There are two main groups opposing Assad in Syria: The pro-democracy rebels, and the Islamist ISIS.
Al Black
12

“There are two main groups opposing Assad in Syria: The pro-democracy rebels, and the Islamist ISIS. The West should be supporting the first group and exterminating the second: ISIS are terrorists.”

What is a “pro-democracy rebel?” Is it a rebel who is led by “honest politicians” and does it ride around on a purple unicorn? Have you ever seen one of these fantastical creatures? There is usually only one kind of rebel. That is the kind that wants to impose their own version of dictatorship. They usually claim to be “pro democracy” though because some people will believe anything.

When you terrorise the civilian population then you are a terrorist. It doesn’t really matter what side you’re on and both sides are doing it. This is a classic case of one man’s terrorist being another man’s freedom fighter. So it has always been.

“Russia is leaving ISIS alone hoping.”

No they are not. Russia has inflicted more damage on ISIS so far than anyone else. Not even Washington disputes that.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/russia-kills-150-isis-fighters-8650767

“They damage the Coalition forces.”

Is a “coalition force” the same as a “pro-democracy rebel?” In other words is it measured not by its aims or actions, but whether or not it is politically expedient not to call it an “aggressor” or a “terrorist?”

How do you know the difference between a “coalition of the willing” and an “axis of evil?” Because from where I am sitting it really just depends whose side they are on at any given time.

“Having said that, once the fighting starts, it is difficult to distinguish between the Freedom Fighters and the Terrorists.”

Welcome to the Middle East. So it has always been. There are no “freedom fighters.” There are just factions jostling for their own power and their own gain. In fact most war zones in most of the world through most of human history could also be so described. “Coalition forces” and alliances likewise: They are all in it for their own reasons, and democracy and freedom is almost never even on the list, even though they are almost always invoked as a useful excuse.

You really think either the USA or Russia cares one jot about democracy in Syria? Or anywhere else?

As for the Kurds. Hundreds of thousands have already fled PKK held areas, not from ISIS but from the rough “justice” of these Marxist / Leninist “freedom fighters.” If they are also “pro-democracy” rebels then they sure have a clever way of hiding it. Even the Iraqi Kurds for the most part refused to have anything to do with them.

“If there were any justice, they would be granted eastern Syria and northern Iraq as a new country of Kurdistan.”

Well what could possibly go wrong? But who is going to “grant” this new country to this vicious gang of Marxist thugs? I cannot see either Washington or Moscow going along with that and I predict that it would soon disintegrate into a bloodbath of infighting between different Kurdish factions even if they did. Both Washington and Moscow need to learn that interfering in other regions usually just produces more of whatever it was you claimed to be trying to prevent (but weren't actually trying to prevent)in the first place.

Moscow supported “freedom fighters” in Chechnya and Afghanistan too. The USA also supported “Freedom fighters” called Al Qaida and the Taliban. All in the name of freedom and democracy naturally:

How did that work out?

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/09/sleeping-with-the-devil-how-u-s-and-saudi-backing-of-al-qaeda-led-to-911.html

One clap, two clap, three clap, forty?

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