Generational Dynamics Forum - New Site

11-Jan-14 World View -- Syria's president al-Assad collaborates with al-Qaeda against Syria rebels

Christians cheer as Central African Republic president resigns

** 11-Jan-14 World View -- Syria's president al-Assad collaborates with al-Qaeda against Syria rebels
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e140111



Contents:
Syria's president al-Assad collaborates with al-Qaeda against Syria rebels
Christians cheer as Central African Republic president resigns
Israel announces plans for 1,800 new West Bank settlements
U.S. sends troops to Somalia


Keys:
Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad,
Islamic Emirate in Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, ISIS, ISIL,
Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Nusra Front, Syrian National Coalition, SNC,
Central African Republic, C.A.R., Bengui,
Michel Djotodia, François Bozize, Seleka,
Kongo-Wara Rebellion, War of the Hoe Handle,
Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, Saeb Erekat, West Bank,
Somalia, Black Hawk Down

Well, Assad's strategy has proven to be an enormous success. I haven't forgotten how he supported Al-Qaeda and similar groups during our time in Iraq when they were blowing our soldiers up.

Personally, I'm amazed at just how many people have bought that hook, line, and sinker. I read and listen to comments everywhere that we should be supporting Assad because he's fighting terrorists. He'd supported them in the past and he'll do it again because he knows that many people believe that all the rebels are jihadists and see him as a hero in spite of all of his atrocities.

It looks like he'll remain in power, though. The rebels have lost some serious ground and they haven't gotten anywhere near the kind of support Assad is receiving, so I highly doubt that they're going to be able to overthrow him.

One last question: back in 2011 and 2012, you were saying something like every other week that it's likely we've seen the worst of the violence, that this is an awakening era meaning that the people don't want a war. Now you're saying that Syria has reached a tipping point and will likely spiral into a regional war because it's taken on a life of its own. What prompted the change?

Trevor wrote: > One last question: back in 2011 and 2012, you were saying
> something like every other week that it's likely we've seen the
> worst of the violence, that this is an awakening era meaning that
> the people don't want a war. Now you're saying that Syria has
> reached a tipping point and will likely spiral into a regional war
> because it's taken on a life of its own. What prompted the
> change?

You have to look at what's going on. The two Syrian groups are the
SNC and al-Nusra. Those are the Syrian people. They're fighting
al-Assad who's doing well because of massive arms shipments from
Russia and aid from Hezbollah. And they're fighting ISIS, which
consists of foreign fighters, not Syrians. You have to ask what would
happen if Russia abandoned al-Assad, and if ISIS withdrew. Would the
war end at that point? I believe it would. Right now it's a proxy
war, not a civil war. This is an Awakening era for Syria, and the
Syrian people don't want a war, but the Russian arms suppliers and
ISIS do want a war.

.

Reality Check wrote: > I hope you were just in a hurry on this one John. What was
> actually announced was that Israel was moving ahead with
> previously announced ( years ago ) building plans for "apartment
> units" in existing Jewish parts of Jerusalem and also a much
> smaller number of apartment units in what is commonly known as the
> occupied west bank. The Total of which added up to the "1,800"
> number you claimed were "1,800 new West Bank Jewish
> settlements".

As I'm typing an article, there's always an issue of how much I should
include in each paragraph, where my goal is brevity. I've gone into
these issues in the past, and perhaps I should have this time as well,
and perhaps I will next time. But as a practical matter, the foreign
mainstream press, including the AFP article I referenced, refer to
these as "new" settler homes, and few people seem to care about
Israel's protestations. In fact, Israel's own left wing, as
illustrated by the "Peace Now" quote in the article, opposed the
announcement as a bad idea because it harmed the "peace process."
Almost no one cares about the fact that these homes are on land that
will belong to Israel in any peace agreement.

Incidentally, Debka's newsletter claims that Kerry's peace proposal
demands that the Palestinians accept such settlements and also that
Israel is a Jewish state.

.

John wrote:
Incidentally, Debka's newsletter claims that Kerry's peace proposal
demands that the Palestinians accept such settlements and also that
Israel is a Jewish state.

