The Syria Analysis Thread

10 posts

Stubby
Angocachi do you care to provide any evidence? Saudi Arabia 'concocting' the Islamic Front and Ahrar ash Sham... quite the conspiracy...

In fact right now there are reports of JN fighters fighting against ISIS in Raqqa, and of regional AAS commanders claiming not to be fighting ISIS....
Angocachi
I mean to say they are backed primarily, and to start solely, by Saud.
They exist first to make Al Qaeda in Syria appear to lose its monopoly on Islamism, hoping that will lessen support for it among Syrian Sunnis and foreign Muslims who want a Shariah state in Syria. Al Qaeda gets most of its support by demonstrating that it opens Shariah courts in whatever territory it consolidates. The Islamic Front doesn't, but the claim can convince some Saudi Islamists for example that they can volunteer for or send aid to it rather than go to prison trying to support Al Qaeda.

Secondly, they exist to literally battle Al Qaeda in Syria. The GCC and NATO want a secularist regime in Damascus comparable to the pro-Saudi and pro-Western governments that have been in Lebanon. Al Nusra and Al Qaeda threatened to turn Sunni Syria into an Islamic State, genuine. Now they are trying to cleanse the anti-Western, anti-Saudi, Shariah pounding faction from the rebellion... so an Islamic Statelet becomes impossible.

Later they will be dissolved into a secularist coalition, but only if they can kick out AQ and Al Nusra.
SweetLeftFoot

I reckon anyone who claims to know what is actually happening on the ground in the intra rebel fighting now is completely full of shit.

Stubby
You more or less completely ignored what I wrote.

According to wikipedia, AAS predates JN, which itself predates any open involvement of AQI and the subsequent spats between Al Jolani and Bagdadi. I'm also seeing here that AAS and JN set up the Aleppo sharia court jointly. And even ignoring the possible participation of JN fighters in battles against ISIS (are they the 'good islamists' or not?), it's been clear for a while that none of these groups cooperate well with each other, and there have been power struggles from the beginning. JN and AQI/ISIS, the Jaish Muhajireen and ISIS, etc.

Your characterization of Ahrar ash Sham has little to nothing to support it, there is no unity between the groups you claim are 'good Islamists', and no strict divide between 'Western/Saudi puppet Salafis' and 'good Salafis', making the conspiracy angle pretty weak. Care to address any of this, or is it too good over there in fantasy land, where the primary goal of all the factions besides the one you like is to prevent the one you like from winning?
SweetLeftFoot

The only possible metaphor here I'd use is that in a mob war (what this effectively is) Al-Nusra are working with the cops (the Saudi/Western aligned lot) to wipe out the competition in ISIS, who whacked some of their guys.

But FFS, its so remote and intricate and also localised. There'll be personal enmity driving some of the village by village decisions.

Angocachi
You're too hostile and emotional.

Does any of this negate what I said?

It's a Saud backed group that has turned to fighting against the anti-Saud group. Don't you agree with that?
The Saud backed group insists that they will have an Islamic State in Syria, but take up fighting against the one group that has established an Islamic State in Syria... even stating that they're fighting it BECAUSE it created an Islamic State.



I never mentioned conspiracy, good Islamists, good Salafis, etc.

I can see this;
US policy is anti-Shariah and pro-Secular.
The Saudi monarchy is in the service of the US, and is anti-Shariah at home and abroad.
Al Qaeda is anti-US, anti-Saudi monarchy, and pro-Shariah.
The US backed Saudi monarchy is backing a group that is fighting Al Qaeda in Syria, Al Qaeda being the only group to raise an Islamic State there.

