see I'm a suspicious bastard, I'm thinking if the first thing he says is 'I'm a civilian' then he clearly knows what's going on and is trying to differentiate himself from the guards, at which point I'm thinking he also looks pretty well fed for a guy who's been starved for 3 or 4 months
There are plenty of reports of prisoners having good access to food and water, while being held captive in Syria:
Quote:
Footage has shown men, women and in some cases children emerging from overcrowded windowless cells, often disorientated and unaware of events that had taken place outside.
However, Mr Timmerman appears to have been relatively well-treated, telling CBS: "I'm feeling well. I've been fed and I've been watered, so I'm feeling well."
He added that he had had the use of a mobile phone during his detention and had spoken to his family three weeks ago.
Speaking to fellow US outlet NBC, Mr Timmerman said he had crossed the mountains between Lebanon and Syria on a "pilgrimage" and had "been reading the scripture a lot".
In places like that, the variety of conditions is extremely normal. Even if you're never letting someone out, you can still for example have leverage over them or their family. It also makes people in prison feel like they have something to lose. "I don't have it as bad as some here, I should keep my head down."
But it can also be just random, essentially. If there's no oversight, the guards can just treat everyone the way they like.
Last edited by Itse; 12-12-2024 at 11:09 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
Read the following, which summarizes my confusion nicely!
"What's happening Syria is probably the most incoherent geopolitical event I've come across, and the more you look into it, the more confusing it gets.
I mean, just look at this list:
- First of all, the speed of Assad's collapse still makes very little sense: after successfully holding out against multiple enemies for 13 years with Russian and Iranian backing in a brutal civil war, his regime suddenly crumbled in just 11 days with almost no bloodshed.
- The "liberators" of Syria being celebrated by the West are Islamist groups on their own official terrorist lists. The country's new leader, Al-Julani, still has a $10 million bounty on his head as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" for founding the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda.
- Biden called this "a historic opportunity for the long-suffering people of Syria to build a better future" while his administration continues to occupy a third of Syria, control its oil fields, maintain crippling sanctions, and bomb its territory... thereby obviously very much compromising this better future.
- Assad's Prime Minister immediately agreed to work with the rebels and they accepted him - despite being mortal enemies in a brutal 13-year civil war.
- Al-Julani, after years of orchestrating suicide bombings and sectarian massacres against civilians, is now suddenly positioning himself as "diversity friendly".
- Russia, despite being in an alliance with Syria dating back to the Soviet era, billions invested in protecting Assad, and their only Mediterranean naval base in Tartus, essentially shrugged it all and let their ally fall.
- Syria's new leaders remain bizarrely silent about Israel invading their territory and the U.S. bombing and occupying their country. They've said nothing about their strategic assets - including the entire navy and air force - being destroyed in U.S. and Israeli air raids.
- The U.S. maintains its occupation of a third of Syria (including most oil fields), claiming it's necessary to "ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS" - despite Trump declaring in 2019 (and the U.S. repeatedly confirming since) that "we have defeated ISIS in Syria". Western media largely ignore this ongoing occupation while celebrating Syria's "liberation".
- Hamas, while in the middle of a war with Israel, took time to congratulate the Syrian rebels - even though Assad was their (and Iran's) longtime ally and Syria's fall significantly weakens their own strategic position.
- The U.S. celebrates the liberation of Syrian prisoners while operating its own concentration camps in the country (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...rs-and-victims) holding tens of thousands indefinitely without trial - half of them children - but that apparently doesn't count as oppression.
- Türkiye is fighting against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with apparent U.S. approval, while the SDF was fighting Assad (which the U.S. wanted) - meaning U.S.-backed forces are effectively fighting other U.S.-backed forces.
- Iran, normally eager to defend its regional interests, suddenly abandoned billions in investments and a crucial strategic ally in their "Axis of Resistance", evacuating their personnel and citizens within hours.
Truly one of the strangest chapters in modern geopolitical history. Every possible explanation contains its own contradictions, and most players are acting against their own stated principles and interests.
