Syria: The Next Act

So although it isn't yet a done deal and anything can happen, it would appear that Syria's willingness to essentially give-up its chemical weapons will stop (at least for now) a military strike on the Assad regime. This development clearly advantages Assad and disadvantages the opposition. Now whether you believe the opposition is self-motivated to evict the current Syrian government or that their actions were fomented and are being aided by some behind-the-scenes political block is, for the most part, immaterial. What we know is that the recent developments shift the advantage.

Most of us, lacking any solid evidence to the contrary, believe that the chemical attacks were perpetrated by opposition or opposition-aligned people in order to draw-in the West. If that's true, and they were willing to gas their own people in order to attempt to gain an ersatz military ally, it seems improbable that they'll just take the defeat on the chin and go back to business-as-usual. The ante has been upped.

There is an apparently large and seemingly ruthless group that is hell-bent on bringing down the Syrian regime. They clearly can't do it on their own and they recognize that or would not have carried out this brutal ploy. My question to the ATS brain-trust is what's next? What will their next move be in order to gain a military advantage in what, as of late, is beginning to be a losing cause? The opposition is being increasingly painted as brutal, soul-less terrorists. It's going to be difficult to convince most nations to support them. If they are cornered, as they now may well be, how will they react?

www.youtube.com...

This could be an idea of what could come next.
False flag attacks in the next week or so which would totally `justify` the intervention that they so badly want.

I had a feeling Russia/Iran were going to suggest something like this.

I mean, Assad is Russia's puppet like how Saddam was the USA's puppet. Russia knew it needed to reign in it's own ally before the West went in. Russia wants to keep Syria close for a bunch of reasons.

Russia was just being Russia. They're still butt-hurt that they're not No.1 and that their socio-political system utterly failed. Putin takes any chance he can to stick it to America, and this round of brinkmanship is a prime example of that.

Oh, the West totally wants Assad gone and their own people in there. How they plan to do that is beyond me. Russia won't let the US install it's own vetted regime.

Interesting times...

The same thing that usually happens when a revolution/rebellion loses support.

It ends.

The leading nations will say the usual choice words about it than quickly move onto other issues. Assad will track down the remaining leaders and execute them. The rest of the rebels will accept that they lost and settle in.......the same story we've seen repeated throughout history.

I think you're right OP and we'd all be right to be concerned. These rebels, as they are termed in that campaign, are fighting in other countries around the region too. Syria is as much a stumbling block as a goal in and of itself. Of course they won't give up.

I think we're entering the most dangerous time right now, given that we're seeing a group willing to pull real 'false flag' events. I'd really worry about them sending warheads into Israel to start that front hot, except even Obama couldn't sell the world on Assad actually provoking Israel to open war. Assad would need raving lunatic status for that one...and he clearly isn't.

What else might they do, if they think it will directly benefit 'the cause' though? Well.... I believe the last Chemical attack was them...so that says how far I think they'll go.

Anything that brings the world into working with Assad on civil and official levels must make the rebels so furious, they vibrate like a cartoon character. Statements last week from FSA Commanders also quoted them to say the US had told them to be patient, the support was still coming, even if delayed a bit.

I'm not sure what to expect at this point.

reply to post by Tinkerpeach


I don't think that's going to happen in this case. There are a number of entities that have a vested interest in this war:

Israel wants the regime toppled to remove the air defense cooperation Syria provides Iran and to stop some of the material support for Hezbollah.

Russia wants to keep Syria as-is to retain their natural gas monopoly in the Eurozone and to keep one of their biggest military equipment customers

Saudi Arabia and Qatar want the regime to fall so they can build a gas pipeline through Syria to get a piece of the Eurozone natural gas pie.

The neocons want the Syrian regime to fall so they can plunder their resources and further the PNAC agenda

Iran wants the Syrian government to remain as-is for exactly the reasons Israel wants it removed.

Islamic Fundamentalist want the Syrian government gone to further their cultural revolution.

There are a lot of players with agendas that are at-odds with one another and hundreds of billions of dollars in play. I don't think this one is going to just 'go away'.

reply to post by MystikMushroom
well today has brought about some interesting aspects of events to come Obama says yes to UN Russia agreement over Syria Chems Kerry and McCain say ground troops will be need to see if the Chem are no longer threat Iraq 2.0 to come. The war has been put off for now, to become the war feared by all, Ground forces in Syria. Kerry and McCain have no clue as of yet to this worldnews.nbcnews.com... from the link

Obama agrees to UN discussion of Russia proposal on Syria chemical weapons

Syria's Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem told NBC News' Keir Simmons in Moscow that he hoped acceptance of Russia's "peaceful solution" would "put an end to the war."