The Sunni groups fighting Al Qaeda in Syria are essentially a repeat of the Sahwa in Iraq, who fought Al Qaeda there for the same reason - erecting an Islamic State. The only differences are these;
They get their support from an American lackey regime rather than directly from the US.
They are promising, but not delivering on, an Islamic State in what is an obvious attempt to rob Al Qaeda in Syria of the one thing that earns it support - its being the only group that will ignore negotiations, tip-toeing, talk of moderation, and assorted bullshit and just create an Islamic State already in the here and now come whoever's condemnation.
That has been Al Qaeda's signature, such as in Azawad, Somalia, Iraq, Yemen, etc... it says 'fuck everybody, here's a black flag, and welcome to the Emirate.'
Now once again they're being attacked by groups with backing from foreign regimes that openly oppose even the prospect of an Islamic State, stomping all over democratic pacifist Ikhwan and overt Jihadists to make their point clear.
Stubby

Yes, it does negate what you said. AAS predates the groups you claim it exists to fight, and is/was active in the pursuit of Islamic government in the bits of Syria they controlled. This negates the claim that they were created and exist for 'preventing sharia'. Clear enough? Your claim on the origins and purpose of the groups are not only wrong, but you attribute without evidence, from Korea, motives to remote actions taken by these groups while under the fog of war. It's as ridiculous as those saying that the rebels got tons of sarin and then killed their own people with it. Pure fantasy. And stop talking about 'al qaeda', there is no al qaeda in Syria, there's ISIS and JN, two organizations that are not friends, this is more deception. Unless you now want to consider only ISIS as AQ, in which case we can begin the 'no true salafi' game.


http://www.thespec.com/news-story/4...ted-forces-in-syria-near-war-with-each-other/

And further, a statement from Jolani

Definitely a Saudi/American/Liberal conspiracy.

You never source anything you write, you just spew out whatever sounds right to you. The above is patently false, a broad group is now fighting ISIS, and what triggered it was ISIS kidnapping and killing a member of AAS.

http://eaworldview.com/2014/01/syri...mar-al-shishani-ahrar-ash-sham-eastern-front/

Potential truce talks point to spat between independent groups jockeying over space, and being petty, NOT an ideological push by secularists against the poor mujahideen.

You say I'm hostile, but I'm just calling you on your shit. You provide these broad and vague descriptions of groups, trying to neatly arrange everything in a way that suits your narrative, but clashes with the actual facts on the ground. Yes, you are actually weaving a fantasy. You make absurd claims, then do nothing to back them up. It's an insult, so stop acting like a little faggot, pretending that it isn't a provocation to just make shit up in your childish, transparent, and partisan way. I asked you for some evidence, and you give me your opinion.
Angocachi
I never made any claim regarding when AAS was created.
Today it exists to drive out AQ, that is what Saud is paying it to do.
The Islamic Front crowd makes promises of an Islamic State and Islamic Law, but didn't deliver... saying that had to wait and they needed to take into consideration all opinions, etc.
It's probable that they're much like Hamas and are filled with guys who would establish a state, but the leadership doesn't actually allow that to get beyond a fantasy.
Nusra and ISIS are both AQ, have pledged themselves to AQ, and nobody debates this. The only question is how much they actually listen to AQ central... which can be a lot or a little depending on a hundred factors.

Saud is secularist, it's paying Syrian rebels to fight AQ. That makes it a secularist push against the Mujahideen and the only Islamic state in Syria.

Respond with a cool head.
Longface

No one is trying to push al Qaeda out of Syria, no one is trying to establish a 'secularist' government. What is happening is an attempt to prolong the war as much as possible and export it to Lebanon to weaken all sides, mainly Hezbollah, the only true opposition to Israeli hegemony over the middle east.

Angocachi
Assad, NATO, the GCC, and the groups they back in Syria do indeed want Al Qaeda out of Syria as much as they can get it out.

All sides but Al Qaeda have administered either outright Secular or very short of a Shariah state, and now all sides but AQ are working to shut that down.

An attempt by who?

Paying the rebels to take on the most vehemently anti-Shia group in the world, which has more Shia killing under its belt than anybody since Saddam Hussein, doesn't seem to be taking the conflict in a direction against Hezbollah and the Iranian led Shia crescent.