At this stage it looks like the simplest explanation might go something like this: the U.S. welcomes the fall of a longtime opponent; neighboring powers like Israel and Türkiye see an opportunity for territorial gain; rebel leaders seem willing to accept loss of sovereignty and territory in exchange for domestic control over a diminished Syria; Russia and Iran chose to cut their losses given other regional priorities; and smaller players like Hamas are scrambling to adapt. Still, the unprecedented speed and coordination of these events suggests we're missing some crucial pieces of this very strange puzzle."
Read the following, which summarizes my confusion nicely!
"What's happening Syria is probably the most incoherent geopolitical event I've come across, and the more you look into it, the more confusing it gets.
I mean, just look at this list:
- First of all, the speed of Assad's collapse still makes very little sense: after successfully holding out against multiple enemies for 13 years with Russian and Iranian backing in a brutal civil war, his regime suddenly crumbled in just 11 days with almost no bloodshed.
- The "liberators" of Syria being celebrated by the West are Islamist groups on their own official terrorist lists. The country's new leader, Al-Julani, still has a $10 million bounty on his head as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" for founding the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda.
- Biden called this "a historic opportunity for the long-suffering people of Syria to build a better future" while his administration continues to occupy a third of Syria, control its oil fields, maintain crippling sanctions, and bomb its territory... thereby obviously very much compromising this better future.
- Assad's Prime Minister immediately agreed to work with the rebels and they accepted him - despite being mortal enemies in a brutal 13-year civil war.
- Al-Julani, after years of orchestrating suicide bombings and sectarian massacres against civilians, is now suddenly positioning himself as "diversity friendly".
- Russia, despite being in an alliance with Syria dating back to the Soviet era, billions invested in protecting Assad, and their only Mediterranean naval base in Tartus, essentially shrugged it all and let their ally fall.
- Syria's new leaders remain bizarrely silent about Israel invading their territory and the U.S. bombing and occupying their country. They've said nothing about their strategic assets - including the entire navy and air force - being destroyed in U.S. and Israeli air raids.
- The U.S. maintains its occupation of a third of Syria (including most oil fields), claiming it's necessary to "ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS" - despite Trump declaring in 2019 (and the U.S. repeatedly confirming since) that "we have defeated ISIS in Syria". Western media largely ignore this ongoing occupation while celebrating Syria's "liberation".
- Hamas, while in the middle of a war with Israel, took time to congratulate the Syrian rebels - even though Assad was their (and Iran's) longtime ally and Syria's fall significantly weakens their own strategic position.
- The U.S. celebrates the liberation of Syrian prisoners while operating its own concentration camps in the country (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...rs-and-victims) holding tens of thousands indefinitely without trial - half of them children - but that apparently doesn't count as oppression.
- Türkiye is fighting against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with apparent U.S. approval, while the SDF was fighting Assad (which the U.S. wanted) - meaning U.S.-backed forces are effectively fighting other U.S.-backed forces.
- Iran, normally eager to defend its regional interests, suddenly abandoned billions in investments and a crucial strategic ally in their "Axis of Resistance", evacuating their personnel and citizens within hours.
Truly one of the strangest chapters in modern geopolitical history. Every possible explanation contains its own contradictions, and most players are acting against their own stated principles and interests.
At this stage it looks like the simplest explanation might go something like this: the U.S. welcomes the fall of a longtime opponent; neighboring powers like Israel and Türkiye see an opportunity for territorial gain; rebel leaders seem willing to accept loss of sovereignty and territory in exchange for domestic control over a diminished Syria; Russia and Iran chose to cut their losses given other regional priorities; and smaller players like Hamas are scrambling to adapt. Still, the unprecedented speed and coordination of these events suggests we're missing some crucial pieces of this very strange puzzle."
It is quite interesting. Do you have a link to an article you are quoting from?
Thanks.
Read the following, which summarizes my confusion nicely!
"What's happening Syria is probably the most incoherent geopolitical event I've come across, and the more you look into it, the more confusing it gets.
I mean, just look at this list:
- First of all, the speed of Assad's collapse still makes very little sense: after successfully holding out against multiple enemies for 13 years with Russian and Iranian backing in a brutal civil war, his regime suddenly crumbled in just 11 days with almost no bloodshed.
- The "liberators" of Syria being celebrated by the West are Islamist groups on their own official terrorist lists. The country's new leader, Al-Julani, still has a $10 million bounty on his head as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" for founding the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda.