By Alastair Jamieson, Albina Kovalyova and Keir Simmons, NBC News
President Barack Obama has agreed to discuss Russia's proposal that Syria hand over chemical weapons, the White House said Tuesday after Damascus confirmed it would accept such a deal.
The United Nations Security Council planned to meet behind closed doors at 4 p.m., even as Obama prepared to address Congress and the American people to make the case for authorization to use military strikes if diplomatic solutions fail.
British Prime Minister David Cameron said the U.S., France and Britain would propose a Security Council resolution.
Earlier, Syria Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem told NBC News in Moscow that he hoped acceptance of the "peaceful solution" would "put an end to the war."

it does go on , but i thought this would be enough to show that peace is on Obama's mind Kerry and McCain want war.
Kerry saying we not waiting , it is a Video http://www.nbcnews.com/video/nbc-news/52971653/#52971653 for you that have video problems here is the jest of it

Kerry: 'We're not waiting for long' on Syrian weapons proposal
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry testifies before the House Armed Services Committee Tuesday, saying that the Obama administration will not wait for very long on a possible Syrian chemical weapons proposal.

Kerry it is about peace and not wanting war , or is that to easy for you get a grip on.

reply to post by jtma508


Every single uprising has people with agendas on both sides.

I happen to base this belief off of historical cases similar to what is happening in Syria. Many cases in South America that fizzeled out in the 70s and 80s with arguably much more at stake than anything in Syria and they never amounted to anything more than they were.

Other cases even in the ME have never gone beyond what they were. I can only imagine if the overthrowing of the Shaw happened today or the Israeli/Egypt war, what people such as yourself would make of it.

World War III coming perhaps?

It settled down.

reply to post by jtma508

jtma508
What will their next move be in order to gain a military advantage in what, as of late, is beginning to be a losing cause?

The next step is France trying to sabotage the peaceful russian solution.

According to Reuters, the French want their resolution to include an explicit condemnation of a chemical weapons attack by Assad. Based on zero evidence.

This will be a dealbreaker for Russia and the French know this.

What will the various barbarian and a few cannabalistic Rebels do to a unbombed Syria...


well they will share the knowledge of Intel gathered by the USA as to the chemical weapons storage facilities of the Assad Armies... if cruise missiles weren't sent to destroy those caches of chem stuff---
then the American-Saudi-Quatar trusted boots-on-the-ground will target the sites.


watch that Not Happen... all parties involved know that the conglomeration of FSA 'rebels' are little more that patholigical murderers with no political-moralistic platform for their being there...

hell i'd say that most AQ, al Nusra et al are there for the battle & killing, outside of the religious perimeters of fighting for their sect of Islam and the return of the 12th Imam [Hazrat Madhi]...


their bloodthirst for savage killing is keeping their instincts honed for perhaps the future conflict with Israel & the USA... as they all await the confirmed death of the Saudi King Abdullah as the sign of the immediate return of the Madhi...(for them few Rebels that have room for such deep sentiments and beliefs)


just one outsiders view & analysis

Russia looks weak now because they have to vote yes to intervention in the UN Security Council. Their position has been cracked.

Assad is definitely weaker by having to give up his ace in the hole, his chemical weapons stockpiles. UN forces will be operating in the country to do the job of gathering and destroying his chemical weapons. His commanders who have been begging to use them in the field will see this utter defeat, they may even oust him in a coup so they don't go down with his sinking ship.

No stipulations have been placed on the FSA, they will be stronger by receiving more foreign aid than ever before.

Israel is more secure with the removal of chemical weapons stockpiles from its borders.

The world sees a swift action and turn of events from the use of chemical weapons not being tolerated. This means N Koreas hundreds of tons of chemical weapons stockpiles will be less likely to become first choice warheads in any outbreaks in the region.

Iran sees the specter of overwhelming US military might changing the theater of war the instant it gets taken out of the bag and put into play. This is reminding them the lesson that US might still dominates world events if forced into play.

These are the realities that all the propaganda out there that is anti West, is trying to hide from normal people trying to understand things.

Lack of Western intervention will benifit Assad a little in the short term. Losing the chemical weapons will hurt him long term as things go south. The radicals fighting Assad will also benefit by accusing the West of working with Assad. Western intervention at any level is the last thing the radicals want. Everytime that happens Bosnia, Libya, Somalia etc. the lose their chance at control.

Outside of parts of the coast and the desert the rest of Syria is outside of Assad control. While the Iranians, Lebanese militias, Syrian militias and Hezbollah have been able to slow the rebel advance and even on occasion push them back when over extend themselves whats left of the Syrian Army keeps deserting and the rebels numbers keep growing.

With the ovewhelming support of the population the rebels have a huge manpower advantage. And that is what keeps them in the fight and on the offensive. What they lack however are heavy weapons in any real numbers. And more importantly command and control. While the core of rebels are Syrian troops that have changed sides the rebels also have lots of militias, outside groups, and radical groups as well. A good chunk of these forces are not under and kind of central control and tend to do thier own thing without coordination of the main rebel forces. Without outside Western support they will win but, it will be a long war of attrition. With Western arms and advisors they could speed that up a great deal but, would also find themselves figting the radicals at the same time who try and carve out some territory for themselves.

