Syrian Civil War (Graphic Photos/Vid Not Allowed)

[Dr.Thrax]

So far, rebels today are advancing in Latakia mountains east of southern Sahl al Ghab. Rebels now have high ground and many other positions vs. Assad. They took Jubb al Ghar among other places.
There is also a video of a perfect SPG-9 shot; 7 Assadists were gathered on top of a mountain inspecting something or planing something out, SPG-9 hits right in the middle of them, all 7 are either dead or with severe burn marks. Body parts also go flying. Can't post for obvious reasons, but if you want to see it it's on the twitter profile of "@interbrigades."
First Coastal Division - Covering fire with tank shells for troops storming Jubb al Ghar

First Coastal Division - Covering fire with 23mm machine gun (auto-cannon in reality, no word for that in Arabic) for the Mujahideen storming Tall Zira'a

First Coastal Division - GoPro footage of storming of Jubb al Ghar

There are also major advances in Eastern Ghouta as well.

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

No it's not. Dara'a is closer to Damascus and is much more easily reinforced and supported by air support. Rebels in Dara'a are not allowed by Jordan to attack right now after what JaN did to Druze a few months ago. Southern Front barely doing anything now besides the usual tank and artillery shelling.

What's "JaN"?

 

[Dr.Thrax]

What's "JaN"?

Jabhat al Nusra. JaN

 

[BLACKEAGLE]

So happy with the recent advances.. God bless you.

 

[500]

I am honestly perplexed Sir.

It is beyond my understanding how the SAA with its Air Support and Heavy Weapons continue to loose pitched battles against these Rebels who have no Artillery, Air Force or even Basic Armour. Seriously, what tactics is the SAA using that they continue to loose again and again? The videos that i have seen, at best the Rebels have only deployed light weapons. In theory, they should get decimated by the SAA.

I can understand that SAA has a shortage of manpower but with all these heavy conventional weapons, they should be able to offset that and form fortified lines along the Areas they control. I haven't followed the Syrian Conflict in such detail, but the only comparison i can think of in this case is Uzbeks, Chechens and TTP fortifying Miran Shah and daring the Pakistan Army to attack and fight a conventional battle. Not only were the militants clobbered, Pakistan Army had taken the city within a day. After that, TTP or other militants never dared fight PA in a conventional battle and resorted to guerrilla attacks.

Sir, what is your assessment of SAA's Officer Corps? It does look to me that they are not a very inspiring bunch, as there incompetence has been exposed by the Rebels. Looks like only overwhelming Russian Support can result in changing the tide of war, similar to Eastern Ukraine.

Its hard to defend city with disloyal population inside and outside. Assad soldiers dont really understand why they need to defend it and flee at first opportunity. On the other hand their own towns they defend well, like Fua in Idlib and Zahra in Aleppo.

 

[Madali]

Its hard to defend city with disloyal population inside and outside. Assad soldiers dont really understand why they need to defend it and flee at first opportunity. On the other hand their own towns they defend well, like Fua in Idlib and Zahra in Aleppo.

I don't understand. From what you guys say, Assad loses his cities in the matter of days. His support base is tiny, his armies are demotivated, and his war strategies crap. And on the other hand, the rebels are kicking ***, they have the support from rich gulf countries and get logistics from Turkey.

So, the question is, why is he still remaining after 4 years??

Oh, wait, it's because Iran supports Assad. Which means, with Iran's few advisers, Iran is able to make up for all of Assad's flaws (no support, shitty army, etc) then ergo: Iran must be frigging awesome and mighty! Right?

 

[500]

I don't understand. From what you guys say, Assad loses his cities in the matter of days. His support base is tiny, his armies are demotivated, and his war strategies crap. And on the other hand, the rebels are kicking ***, they have the support from rich gulf countries and get logistics from Turkey.

So, the question is, why is he still remaining after 4 years??

Oh, wait, it's because Iran supports Assad. Which means, with Iran's few advisers, Iran is able to make up for all of Assad's flaws (no support, shitty army, etc) then ergo: Iran must be frigging awesome and mighty! Right?

