[MTVN]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

I read a couple of your links but I'm guessing they are all more or less saying the same thing?

There are moderate forces everywhere in Syria, in fact there are more than 1,000 different armed groups presently fighting, including IS, which isn't moderate at all. Its not that these forces don't exist, its identifying them that's a problem.

What we do know is, both Russia and Iran are out to protect Asad and they are ready to attack any opposing force. Whilst the West want to target the extremists 'IS' and rightly so, Russia wants to target any of the opposition.

How do they do this when so many moderates have gone to ground? by bombing hot spots where there is clear civil unrest towards the Syrian government and allies.

Well they say the same thing in that they all highlight the difficulty in identifying any 'moderate' forces who have a substantial presence in Syria. The last one by Robert Fisk is the most worth reading I'd say: he fiercely attacks the Russians while also pointing out the holes in the Western narrative. Yes there are hundreds of different armed groups and that is exactly the problem: the opposition is far too fractured that any elements that might be moderate long ago became lost in the quagmire. It used to be the Free Syrian Army that held the greatest hope but they have fallen to pieces. IS is clearly far larger and more powerful than any other opposition group to Assad in Syria and even beyond them its al-Nusra who are the strongest and most organised force and they too are extreme Islamists. A lot of the weapons that were supplied by Washington have now found themselves in the hands of extremists as those supposedly moderate groups melted away or were absorbed.

Yes Russia do want to protect Assad: he is their ally in the region and is important to Russia maintaining their influence there. The West might not like it but the only force that is able to defeat IS in Syria is the Syrian Army. To hope that there could be an alternative where both IS and Assad are removed from power is wishful thinking, and the West is now starting to wake up to that hence the UK and US both now accepting that Assad could play a 'transitional' role in a settlement.

[DemolitionRed]

Originally Posted by MTVN

Well they say the same thing in that they all highlight the difficulty in identifying any 'moderate' forces who have a substantial presence in Syria. The last one by Robert Fisk is the most worth reading I'd say: he fiercely attacks the Russians while also pointing out the holes in the Western narrative. Yes there are hundreds of different armed groups and that is exactly the problem: the opposition is far too fractured that any elements that might be moderate long ago became lost in the quagmire. It used to be the Free Syrian Army that held the greatest hope but they have fallen to pieces. IS is clearly far larger and more powerful than any other opposition group to Assad in Syria and even beyond them its al-Nusra who are the strongest and most organised force and they too are extreme Islamists. A lot of the weapons that were supplied by Washington have now found themselves in the hands of extremists as those supposedly moderate groups melted away or were absorbed.

Yes Russia do want to protect Assad: he is their ally in the region and is important to Russia maintaining their influence there. The West might not like it but the only force that is able to defeat IS in Syria is the Syrian Army. To hope that there could be an alternative where both IS and Assad are removed from power is wishful thinking, and the West is now starting to wake up to that hence the UK and US both now accepting that Assad could play a 'transitional' role in a settlement.

The part I put in bold is relevant to my initial fear of what the Russians are doing. Its not so much 'why' they are doing it, but more about that uneasy feeling (once again) of East against West. Its almost got a cold war feel about it and that doesn't lay easy with me, or am I just being over alarmist?

[Northern Monkey]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The part I put in bold is relevant to my initial fear of what the Russians are doing. Its not so much 'why' they are doing it, but more about that uneasy feeling (once again) of East against West. Its almost got a cold war feel about it and that doesn't lay easy with me, or am I just being over alarmist?

I agree with you and feel the same.Hence my thread the other day on my worries of the US and Russia both conducting bombing campaigns in the same region.Mistakes happen as we saw the other day when US jets bombed the Afghan hospital.It seem tensions are gradually raising slowly but surely.
Also there has been Russian jets entering Turkish airspace recently who i believe are a member of NATO.The west takes that very seriously.

"NATO member Turkey accused Russia of violating its airspace at least twice over the weekend, and warned it will activate its rules of military engagement if such intrusions are repeated."

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/top-s...-airspace.html

[MTVN]

Originally Posted by DemolitionRed

The part I put in bold is relevant to my initial fear of what the Russians are doing. Its not so much 'why' they are doing it, but more about that uneasy feeling (once again) of East against West. Its almost got a cold war feel about it and that doesn't lay easy with me, or am I just being over alarmist?

It could be getting that way but I don't think it needs to be: the West has been overplaying the Russian threat and making it out to be a bigger danger than it is imo. In a way I think it's been happening ever since the breakup of the USSR: that should have provided a chance to bring a reformed Russia back into the international fold but instead they've been treated with hostility ever since. In the years since then Nato has continued to expand eastwards and Western foreign policy has been more aggressive while Russia has been forced to give up much of its territory and until the last two or three years hadn't been that influential on the world stage, yet they are treated as the great menace? I think there's a lot of resentment in Russia about that which has fuelled nationalism over there and its why they're quite enjoying reasserting themselves again now.