Turkey the Kurds and IS - whos on which side
Discussion
Very confusing
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34501617
It says the rally that was bombed was a pro-kurdish rally
It goes on Turkey retaliates by air strikes against the Kurds
Surely they should be retaliating againt whover set the bombs at the Kurdish rally?
How can you tell who's on which side?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-34501617
It says the rally that was bombed was a pro-kurdish rally
It goes on Turkey retaliates by air strikes against the Kurds
Surely they should be retaliating againt whover set the bombs at the Kurdish rally?
How can you tell who's on which side?
Purity14 said:
What you have to understand is that you are using Kurds as a catch all.
There are different groups of Kurds; Turkish Kurds, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds.
Turkey is hostile towards Turkish Kurds, yet they are friendly with Iraqi Kurds.
Maybe we need better reportingThere are different groups of Kurds; Turkish Kurds, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds.
Turkey is hostile towards Turkish Kurds, yet they are friendly with Iraqi Kurds.
Purity14 said:
Think of them as the "People's front of Judea" and the "Judeans Peoples Front".
That was very much on my mind 
And of course anyone who happens to mention their breakfast was fit for a prophet
ISIS is the CIA.
Russia is bombing ISIS.
The US isn't bombing itself.
Russia is being more effective as a result.The US are being exposed for their constant wars by proxy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3ZLYUvAZvs
Russia is bombing ISIS.
The US isn't bombing itself.
Russia is being more effective as a result.The US are being exposed for their constant wars by proxy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3ZLYUvAZvs
saaby93 said:
How can you tell who's on which side?
Nobody likes ISIS. The Kurds don't like ISIS. Turkey does not "not like" the Kurds, but the Kurds do not have their own homeland. Should they get their own homeland, then the natural borders of Kurdistan would include parts of Turkey. For that reason, Turkey and the Kurds have the potential to be enemies, or at least have a major conflict of interest.
ISIS doesn't like anybody, this includes Turkey and the Kurds.
Simples!
As a footnote, the ISIS tentacles seem to have reached to Golburn Jail in New South Wales:
https://au.news.yahoo.com/nsw/a/29780279/isis-gang...
remkingston said:
ISIS is the CIA.
Russia is bombing ISIS.
The US isn't bombing itself.
Russia is being more effective as a result.The US are being exposed for their constant wars by proxy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3ZLYUvAZvs
Russia is bombing ISIS.
The US isn't bombing itself.
Russia is being more effective as a result.The US are being exposed for their constant wars by proxy.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W3ZLYUvAZvs
Edrogan is using the latest Kurdish issue for internal Turkish political maneuvering. He lost his majority in the Turkish parliament earlier this year, due to the Kurdish parties banding together. The newly reignited issue with the YKK is a play to get that majority back. You can expect another election in Turkey soon.
M
This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
marksx said:
Can someone make a handy friend/not friend compatibility chart with the various groups on each side please. 'Cos I'm bloody confused!
This was posted on the Wildcamping forum;This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
kdri155 said:
M
This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
or to simplify...marksx said:
Can someone make a handy friend/not friend compatibility chart with the various groups on each side please. 'Cos I'm bloody confused!
This was posted on the Wildcamping forum;This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_UGD7AazMI&fe...
Purity14 said:
What you have to understand is that you are using Kurds as a catch all.
There are different groups of Kurds; Turkish Kurds, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds.
Turkey is hostile towards Turkish Kurds, yet they are friendly with Iraqi Kurds.
Think of them as the "People's front of Judea" and the "Judeans Peoples Front".
But everyone is fighting IS.
Turkey has been bombing the Kurds of Iraq since the no-fly-zone after the Gulf War was created.There are different groups of Kurds; Turkish Kurds, Syrian Kurds, Iraqi Kurds.
Turkey is hostile towards Turkish Kurds, yet they are friendly with Iraqi Kurds.
Think of them as the "People's front of Judea" and the "Judeans Peoples Front".
But everyone is fighting IS.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/29/turke...
Very confusing. I think it's worth treating all sides with suspicion. My take on it so far:
Assad is basically an Arab nationalist/Ba'athist of the Saddam mould. He has run a brutal and repressive but basically secular state.
Free Syrian Army and most of the aligned rebel groups are linked with the Muslim Brotherhood, who want to create an Islamic state.
Islamic State themselves are bats
t crazy and determined to create a caliphate, and kill anyone, Assad or MB who stand in their way.
The Kurds are a people without a land spread mostly between Iraq, Syria and Turkey and everyone seems to hate them. They want their own state and this brings them into conflict with the governments of those countries.