- Biden called this "a historic opportunity for the long-suffering people of Syria to build a better future" while his administration continues to occupy a third of Syria, control its oil fields, maintain crippling sanctions, and bomb its territory... thereby obviously very much compromising this better future.
- Assad's Prime Minister immediately agreed to work with the rebels and they accepted him - despite being mortal enemies in a brutal 13-year civil war.
- Al-Julani, after years of orchestrating suicide bombings and sectarian massacres against civilians, is now suddenly positioning himself as "diversity friendly".
- Russia, despite being in an alliance with Syria dating back to the Soviet era, billions invested in protecting Assad, and their only Mediterranean naval base in Tartus, essentially shrugged it all and let their ally fall.
- Syria's new leaders remain bizarrely silent about Israel invading their territory and the U.S. bombing and occupying their country. They've said nothing about their strategic assets - including the entire navy and air force - being destroyed in U.S. and Israeli air raids.
- The U.S. maintains its occupation of a third of Syria (including most oil fields), claiming it's necessary to "ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS" - despite Trump declaring in 2019 (and the U.S. repeatedly confirming since) that "we have defeated ISIS in Syria". Western media largely ignore this ongoing occupation while celebrating Syria's "liberation".
- Hamas, while in the middle of a war with Israel, took time to congratulate the Syrian rebels - even though Assad was their (and Iran's) longtime ally and Syria's fall significantly weakens their own strategic position.
- The U.S. celebrates the liberation of Syrian prisoners while operating its own concentration camps in the country (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...rs-and-victims) holding tens of thousands indefinitely without trial - half of them children - but that apparently doesn't count as oppression.
- Türkiye is fighting against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with apparent U.S. approval, while the SDF was fighting Assad (which the U.S. wanted) - meaning U.S.-backed forces are effectively fighting other U.S.-backed forces.
- Iran, normally eager to defend its regional interests, suddenly abandoned billions in investments and a crucial strategic ally in their "Axis of Resistance", evacuating their personnel and citizens within hours.
Truly one of the strangest chapters in modern geopolitical history. Every possible explanation contains its own contradictions, and most players are acting against their own stated principles and interests.
At this stage it looks like the simplest explanation might go something like this: the U.S. welcomes the fall of a longtime opponent; neighboring powers like Israel and Türkiye see an opportunity for territorial gain; rebel leaders seem willing to accept loss of sovereignty and territory in exchange for domestic control over a diminished Syria; Russia and Iran chose to cut their losses given other regional priorities; and smaller players like Hamas are scrambling to adapt. Still, the unprecedented speed and coordination of these events suggests we're missing some crucial pieces of this very strange puzzle."
It doesn't seem that complicated.
Assad had been propped up by Russian and Iran. Russia doesn't have any spare weapons to send to Assad. Iran's enforcers, Hezbollah, who had become Assad's main fighting force, have seen much better days. During previous rebel pushes, Hezbollah had sent thousands of troops to back up Assad. That obviously didn't happen.
The relationship between Assad, Hamas, and the other Arab nations is complicated. Assad is a pro Arab nationalist. His also a Shi'ite oppressing a Sunni majority. Most Arab nations, with the exception of Bahrain and possibly Lebanon, are led by Sunnis.
Hamas' main benefactor has become Iran. Hamas is a Sunni nationalist organization. Iran is led by Shi'ites. Hamas likes the money, but at the end of the day, if the two ever accomplish their goals, they'll go toe to toe. Similar to the Hitler/Stalin alliance in WWII. Tahrir al-Sham are allies and closely affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the same organization Hamas was derived from. Hamas and Tahrir al-Sham are natural allies.
Turkey is concerned about having a Kurdish state on its borders. It's involvement there is more about destabilizing the Kurds than expanding its territory.
Syria was Russia's main weapon against Israel for 70 years. They've had large amounts of weapons pointed directly at Israel. Israel is taking out those weapons before they fall into the hands of Tahrir al-Sham, who have already declared that Israel is an enemy and moved hundreds of troops to border. They have troops in the former demilitarized zone, but that's not a habitable zone. There are a few mountain villages, largely inhabited by Druze, there, but not much more. I'm sure right wing elements in Israel also want to expand territory.
