I partially agree with your post.
Well, it has been several thousands, not several hundreds
USA, in one pack alone, sold about 3000 TOWs to arabs to be delivered to oppositions, if you remember.
The supplies of ATGMs started only in June 2013. Thats some 500 days total. They fire no more than 2-3 a day on average. More than 1 thousand but less than 2 thousands. Assad has some 10,000 pieces of armor.
Anyway, it is like 70% in Quneitara, 60% in Dar'aa, and still the city is not captured yet, and 5% or less in Suwayda. It's a very poor result after this long time, although I do understand your point about the big number of army bases units stationed in that area.
Dar'a as province bordering Israel was one big fortification. Virtually every hill there had an army base. Storming a hill without heavy weapons is extremely hard thing.
Suwayda is virtually all Druze and loyal to Assad. Also in Daraa and Quneitra there are loyal towns.
Not about Aleppo, but they have upper hands in Idlib. Still have not capture the city of Idlib, though.
Well rebs controlled most of the Aleppo province prior ISIS takeover. The Aleppo city itself is mostly loyal to Assad.
Idlib and Hama are two cities which experienced massive crackdowns in early stages of the revolt, before any serious resistance appeared there. But that backfired for Assad, since as result Assad had not enough troops to protect his main economic hub - Aleppo and Damascus suburbs.
That's true for their leaders and elites, but I don't think that the body of ISIS forces are like Chechns or ex-Saddam officers. They are mostly paid, or have blind religious motivations and not much training.
Since IS is well organized, they are highly mobile and can dispatch their elite commanders to main fronts.
But most important is actually was their strategy. They came in in spring 2013 as rebel allies. Slowly populating areas with their men. Then in january 2014, when rebels had hard times in Aleppo, Damascus, Homs, Qalamun, they backstubbed the rebels. And for over half year they almost did not fight Assad. They basically had some sort of informal truce and even allowed supplies to encircled Assad bases.
Except for usual propagandas in favor of Hezballah goons and Iranian goons, also in reality they have shown to be better than SAA, or NDF and such goons. Well, if you remember, a video from Iranian officers was exposed in Syria about 1 year ago, in which the Iranian commander clearly was critical of Assad forces, and was suggesting that Iranians do the attacks, then use Assad forces for keeping the area.
Hezbollah are carefully selected fanatics out of 1.5 million Shia population of Lebanon. They pass extensive training (which starts since school summer camps), they are well financed, they have experience in guerilla warfare. So obviously they are much higher quality than average drafted SAA soldier.
Nevertheless they are highly overrated and would not do much without Assads barrel bombs, Volcanos and armor.
In sum, still I feel to stand correct about my opinion regarding Assadists and oppositions. Non of them have done what they supposed to do and have had very rookie mistakes.
I actually think that both sides actually did the max:
* Assad while being a little minority managed to hold the integrity of his army (there were virtually no unit defections), functional regime (with massive foreign aid though), and control over the core of Syria.
* Rebels virtually without any support (as I said minor support started only in mid 2013) managed to take some half of the country by the end of 2012.
Then in 2013 new forces came in now the war looks something like this:
