. If you look at the Russians' track record, though, this is very unlikely. Option Two, full-scale escalation and intervention, with the added message of "keep the hell out, Westerners, this is our business." That would entail burning a lot of bridges to the West, but given Putin's hypernationalism I could see it happening.
Before either case, though, I think Russia will try to keep this low-key. They may be gambling on the perception that the rebels won't be strong enough to attack in a powerful enough manner that will force Russia to make that decision.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.Russia has contacts with the various rebels y'know.
I honestly think, considering the likely outcome of what would happen with a potential collapse of the Baathist regime, that Russia has the right idea. If it was a simple change of the guard, I could see Russia simply calling up the rebel leadership and simply getting them to promise they'll honor any deals made by the previous government. It's far easier and more profitable. The problem, of course, lies in their being no unified rebel leadership, nor a simple change of the guard.
I get that its easy to villify Putin, especially in lieu of Russia's support for the regime and the attrocities it commits, but Syria is not Libya. It will take a strong military force occupying the nation for years to really sort out the mess in Syria. The US and the West isn't willing (or really even able) to do it.
We can be as indignant to Assad as is necessary, but until we can find a viable solution, I'm not sure we're in any position to call Russia out.
Yeah, that was mentioned in the previously linked article. One point for them, at least.
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.Ceasefire to alleviate the damage to citizens?
You're kidding me.
Assad's forces are killing citizens. It's not collateral, it's not citizens getting caught in the crossfire, the actual goal is to kill citizens of Syria until the urban areas are pacified by force.
I have nothing but contempt for the offer of two hours ceasefire. Why don't you back a proposal to stop slaughtering innocent people, Russia? Until then, Russia's government and people disgust me. At least the Chinese live under an actual authoritarian regime. Russia's still technically a democracy, illiberal or not. The Russian people know exactly what's going on, and yet nobody calls out Putin's government.
edited 19th Mar '12 5:40:48 PM by Ultrayellow
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.Not to mention that without a neutral, disinterested, third-party force with boots on the ground, the cease-fire will get broken when one side or the other thinks it will gain an advantage from it. There's no way the anti-Assad forces will perceive Russia as neutral, and no other country wants to commit the troops, under the time-honored dictum of "you broke it, you buy it."
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.If by "the alternative" you mean a hands-on intervention, I'm afraid that you're right on that point.
Charlie Stross's cheerful, optimistic predictions for 2017, part one of three.

Yeah, the FSA appears to be generally retreating on the northern fronts, one stronghold at a time... unless they're trying to ultimately trick the regime forces into overconfidently walking straight into a trap that would deal a very decisive/crippling blow to both their fighting power and general troop morale.
@Octo: Avatar source?
edited 15th Mar '12 3:16:03 PM by MarqFJA
Fiat iustitia, et pereat mundus.