But who will Kerry and Obama allow the Western European and U.S. Media to blame, over and over again, for the failure of the peace talks.

The Palestinians insistence that all Jews leave East Jerusalem and all lands they receive as part of a peace deal, while Arabs from all over the world have a right to migrate into Israel, and their refusal to agree Israel has a right to exist.

Or will Kerry and Obama sit back and let the media report over and over again that Israel killed the peace process by building homes on "Palestinian Territory" without comment.

This is the Mistake the Obama Administration made before, and I will bet they make it again.

Punish your allies and reward your enemies.

Proven formula for self destruction.

Trevor wrote:
Personally, I'm amazed at just how many people have bought that hook, line, and sinker. I read and listen to comments everywhere that we should be supporting Assad because he's fighting terrorists. He'd supported them in the past and he'll do it again because he knows that many people believe that all the rebels are jihadists and see him as a hero in spite of all of his atrocities.

I believe there is a little bit of historic revisionism in that.

Baathist in Iraq were primarily secular Arab Sunni with some secular Christian, secular Kurdish and secular Shia support.

Baathist in Syria started out being a coalition of Secular Sunni and Secular Alawites and Secular Christians.

The enemies of the Baathist in Syria were the fundamentalist Sunni.

The enemies of the Baathist in Iraq was the fundamentalist Shia.

Thus, Syria was helping imprison and interrogate Al Qaeda prisoners captured by the U.S. in Afganistan, Pakistan and elsewhere in the world before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the pronouncement by President Bush that Iraq, Iran and Syria were the axis of evil.

Both the governments of Iraq and Syria relied on secular coalitions to stay in power.

When the U.S. invaded Iraq and destroyed the existing security order, without using enough troops to impose a new security order, well alliances changed.

The civil war in Syria is causing other alliances to change.

But I agree, Assad and his government are not good guys just because they sometimes kill bad guys along with everybody else.

Trevor wrote:Well, Assad's strategy has proven to be an enormous success.

...

It looks like he'll remain in power, though. The rebels have lost some serious ground and they haven't gotten anywhere near the kind of support Assad is receiving, so I highly doubt that they're going to be able to overthrow him.

...

Assad still looks very week.

His governing coalition included the wealthy and powerful secular Sunni Baathist families who make up the Free Syrian Army. Without them he remains a government without support from any major faction of half the people in his country, the Sunni Arabs.

The U.S. and Russia and even Iran, could live with a coalition government headed by Secular Sunni who were as afraid of the Sunni Fundamentalist as the non-Sunni Arabs in the country.

That would leave the Assyrians, the Alawites, the Christians, autonomous Kurds and the Shia firmly in the governing coalition, and only the Assad Family and the Sunni Fundamentalist outside.

My own suspicion is that the Syrian people, including the Sunni Arabs, under the rule of the Salafi hate them as much as the Assad government. So they are not an existential threat unless the U.S. supplied them air power, and that appears unlikely.

Actively, or Passively, Supporting the Al Qaeda fighters does not really risk much for Assad. The one thing the U.S., Russia, Iran, the Jordanian Royal Family, Kurds and the Shia government in Iraq all agree on, is preventing Al Qaeda from becoming strong enough to threaten them.

Reality Check wrote:

Trevor wrote:

Thus, Syria was helping imprison and interrogate Al Qaeda prisoners captured by the U.S. in Afganistan, Pakistan and elsewhere in the world before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and the pronouncement by President Bush that Iraq, Iran and Syria were the axis of evil.



But I agree, Assad and his government are not good guys just because they sometimes kill bad guys along with everybody else.

The so-called Axis if Evil was mad eup of Iran, Iraq, and North Korea, not Syria.

America has made a mess. The neocons wanted to make the the ME safe for israel, and that's it. The US has defended israeli interests to its detriment. It dishonest to pretend otherwise. The US needs to withdraw from the ME and buy oil from whatever group controls it. They won't embargo the West because the ME has little else to sell. (What are else are ME governments going to sell to finance themselves, pistachios? ) Just walk away. Americans are jobless and broke. Just walk away.