“Everyone that serves the function of “information gatekeeper” might be lying.”
Caitlin Johnstone

Nice to meet you too, and thanks for your replies.

I would contend your opinion that Assad will win eventually if left to his own devices. Firstly, without Russian assistance, his conventional forces are inadequate for dealing with this insurrection (as indicated by chlorine barrel bomb attacks, intended to have a strategic psychological impact, which are likely to have been committed by Assad, as supported by the tight spot this put the Obama administration in; a brutal game of chicken with other people’s lives). Secondly, Assad is actually fighting on several fronts, because IS is also creeping up on him from the east, and there is no “linear territorial front” (not official jargon, I hope you know what I mean) but rather “mini-fronts” focused around and within individual population centers, and his steadily diminishing resources must be spread thin accordingly. Thirdly, even if the war is formally ended today in Assad’s favor, armed men will be running amok for the next decade or so, creating a breeding ground for something similar to the Taliban. In conclusion, if Russia were to leave Syria alone (which it won’t, so your opinion is valid except for the “his own devices” part), Assad would be in a pretty tight spot.

In addition, looking at the history of the Ba’ath party in Syria, I’m not sure if they’re worth protecting (kind of depends on the doctrine of foreign relations you prefer). Over the past 40 years or so, the Ba’ath party has been responsible for state-sponsored nepotism and corruption (typical of communist-inspired systems of government, believe me I know, I’m from Poland, remember?) to a degree that justifies a popular uprising (even one that is not entirely organic) to some extent. Probably the only states that have an interest in preserving the Ba’ath government are Russia and Iran. On the other hand, their success in doing so would be highly detrimental to opposing oligarchic interests.

Regime change is probably off the table diplomatically, and in all likelihood, the Arab Spring (Egypt, Libya, Syria) debacle will be yet another CIA blunder for the history books (unless history itself is subverted even further than it is now by said intelligence service). But we can’t rule out an assassination to take us further down the rabbit hole.

How do I know this? I don’t really. It’s what I’ve pieced together in my own mind (and which therefore may not be consistent with reality) after listening to a bunch of opinions disguised as facts. Nevertheless, it’s the best I’ve got, and I’m sticking to it. Frankly, I don’t even see good guys and bad guys anymore, just “guys” who want specific things (of which things I cannot fully be certain, as these “guys’” desires are conveyed by a corrupted propaganda apparatus).

P.S. Do not think of RT as a credible source. Their English-language programming is designed for us, but I’ve seen enough of their domestic schlock to know that they are CNN’s equal, if not superior, in terms of collaboration with intelligence services.

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

By clapping more or less, you can signal to us which stories really stand out.