Set against this there's the oil politics of the west and Turkey wanting a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Europe, which would break Russia's stranglehold on Europe. Assad demanding a high price for this, and the west seeing that overthrowing him might be cheaper have backed MB/FSA and to an extent IS. Russia obviously doesn't want this and aligned itself with Assad to block it.
I suspect MB/FSA are prepared to let the pipeline go for a more reasonable price as they can then have an Islamic run state with constant oil revenues. And that always works out great.
Not quite clear why Iran are backing Assad, but they wouldn't have much to gain from selling gas to Europe so presumably they have some other political objectives.
But it's a weird and murky world and there may be much that I have missed.
Assad is basically an Arab nationalist/Ba'athist of the Saddam mould. He has run a brutal and repressive but basically secular state.
Free Syrian Army and most of the aligned rebel groups are linked with the Muslim Brotherhood, who want to create an Islamic state.
Islamic State themselves are bats
t crazy and determined to create a caliphate, and kill anyone, Assad or MB who stand in their way.The Kurds are a people without a land spread mostly between Iraq, Syria and Turkey and everyone seems to hate them. They want their own state and this brings them into conflict with the governments of those countries.
Set against this there's the oil politics of the west and Turkey wanting a gas pipeline from the Gulf to Europe, which would break Russia's stranglehold on Europe. Assad demanding a high price for this, and the west seeing that overthrowing him might be cheaper have backed MB/FSA and to an extent IS. Russia obviously doesn't want this and aligned itself with Assad to block it.
I suspect MB/FSA are prepared to let the pipeline go for a more reasonable price as they can then have an Islamic run state with constant oil revenues. And that always works out great.
Not quite clear why Iran are backing Assad, but they wouldn't have much to gain from selling gas to Europe so presumably they have some other political objectives.
But it's a weird and murky world and there may be much that I have missed.
MrBrightSi said:
Look at who backs Isis, Saudi and Qatar are of the Sunni wahabi sect. Iran is Shia.
Look at yemen and how their civil war has played out as another Islamic proxy war between Saudi n co and Iran.
Are Saudi backing IS? I assumed they would be backing the same 'moderate' rebels we were? Though I know they don't like the Muslim Brotherhood so maybe not?Look at yemen and how their civil war has played out as another Islamic proxy war between Saudi n co and Iran.
It's all a bloody mess either way.
I thought Vox had a good breakdown here. It's on the birth and expansion of ISIS but explains a lot of the rebel positions and the external causes too. The video is a more simplistic version of what they've written:
http://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9779188/isis-syria-i...
http://www.vox.com/2015/11/23/9779188/isis-syria-i...
kdri155 said:
M
This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
The Jingles versionmarksx said:
Can someone make a handy friend/not friend compatibility chart with the various groups on each side please. 'Cos I'm bloody confused!
This was posted on the Wildcamping forum;This will clear everything up for you !!!
A highly restricted briefing document on Syria....
President Assad ( who is bad ) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels ( who are good ) started winning ( Hurrah!).
But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State ( who are definitely bad!) and some continued to support democracy ( who are still good.)
So the Americans ( who are good ) started bombing Islamic State ( who are bad ) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) so they could fight Assad ( who is still bad ) which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS ( which is a good thing ) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria.
So President Putin ( who is bad, cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi ) has decided to back Assad ( who is still bad ) by attacking IS ( who are also bad ) which is sort of a good thing?
But Putin ( still bad ) thinks the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans ( who are good ) who are busy backing and arming the rebels ( who are also good).
Now Iran ( who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good ) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad ( still bad ) as are the Russians ( bad ) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad ( still bad ) Putin ( extra bad ) and the Iranians ( good, but in a bad sort of way ) are going to attack IS ( who are bad ) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels ( who are good ) which is bad.
Now the British ( obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad ) and the Americans ( also good ) cannot attack Assad ( still bad ) for fear of upsetting Putin ( bad ) and Iran ( good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS ( who are super bad).
So Assad ( bad ) is now probably good, being better than IS ( but let’s face it, drinking your own wee is better than IS so no real choice there ) and since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS that may now make them Good. America ( still Good ) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin ( now good ) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran ( also Good ) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now Bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS ( still the only constantly bad group).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims ( Assad and Iran ) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihads fighting in the Holy War and hence many Muslims will now see IS as Good ( Doh!.)
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal ( mmm. might have a point.) and hence we will be seen as Bad.
So now we have America ( now bad ) and Britain ( also bad ) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels ( bad ) many of whom are looking to IS ( Good / bad ) for support against Assad ( now good ) who, along with Iran ( also Good) and Putin ( also, now, unbelievably, Good ) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?
There there, so, now you fully understand everything....... Simples, all your questions are answered!!!!
https://youtu.be/kZqJKEbpRXE?t=15m24s
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff