This isn’t about ISIS, just good old fashioned regime change

Greetings,

This isn’t about ISIS, just good old fashioned regime change

It must be difficult to be Syrian today. Not only are you seeing your country crumble before your very eyes and overrun by foreigners intent on imposing a system you never requested, but when you attempt to say what your aspirations are, you are ignored.

Syria is it seems everyone’s problem, except the Syrians. They don’t deserve a say in their nation’s future.

Western capitals have decided that their president “must go”. Jihadi fighters have decided it should become the next Caliphate. Gulf monarchies and Israel are pushing for its destruction. But Syrians – well what Syrians want is irrelevant.

They can shout from the top of their lungs, their plight is pointless as their voices are muffled. Like that of a small child lost in a large crowd desperately attempting to be heard. Everyone looks down on him, sympathetically, and then looks away again to listen to the grown-ups.

As the conflict enters its fifth year, Syrian voices are once again muted. Opinion poll after opinion poll clearly indicates that a majority of Syrians, living in Syria, would prefer Bashar Al Assad to remain as their leader.

Assad is naturally popular among his own Alawite community, but he is also popular among other minorities who’ve enjoyed peace and prosperity under his rule.

Among the Sunni majority of the population is where support is perhaps less obvious. Some have remained loyal supporters while others who opposed him in the early days of the uprisings have decided that he is by far the better alternative in light of the nature of the regime his opponents would like to implement.

When added up, this gives the Syrian president a comfortable majority should further elections be held.

Nevertheless, what Syrian public opinion wants never features in debates about the Levantine country.

Last week, Britain’s parliament was momentarily shaken by the prospect of a round of voting that, had it not passed, would have almost certainly forced Prime Minister David Cameron to resign.

As it happens, the motion he supported was voted in by a comfortable majority of his MPs as well as several from other parties.

The motion was essentially focused on whether air strikes should be extended to Syria. David Cameron, who’d accused Russian President Vladimir Putin of exacerbating the risk of radicalization among disenfranchised Muslim youths through his air strikes, was pushing for further strikes himself. Unlike Putin however, Cameron dispensed with superfluous details such as getting approval from the sovereign state of Syria.

A week into British involvement, in collaboration with France and the US, another ‘blunder’ has taken place on the battle fields. Instead of targeting ISIS outposts, the US hit a Syrian army base killing at least three soldiers and wounding scores of others, according to Syrian officials.

The Syrian army which is at the forefront of the battle against the terror outfit now has to protect itself from ISIS and US fire. One would think they were working in tandem!

This of course is not the first time, the US, credited with the most sophisticated military hardware, has made mistakes by hitting ISIS opponents instead of terrorists. Better still, at times weapons and food supplies were also dropped in ISIS zones, unintentionally, according to US sources.

Over ten years ago, when the US was about to invade Iraq, in what proved to become the birthplace of ISIS, experts spoke of satellite technology that allowed astronauts to read a newspaper headline from space!

And yet in the 14 years that the US has waged its war ‘on’ terror, civilians in Afghanistan and Yemen have ‘mistakenly’ died by the hundreds, at the hands of US drone operators, to the delight of Al-Qaeda which saw its ranks inflated thanks to the frustrations caused by these indiscriminate attacks.

So what to make of operations designed to destroy or at the very least weaken an organization that is made up of unprofessional thugs, recruited through the internet and hoping to live out some adventure through the cover of a ‘cause.’ Surely they should be no match for a powerful coalition of the most well equipped armies in the world.

Could it be that the aim of the coalition is not to destroy ISIS but rather to remove Assad?….More Here

Social

This isn’t about ISIS, just good old fashioned regime change