Assad is pretty much stuck surving on outside manpower for help. He has raised loyal miltias from the costal area but, outside of that actual Syrians that will fight for him are hard to find. Even letting what is left of the Syrian Army near the rebels is a risk because they might defect. They are used on border areas and for security in areas away from rebel control. How long Assad survives depends on if the West begins aid to the rebels and how long Iran, the Lebanese and Hezbollah are willing to send men into the meat grinder. Russia will be more than happy to keep arming Assads supporters so long as he has money to pay for it. If that runs out expect the Russians to walk away.

reply to post by TinfoilTP


Or you could see a President of the United States who wanted to strike Syria but was too weak to make it happen.

Basically you can gas your own people and the most you will have to is give up your weapons.

All a matter of perception I guess.

reply to post by Tinkerpeach


Personally I don't think this is Obama's 'thing'. As with all Presidents before him he's just the front-man for the neocon powerbrokers that run this place. I mean it was McCain who was railing as far back as April/May to back the 'opposition' and went so far as to meet with Al Qaeda leaders. This issue goes way beyond this Administration IMHO.

reply to post by jtma508


Of course there are many factors involved but on the world stage it is Obama that pushed for it, not McCain or anyone else.

Ultimately, the sitting President will take either the credit or blame for what happens. And there is no doubt about what Obama pushed for and will presumably fail to achieve it.

You may not agree with Bush's Iraq war, as I do not, but he did finish what he wanted to do and was able to attain the support to make that happen.

Obama did not have the ability to either recognize the futility of this issue, or was not skilled enough to lure enough support to his side.

Either way he does not come out of this on the positive.

It now seems Russia has pulled there deal?
What gives, anybody know?

thesaneone
It now seems Russia has pulled there deal?
What gives, anybody know?

"Russia has withdrawn its request for an emergency U.N. Security Council meeting on the Syrian crisis that had been set for later Tuesday afternoon, a U.N. diplomat said. Russia -- which has been a key player in efforts to have Syria give up its chemical weapons -- dropped its request due to "changing circumstances," according to the diplomat."

www.cnn.com...

reply to post by thesaneone


No, that's not what happened. They had a UN meeting scheduled but have instead agreed on holding bilateral meetings with Kerry to work the whole thing out. The deal is still on, just the UN meeting isn't.

Kinda copied from a similar thread


Soon it will be
'Syria has become a hotbed of terrorist activities and a refuge for terrorist groups planning to attack American and our allies ( Israel ) interests'

Afghanistan 2.0

Neocrusader
Kinda copied from a similar thread


Soon it will be
'Syria has become a hotbed of terrorist activities and a refuge for terrorist groups planning to attack American and our allies ( Israel ) interests'

Afghanistan 2.0

at last ....someone who sees past the noise


Syria, along with all the other 'regime change' States... Egypt, Libya as the most recent two examples...

the program going on now, is that Billions of USDs are being spent/sent to the Rebels in the FSA &/or their relatives...
the USA & the Saudi's are both spending USDs to finance the opposition Army and have a reliable system to disburse these monies

the USA in financing Rebels and then supporting the 'Liberated Country' is creating an ongoing demand & need for USDollars ~~~~ ergo these hundreds of millions of people, both the citizens and the Rebel forces are the replacement for the global community which no longer has any interest in buying US Treasuries/Bonds to finance the USA credut card/

This IN My Opinion is one of the many reasons why the USA is engaged in 'punishing' or 'degrading the military' or 'regime change' in the EurAsian / Mid-East / N Africa region...the continued dominance of the USD is just one of the 6 or more reasons for the USA actions to intervede in other sovereign nations business ...its not to bring freedom and democracy to peoples as the propaganda machine churns out for the TV viewer


resource dominance, currency dominance, banker system dominance, Empire hegemony, these a only 4 of the top reasons for the USA policies & strategies...
Syria is under attack since the orchestrated Arab Spring because Syria is a stumbling block to the USA on all 4 of the listed reasons...

We are trying to undo the Russia Gazprom inroads to having the major hand in the Syrian part of gas/oil pipeline to the EU...
the USA is creating the continued need & reliance on the continued value of USDs by all the victimized nations
that got into the crosshairs of the USA
After Syria falls or gets 'Balkenized' the former Islamic banking will go on the Swift Code System and the Rothschild banking rules
the Wester juggernaught will fractionalize all these splinter groups that comprise the FSA of today... but leave enough of a renmnt AQ/ al Nusra to have and utilize the MANPACs surface to air missiles that can easily take out all westtern nation commercial aircrafts

see how each component part is interwoven with the other... so there is no Single clear cut reason for our need to be the worlds policeman state... each part reason both supports and then detracts from the other as the answer to the penetrating questions,,, we ain;t fighting for the UZSD, we ain't fighting for the gas-oil pipeline contracts, we ain't fighting for the stature as the world policeman... we are fighting because of the dead children from Sarin--- but we won't remember the children and innocents taken out in the DRONE WAR Program will we~no we are being led away from that line of thought, eh