Free Syrian Army rebels defect to Al-Qaeda extension Jabhat al-Nusra
15 replies, posted
[QUOTE]Syria's main armed opposition group, the Free Syrian Army (FSA), is losing fighters and capabilities to Jabhat al-Nusra, an Islamist organisation with links to al-Qaida that is emerging as the best-equipped, financed and motivated force fighting Bashar al-Assad's regime.
Evidence of the growing strength of al-Nusra, gathered from Guardian interviews with FSA commanders across Syria, underlines the dilemma for the US, Britain and other governments as they ponder the question of arming anti-Assad rebels.
John Kerry, the US secretary of state, said that if negotiations went ahead between the Syrian government and the opposition – as the US and Russia proposed on Tuesday – "then hopefully [arming the Syrian rebels] would not be necessary".
The agreement between Washington and Moscow creates a problem for the UK and France, which have proposed lifting or amending the EU arms embargo on Syria to help anti-Assad forces. The Foreign Office welcomed the agreement as a "potential step forward" but insisted: "Assad and his close associates have lost all legitimacy. They have no place in the future of Syria." Opposition leaders were sceptical about prospects for talks if Assad remained in power.
Illustrating their plight, FSA commanders say that entire units have gone over to al-Nusra while others have lost a quarter or more of their strength to them recently.
"Fighters feel proud to join al-Nusra because that means power and influence," said Abu Ahmed, a former teacher from Deir Hafer who now commands an FSA brigade in the countryside near Aleppo. "Al-Nusra fighters rarely withdraw for shortage of ammunition or fighters and they leave their target only after liberating it," he added. "They compete to carry out martyrdom [suicide] operations."[/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/may/08/free-syrian-army-rebels-defect-islamist-group[/url]
So the FSA is poor and al-Nusra has the all the money? At this rate were gonna be seeing another islamist state.
Oh great, a THIRD party?
No no no guys, you're supposed betray us [I]after[/I] the CIA hands you our weapons.
Syria is a lose-lose situation.
If rebels win, there'll be another civil war or period of instability when the Islamist and secular groups fight for control of the country. With the large Muslim majority in Syria, the chance of becoming an Islamist state is moderately likely.
If Assad wins, then there'll be more oppression as Assad reaffirms his control over the country. Considering the arms embargo and other actions by NATO countries, I doubt his regime will be cooperative with the West.
I personally find that an armed intervention to be reasonable to end the bloodshed and establish a stable government. The faster the war ends, the fewer civilian deaths there will be. With the current war of attrition, I do not foresee the war coming to an end within the next few months even if the rebels have lethal aide from US/NATO.
Lethal aid on the part of NATO is going to open the door for the rebels to commit genocide against the local Shia population, which they've already been doing. If that happens, it's likely Hezbollah will send more forces into Syria to fight them (which they've also already been doing). Then there's more fighting, and we'd be in a pretty bad place intervening on behalf of genocidal militias.
[QUOTE=Angus725;40611213]Syria is a lose-lose situation.
If rebels win, there'll be another civil war or period of instability when the Islamist and secular groups fight for control of the country. With the large Muslim majority in Syria, the chance of becoming an Islamist state is moderately likely.
If Assad wins, then there'll be more oppression as Assad reaffirms his control over the country. Considering the arms embargo and other actions by NATO countries, I doubt his regime will be cooperative with the West.
I personally find that an armed intervention to be reasonable to end the bloodshed and establish a stable government. The faster the war ends, the fewer civilian deaths there will be. With the current war of attrition, I do not foresee the war coming to an end within the next few months even if the rebels have lethal aide from US/NATO.[/QUOTE]
An intervention will make things worse at this point. It should've happened when the FSA was still the dominant faction and were actually asking for help.
[QUOTE=Naaz;40609885]Oh great, a THIRD party?[/QUOTE]
This has been said by Assad and eastern media almost since the start.
[quote]John Kerry, the US secretary of state, said that if negotiations went ahead between the Syrian government and the opposition – as the US and Russia proposed on Tuesday – "then hopefully [arming the Syrian rebels] would not be necessary".
[/quote]
This part especially pisses me off, if negotiations aren't working it isn't a call to give someone weapons but rather make you try twice as hard to get things to work out. Arming the rebels is only going to aggravate US and Russian mediated negotiations and get everyone approximately nowhere closer to anywhere
We should stay out now. Maintain neutrality in the whole thing, don't wanna cause a shitstorm. If we arm the rebels it's likely they'll just try to kill us with the arms in the future.
[QUOTE=Jawalt;40613552]We should stay out now. Maintain neutrality in the whole thing, don't wanna cause a shitstorm. If we arm the rebels it's likely they'll just try to kill us with the arms in the future.[/QUOTE]
That region of the world has been a war zone since before recorded history. The only reason you should try to swat at that hornets nest is if they're doing something that affects anything outside the region (ie. ICBMs.)
There are too many different religions and sects of religions in that area. To further clusterfuck the already clusterfuck of religion, you have thousands of different nomadic groups and tribal groups that all have an immensely complicated web of relationships. The only way to accomplish anything is to play by their rules, which is pretty much an impossible task.
About the best thing you can do is stand on the sidelines and hope for the best.
[QUOTE=Angus725;40611213]Syria is a lose-lose situation.
If rebels win, there'll be another civil war or period of instability when the Islamist and secular groups fight for control of the country. With the large Muslim majority in Syria, the chance of becoming an Islamist state is moderately likely.
If Assad wins, then there'll be more oppression as Assad reaffirms his control over the country. Considering the arms embargo and other actions by NATO countries, I doubt his regime will be cooperative with the West.
I personally find that an armed intervention to be reasonable to end the bloodshed and establish a stable government. The faster the war ends, the fewer civilian deaths there will be. With the current war of attrition, I do not foresee the war coming to an end within the next few months even if the rebels have lethal aide from US/NATO.[/QUOTE]
There is no endgame which is making countries straying away from it. The problem now is that top republicans are itching to start a new war that we don't even need to or want to involve ourselves in and with the info out of the area sketchy at best surrounding the use of sarin there isn't a reason to bring it up at nato or the un.
[QUOTE=bohb;40613805]That region of the world has been a war zone since before recorded history. The only reason you should try to swat at that hornets nest is if they're doing something that affects anything outside the region (ie. ICBMs.)
There are too many different religions and sects of religions in that area. To further clusterfuck the already clusterfuck of religion, you have thousands of different nomadic groups and tribal groups that all have an immensely complicated web of relationships. The only way to accomplish anything is to play by their rules, which is pretty much an impossible task.
About the best thing you can do is stand on the sidelines and hope for the best.[/QUOTE]
DUrr it's obvious the US should just glass the whole area with nukes :downs:
Kind of saw that coming from a mile off. The rebels are struggling to win and the more they struggle the more they become desperate and turn to the extremists.
It's best to stay out of it now. I'd say we should just let it be like north korea (like a really annoying kid who has all of the cool stuff but never knows when to shut up).
Free? I'LL TAKE THEM!
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.