Syrian Civil War and The future of Syria after liberation

[hyperman]

Commentary on Syria by Israeli National Security Studies researcher, Danny Citrinowicz

 

[hyperman]

 

[hyperman]

 

[hyperman]

 

[hyperman]

Lol, resistance boys need to give up the Romantacism with the Assad Regime, yeah he allowed some level of support to reach Lebanon via Iraq, but he wasn't willing to die for you, or on the same side as you. He kept you around as a balancing act, when negotiating element with Israel and the US, ultimately to secure his own rule and interests.

If the US and Israel got too upset with him, he would counter balance with upping the support and transit to Hezbollah, but never let them entrench to the point where they ever going to reach a point where it would threaten his rule via actions from Israel. He would sell out Iran and Hezbollah occasionally to improve relations with the West/Israel

He balanced Iran with Russia and Russia took care to balance the Israelis on his behalf.

The Idea that Iran would ever one day fight Israel through Syria is a farce. Assad would never allow that. He wasn't interested in Liberating Al Aqsa or whatever. He was playing a balancing act.

 

[hyperman]

 

[Bharatah]

Commentary on Syria by Israeli National Security Studies researcher, Danny Citrinowicz

Everyone knows that Assad was supported by the West in power, including supporting the Bush administration in the "war on terror" generated by the false flag 9/11 (CIA and Mossad where planes were remotely controlled) and never went to war with Israel. After that period, they tried to get rid of Assad (just like they did with Saddam and Gaddafi (both used and dispatched), and also recently with the Kurds, for example), so Assad (to survive) forged even closer ties with Iran and Russia, which guaranteed his power. After the "2024 American election" (where Trump's return was already decided), agreements were made (just like what happened in Venezuela, where the military handed Maduro over to the US). The logic was to hand over Assad or he would have to cut ties with Iran (anyone can find news talking about these negotiations). Assad responded that he couldn't sever ties with Iran because of the support he had received (in the past), and that his military wouldn't hand him over so easily, but that he would accept handing over power if they let him go to Russia, and so it was done:

Assad went to Russia (on the same day Assad arrived there, the Syrian embassy in Russia and the Russian government recognized the new Syrian government).

Israel supported this because it believed two things:

1- The flow of weapons to Lebanon would no longer pass through Syria, which in practice did not happen; Hezbollah remains armed and even has new weapons it didn't have before, such as SCUD missiles.

2- That Iran, feeling weakened, would invade Syria to prevent all this: which would justify the Israeli and Trump invasion of Iran as "defense of the new Syria". Since Iran didn't invade Syria, they tried the STARLINK color revolution (which Iran also blocked), and when that all failed, they resorted to open attack (which is the current war) without any major pretext.

 

[hyperman]

 

[hyperman]

 

[Shags202]

Lol, resistance boys need to give up the Romantacism with the Assad Regime, yeah he allowed some level of support to reach Lebanon via Iraq, but he wasn't willing to die for you, or on the same side as you. He kept you around as a balancing act, when negotiating element with Israel and the US, ultimately to secure his own rule and interests.

If the US and Israel got too upset with him, he would counter balance with upping the support and transit to Hezbollah, but never let them entrench to the point where they ever going to reach a point where it would threaten his rule via actions from Israel. He would sell out Iran and Hezbollah occasionally to improve relations with the West/Israel

He balanced Iran with Russia and Russia took care to balance the Israelis on his behalf.

The Idea that Iran would ever one day fight Israel through Syria is a farce. Assad would never allow that. He wasn't interested in Liberating Al Aqsa or whatever. He was playing a balancing act.

To be fair your right but to be fair a lot of the same could be said about the Syria of today and who is leading it and what he’s willing to do to stay in power and turn constant blind eye to Israel’s aggression on Syria quite of few people have died civilians and military from Israeli attacks like I have said I will give this guy another year or so when there are free internationally supervised elections but doesn’t seem like the Syria today has been open to giving anyone the spotlight to counter him no real political opposition but we will see if I was betting man he’s going to attempt to say around Putin or sisi style for years to come

 

[hyperman]

a lot of the same could be said about the Syria of today and who is leading it

How so? Assad came to power a son inheriting power and him and his clan ruled syria and fed off it. Abu Muhammad joined the Iraqi resistance as a teenager and spent his whole live being hunted and living in tents or whereever and constantly worried about airstrikes on him.

Not only that, Assad used to run a CIA black site INSIDE SYRIA, what kind of "resistance" was this guy, when you run a secret CIA Facility to torture people on behalf of the US.

One guy clearly was used to a certain standard of life as a princeling and worried about maintaining it, and the other guy didn't care if he lived or died.

and turn constant blind eye to Israel’s aggression on Syria quite of few people have died civilians and military from Israeli attacks

Its funny you say stuff like this and not understand the overall picture. Why can this not be said about Idlib? He spent 5 years in Idlib, being subject to one sided aggression by Russia and Assad and "Resistance" attacks, and they didn't launch an attack/offensive onto Assad. Was he Turning a bling eye to Assad's Aggression on Syria? Quite a few people died civilians and military from Israeli attacks?

Did he sell out the Syrian Revolution all these years he didn't attack Assad?

The Answer for anyone who isn't a hack trying to score point and that has two brain cells is that he was buying time and building capacity.

Which Ironically is PRECISELY HOW THE ZIONIST REGIME IS INTERPRETING IT TODAY.

Do you people ever take a look at Zionist/Israeli commentary on Syria?

Its important to not be stuck in your own media bubble and to assess and study how the enemy/adversary sees you, just as much as it is to take in the people in your own faction comment on matters. You can learn many things and notice many blind spots in your own assessment not just by listen to people on your side, but observing how the enemy sees you and reads you. Its a very crucial element.

From the Zionist perspective from their news channels, from their politicians, from their Former Security Service and Military Analysts who are able to speak more freely and frankly, what do they say about Syria?

From their perspective "Al Qaeda is running Syria right now", and "Jolani is just a terrorist in a suit", he is going to attack, he can't be trusted, and then they lament over Assad who was a more "predictable" element, and someone who they had an "understanding" with, and now they see a less secure/"less quiet" Golan.

If he is secretly working for them as you say, why is the Jew this agitated?

It doesn't make sense, it only makes sense to you because you see things in binaries and without nuance.

This is the problem with people like and the rest of the "resistance" twitter people. You have very binary outlook towards matters. Anything that you see as a negative for yourself, you automatically label as some sort of Zionist plot and those forces secretly having some sort of deal with the zionists, regardless of the commentary from the actual zionists on the matter. And Anything that you see as positive and in your interests, even when the zionist says it is also in his favor, you dismiss.

You guys also rarely go back and reassess your initial takes and to see if they were correct and if they were wrong, why did they turn out wrong. After Assad fell, every single resistard said "Jewlani will do the US bidding and invade Lebanon to attack Hezbollah." or from the Lebanese "resistance" people, many said, he will try to invade Lebanon to annex Tripoli. But none of that came to be, Trump even asked him to invade Lebanon and fight Hezbollah, but he refused. Why did he refuse Trump? Do you guys ever analyse that? If he is a puppet as your thesis says, why refuse his American master? Then you look at the recent Yemen matter, all of you were convinced Al Qaeda Jewland will go to Yemen to fight Houthis, Saudi is desperate right now, looking for manpower to deploy to Yemen, and they asked him to send troops, he declined. Why did he do that? Do you guys ever assess these things, compared to earlier predictions coming out wrong?

 

[GoatsMilk]

You have to wonder what deal was made between iran and isreal to recently stop each other from striking the other.