Syria population is follow:

Arab Sunni - 65%
Alawites - 11%
Christians - 9%
Kurds - 9%
Druze - 3%
Shiites - 2%
-------------------------------

Lets say quarter of Sunnis are loyal to Assad (65/4 = 16%)

As result we get ~40% (Alawites + Christians + Drize + Shiites + Loyal Sunnis) vs. ~50% disloyal Sunnis.

But these 40% have united command, have thousands tanks, thousands pieces of artillery, hundreds of jets and massive support from Iran and Russia.

While 50% are separated, dont have any air force, only couple dozen captured tanks and some home made junk mortars and cannons. They get some support but it is inconsistent and much much smaller than Russian and Iranian.

 

[Aslan]

]

I don't understand. From what you guys say, Assad loses his cities in the matter of days. His support base is tiny, his armies are demotivated, and his war strategies crap. And on the other hand, the rebels are kicking ***, they have the support from rich gulf countries and get logistics from Turkey.

So, the question is, why is he still remaining after 4 years??

Oh, wait, it's because Iran supports Assad. Which means, with Iran's few advisers, Iran is able to make up for all of Assad's flaws (no support, shitty army, etc) then ergo: Iran must be frigging awesome and mighty! Right?

And what about the loads and loads of hiziz Afghanis and Iraqis. That is without counting the Iranians and Russians

 

[Madali]

Syria population is follow:

Arab Sunni - 65%
Alawites - 11%
Christians - 9%
Kurds - 9%
Druze - 3%
Shiites - 2%
-------------------------------

Lets say quarter of Sunnis are loyal to Assad (65/4 = 16%)

As result we get ~40% (Alawites + Christians + Drize + Shiites + Loyal Sunnis) vs. ~50% disloyal Sunnis.

But these 40% have united command, have thousands tanks, thousands pieces of artillery, hundreds of jets and massive support from Iran and Russia.

While 50% are separated, dont have any air force, only couple dozen captured tanks and some home made junk mortars and cannons. They get some support but it is inconsistent and much much smaller than Russian and Iranian.

So, wait, you are now claiming that Assad has around 50% support? Not bad. So, why are you guys so insistence to overthrow him. Most state leaders of western countries barely have 40% support base.

]
And what about the loads and loads of hiziz Afghanis and Iraqis. That is without counting the Iranians and Russians

Three questions to ponder,

1) How many Afghani and Iraqi fighters are fighting on Assad's side?
2) When did they enter the battlefield?
3) What numbers of non-Syrian fighters are fighting against the government?

To better understand the highly complicated and biased political world, we need to be very careful when reading "reports". One thing I enjoy doing is to search google news using various dates, this allows us to usually reach at certain conclusions that are less tainted by current events.

For example, notice this from 2010 (before the current crisis),
IRIN Middle East | SYRIA: Undocumented, overlooked and struggling to survive | Syria | Refugees/IDPs

"Currently registered with UNHCR in Syria are 3,500 Somali refugees and a further 1,000 asylum-seekers; 1,000 Afghani refugees and 500 asylum-seekers; 400 Sudanese refugees and 600 asylum-seekers; and 200 Iranian refugees as well as 200 Iranian asylum-seekers."

So, at least, 1,500 Afghani refugees were in Syria (probably many more not registered). Common sense and logic would indicate that they run away from the Taliban (could they then be Shia?). So, when the same Islamic Extremists came to Syria, how many of the Afghani fighters were actually Afghanis who had been in Syria from years ago?

Here is an article from 2012 about some of the Afghani refugees escape Syria to Iraq because of rebel threat,
damascus’ afghan refugees end up in iraq | Niqash

"Sadiq recalls why his family left their home in Damascus. “Armed groups started to launch more attacks in our areas. The rebel military were making raids in the alleys as the Syrian army withdrew. So we sought shelter in the shrine of Sayyida Zainab. We didn’t bring anything at all. We left all our belongings and clothes.”"

This shows that they were probably Shia Afghanis who felt threatened by the rebels.

Further in the article,
"In the 1990s, hundreds of Afghan families moved to Syria to escape from the extreme Taliban regime in Afghanistan. And many settled on the outskirts of Damascus near the Shiite Muslim shrine of Sayyida Zainab, because most of them are also Shiite Muslims."

"The fact that many of the Afghan refugees are Shiite Muslims may be part of the reason that some of the buses carrying them were targeted by militias in Syria as they were leaving. “When we reached the Iraqi border they tried to stop us from crossing,” reported another Afghan refugee, Bakir Jafar, who was travelling with his aged mother and his sister. “We were not carrying weapons and we didn’t want to take sides but they fired their guns anyway. The Syrian army stopped them for firing any further. If they hadn’t, then we would all have been dead.”"

 

[JUBA]

Fresh dead hezbodevil rats in Zabadani

 

[500]

So, wait, you are now claiming that Assad has around 50% support? Not bad. So, why are you guys so insistence to overthrow him. Most state leaders of western countries barely have 40% support base.

First of all I said 40%.
Secondly there is a huge difference between loyalty and support. Many westerners dont like their governments but still they are fully loyal.

 

[Hindustani78]

Two car bombs explode in eastern Syria, target Kurdish fighters: monitor| Reuters

Two car bombs exploded in the eastern Syrian of city Hasaka on Monday, at least one of which targeted Kurdish fighters, causing an unknown number of casualties, a monitor said, with state television confirming the explosions.

The first blast occurred in Khashman area in the north of the city, and the second in its center, the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

(Reporting by John Davison; Editing by Alison Williams)

 

[Serpentine]

 

[Aslan]

So, wait, you are now claiming that Assad has around 50% support? Not bad. So, why are you guys so insistence to overthrow him. Most state leaders of western countries barely have 40% support base.



Three questions to ponder,

1) How many Afghani and Iraqi fighters are fighting on Assad's side?
2) When did they enter the battlefield?
3) What numbers of non-Syrian fighters are fighting against the government?

To better understand the highly complicated and biased political world, we need to be very careful when reading "reports". One thing I enjoy doing is to search google news using various dates, this allows us to usually reach at certain conclusions that are less tainted by current events.

For example, notice this from 2010 (before the current crisis),
IRIN Middle East | SYRIA: Undocumented, overlooked and struggling to survive | Syria | Refugees/IDPs

"Currently registered with UNHCR in Syria are 3,500 Somali refugees and a further 1,000 asylum-seekers; 1,000 Afghani refugees and 500 asylum-seekers; 400 Sudanese refugees and 600 asylum-seekers; and 200 Iranian refugees as well as 200 Iranian asylum-seekers."

So, at least, 1,500 Afghani refugees were in Syria (probably many more not registered). Common sense and logic would indicate that they run away from the Taliban (could they then be Shia?). So, when the same Islamic Extremists came to Syria, how many of the Afghani fighters were actually Afghanis who had been in Syria from years ago?

Here is an article from 2012 about some of the Afghani refugees escape Syria to Iraq because of rebel threat,
damascus’ afghan refugees end up in iraq | Niqash

"Sadiq recalls why his family left their home in Damascus. “Armed groups started to launch more attacks in our areas. The rebel military were making raids in the alleys as the Syrian army withdrew. So we sought shelter in the shrine of Sayyida Zainab. We didn’t bring anything at all. We left all our belongings and clothes.”"

This shows that they were probably Shia Afghanis who felt threatened by the rebels.

Further in the article,
"In the 1990s, hundreds of Afghan families moved to Syria to escape from the extreme Taliban regime in Afghanistan. And many settled on the outskirts of Damascus near the Shiite Muslim shrine of Sayyida Zainab, because most of them are also Shiite Muslims."

"The fact that many of the Afghan refugees are Shiite Muslims may be part of the reason that some of the buses carrying them were targeted by militias in Syria as they were leaving. “When we reached the Iraqi border they tried to stop us from crossing,” reported another Afghan refugee, Bakir Jafar, who was travelling with his aged mother and his sister. “We were not carrying weapons and we didn’t want to take sides but they fired their guns anyway. The Syrian army stopped them for firing any further. If they hadn’t, then we would all have been dead.”"

Your sources are awesoooooooome and yes sarcasm intended indeed.

 

[Madali]

Your sources are awesoooooooome and yes sarcasm intended indeed.

What is wrong with the sources?