To Tahrir al-Sham's credit they are already talking about democracy and handing over chemical weapons. The West ought to at least give them a chance. There does appear to be a genuine sense of national unity and freedom after the fall of Assad. The last thing the US should do is polarize that feeling against them by immediately attacking Tahrir al-Sham. The current talk in Syria is of unity governments, freedom of religion, speech, etc...Tahrir al-Sham's track record isn't great, but they deserve some benefit of the doubt.
I think things look fairly clear and all the parties are acting consistently to how they have in the past.
The US does not occupy "third of Syria" or most of their oil fields, not sure what that's even supposed to refer to, they only have a few hundred boots on the ground in Syria. They also haven't been consistently backing any party in Syria, and they definitely do not control the al-Hol refugee camp, that's controlled by ISIL... and that's not a mistake you can make accidentally, so someone has been reading obvious propaganda.
I'm gonna guess that's not all of that's inaccurate or incorrect there.
The Syrian civil war is messy enough without this kind of misinformation.
The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Itse For This Useful Post:
Read the following, which summarizes my confusion nicely!
"What's happening Syria is probably the most incoherent geopolitical event I've come across, and the more you look into it, the more confusing it gets.
I mean, just look at this list:
- First of all, the speed of Assad's collapse still makes very little sense: after successfully holding out against multiple enemies for 13 years with Russian and Iranian backing in a brutal civil war, his regime suddenly crumbled in just 11 days with almost no bloodshed.
- The "liberators" of Syria being celebrated by the West are Islamist groups on their own official terrorist lists. The country's new leader, Al-Julani, still has a $10 million bounty on his head as a "Specially Designated Global Terrorist" for founding the Syrian branch of Al Qaeda.
- Biden called this "a historic opportunity for the long-suffering people of Syria to build a better future" while his administration continues to occupy a third of Syria, control its oil fields, maintain crippling sanctions, and bomb its territory... thereby obviously very much compromising this better future.
- Assad's Prime Minister immediately agreed to work with the rebels and they accepted him - despite being mortal enemies in a brutal 13-year civil war.
- Al-Julani, after years of orchestrating suicide bombings and sectarian massacres against civilians, is now suddenly positioning himself as "diversity friendly".
- Russia, despite being in an alliance with Syria dating back to the Soviet era, billions invested in protecting Assad, and their only Mediterranean naval base in Tartus, essentially shrugged it all and let their ally fall.
- Syria's new leaders remain bizarrely silent about Israel invading their territory and the U.S. bombing and occupying their country. They've said nothing about their strategic assets - including the entire navy and air force - being destroyed in U.S. and Israeli air raids.
- The U.S. maintains its occupation of a third of Syria (including most oil fields), claiming it's necessary to "ensure the enduring defeat of ISIS" - despite Trump declaring in 2019 (and the U.S. repeatedly confirming since) that "we have defeated ISIS in Syria". Western media largely ignore this ongoing occupation while celebrating Syria's "liberation".
- Hamas, while in the middle of a war with Israel, took time to congratulate the Syrian rebels - even though Assad was their (and Iran's) longtime ally and Syria's fall significantly weakens their own strategic position.
- The U.S. celebrates the liberation of Syrian prisoners while operating its own concentration camps in the country (https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...rs-and-victims) holding tens of thousands indefinitely without trial - half of them children - but that apparently doesn't count as oppression.
- Türkiye is fighting against the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) with apparent U.S. approval, while the SDF was fighting Assad (which the U.S. wanted) - meaning U.S.-backed forces are effectively fighting other U.S.-backed forces.
- Iran, normally eager to defend its regional interests, suddenly abandoned billions in investments and a crucial strategic ally in their "Axis of Resistance", evacuating their personnel and citizens within hours.
Truly one of the strangest chapters in modern geopolitical history. Every possible explanation contains its own contradictions, and most players are acting against their own stated principles and interests.
At this stage it looks like the simplest explanation might go something like this: the U.S. welcomes the fall of a longtime opponent; neighboring powers like Israel and Türkiye see an opportunity for territorial gain; rebel leaders seem willing to accept loss of sovereignty and territory in exchange for domestic control over a diminished Syria; Russia and Iran chose to cut their losses given other regional priorities; and smaller players like Hamas are scrambling to adapt. Still, the unprecedented speed and coordination of these events suggests we're missing some crucial pieces of this very strange puzzle."
You may not be old enough to remember how fast the world's second most powerful country that had all but singlehandedly won the second world war a few decades before fell apart, in retrospect you could see the seeds of the fall a couple of years before but at the time it seemed like it fell in a week or two, Gorbachev was arrested while on holiday on August 19th and Moscow was placed under martial law by elements of the army, Yeltsin organized the resistance in Moscow, the coup collapsed in a couple of days on the 21st, Gorbachev resigned as party leader on the 24th as it was clear Yeltsin was now in charge of Russia and Ukraine declared independence the next day, in 4 days the USSR had collapsed
The Following User Says Thank You to afc wimbledon For This Useful Post:
You may not be old enough to remember how fast the world's second most powerful country that had all but singlehandedly won the second world war a few decades before fell apart, in retrospect you could see the seeds of the fall a couple of years before but at the time it seemed like it fell in a week or two, Gorbachev was arrested while on holiday on August 19th and Moscow was placed under martial law by elements of the army, Yeltsin organized the resistance in Moscow, the coup collapsed in a couple of days on the 21st, Gorbachev resigned as party leader on the 24th as it was clear Yeltsin was now in charge of Russia and Ukraine declared independence the next day, in 4 days the USSR had collapsed
I agree. It was numerous tired actors that fell like dominos, all leaning on each other. Luck was involved but sometimes its a chain reaction like you mention that is hard to stop.
I agree. It was numerous tired actors that fell like dominos, all leaning on each other. Luck was involved but sometimes its a chain reaction like you mention that is hard to stop.
Sounds like Assad's army didn't fight back and largely just abandoned their posts too. He wasn't paying or arming them properly, and he'd worked his way pretty deep into the reserves. An army composed of people forced to fight for someone they didn't support.
Sounds like Assad's army didn't fight back and largely just abandoned their posts too. He wasn't paying or arming them properly, and he'd worked his way pretty deep into the reserves. An army composed of people forced to fight for someone they didn't support.
It was obviously a different situation, but a similar thing happened in Iraq when the U.S. invaded. A lot of Saddam Hussein's soldiers just put on their civies and went home. It wasn't worth dying for a leader that had such low approval and was resented by most people.
I am sure that Assad had his hardcore supporters, but the cult of personality had fallen off significantly over the past decade.
__________________
"A pessimist thinks things can't get any worse. An optimist knows they can."
It was obviously a different situation, but a similar thing happened in Iraq when the U.S. invaded. A lot of Saddam Hussein's soldiers just put on their civies and went home. It wasn't worth dying for a leader that had such low approval and was resented by most people.
I am sure that Assad had his hardcore supporters, but the cult of personality had fallen off significantly over the past decade.
It sounds like, by the end, Assad had no standing army of his own. At least not one that could have confronted an invading force. He still had the army outposts all over the cities, but those were only partially manned. It would have given his citizens the appearance of control, but Assad had no real military capabilities left. When the rebels came through, the small outposts manned by a few soldiers, sometimes without proper weapons, just gave up, or worse turned sides:
A big issue was the collapse of the Syrian pound. The soldiers salaries were worthless. Many just left. Sometimes officers sent the soldiers home, so that they could collect their salaries too.
Quote:
What was left on the ground was a Syrian army severely lacking in cohesion, all the sources said, describing multiple units that were undermanned because officers were accepting bribes to let soldiers off duty, or had told soldiers to go home and were collecting their salaries themselves.
With Hezbollah gone, all it took was a push from the rebels, as there was nothing left to defend with.
see I'm a suspicious bastard, I'm thinking if the first thing he says is 'I'm a civilian' then he clearly knows what's going on and is trying to differentiate himself from the guards, at which point I'm thinking he also looks pretty well fed for a guy who's been starved for 3 or 4 months
Looks like AFC was right to be suspicious. It now sounds like this guy is actually an Assad-regime torturer.
