Heavy fighting has continued to rage in the southern part of the northern Syrian Idlib Province, where Turkish-backed rebels, and al-Qaeda, are trying to slow a military advance which is pushing them away from a key highway.
According to the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, at least 60 fighters have been killed on Tuesday, 29 from the pro-government forces and 31 rebels and jihadists. The government forces repelled the Islamists from a counter-offensive.
In addition to the combatant deaths, the Observatory also estimated 10 civilians were killed across Idlib on Tuesday, all of them attributed to various Syrian airstrikes in the area.
Control of the highway is a top priority for Syria, as a highway connects the capital of Damascus with the major northern city of Aleppo. The government controls both cities, but wants a main highway connecting the two.
The fighters are terrorists from ISIS and al-qaeda groups…….not moderates, rebels, or opposition.
They are occupying the Demilitarized zone and launching attacks on the Russian base, Syrian troops and civilians.
Terrorism is a tactic. Using it probably excludes someone from being a “moderate” by definition, but it’s entirely compatible with being a “rebel” or being in “opposition.”
I’d nominate you for an LSA award, but I think you have to be a member first.
Absolutely disagree.
No individual or group using terrorist tactics can be called a “rebel” or an “opposition”.
There are for sure still many places on this earth where institutions do not exist to protect innocents from arbitrary violence. Where organized gangs kill civilians just to take their possessions, and often force them into labor without hope of getting their freedom back. Happens daily in many places.
Anyplace where gangs assume they can impose their will upon others — we have terrorism. No matter what decorations are used to give the thugs respectability. Be that religion or political ideology, or high sounding nothings like freedom and democracy. Because in the end they all want the same — your property and your compliance.
The problem arises when groups not willing to find a way to coexist with others in the same society, resort to intimidation to get supporters, then target others with violence forcing them to flee.
The problem arises regularly when presumably civilized societies decide to make things worse by glorifying some groups and giving them political, military and financial support. They are then called rebels or opposition.
In spite of the fact that majority of population is not supporting them, and is against violence.
Why would governments be forced to negotiate with any group that fancies itself entitled to power by using force instead of political organizing? Or have to account for their actions to those members of pompously called international community who blithely support violence against civilians?
Starting a war on a large scale or group violence on a small scale is still a supreme crime — as they are the cause of all other crimes committed as a result. And the first thing all terrorists want is the destruction of social institutions that are guarantors of security and justice, like delegitimization of state. Then they are free to do what they like.
Because any order is preferable to the violence self-righteous groups visit upon innocents.
I am not suggesting that all of them operate from the base motives of killing for profit — but money is important to all — but even if they are motivated by some righteous and noble thoughts ushering happiness to the masses, or have legitimate grievances — NONE of it justifies terror, the killing and subjugating innocents.
And I am not suggesting that killing all terrorists is the only answer. The answer is in combination of a legitimate, population supported force and peaceful reintegration into society.
Encouraging terrorism under guise of supporting grievances of “opposition” or “rebels” SHOULD be an international crime. Supporting terrorists with weapons, money, political support IS a crime,
For as long as there are those out there willing to take sides with the terrorists and justify violence — there is no disincentive to using violence against your neighbors and your countrymen.
International law has atrophied, as the leaders in the Security Council do not promote its development and application. The majority in Security Council, three NATO members, have set back the process to the point of nearly eliminating WWII legacy of legal framework.
And with various forms of arbitrary sanctions and piracy, things are getting rapidly worse.
Exactly, spot on!!
I was tiered of responding to him, i came to the conclusion that it was a waste of time.
—–
Absolutely disagree.
No individual or group using terrorist tactics can be called a “rebel” or an “opposition”.
—–
In other words, words don’t mean things. I’ll keep that in mind when reading your stuff.