this was more excusable before we had that article revealing this but anyone still parroting assadist talking points is just being willingly ignorant.
I might sound like I'm Coping, but I never understand how Assad's regime is perceived as the backbone of the resistance when the regime is basically a fancier version of a gunrunner, Assad used to be a darling of the West where the west have sent suspected terrorist to be tortured in this country (granted Jordan and Egypt did the same). The Regime has opportunity to negotiate an end to the conflict (as Iran and Russia suggested years ago), but they never did.
As this point, the regime really bought this on themselves. Yes the regime of HST is not going to be good for anyone, but Assad stagnant governance created a environment for Nepotism and corruption not unlike the Karzai's regime. What is also buried under the whole critical support is that the Assads also cracked down on a lot of the opposition which included communists and Palestinian militant groups to insure the survival of the Regime.
Assad's regime was not really a backbone of anything, not even itself. But it was a sine qua non condition for the resistance to even exist. Without Syria it becomes very difficult if not impossible to supply Hezbollah, reducing Lebanon to the country it was designed to be: something that can be easily occupied at Israel's leisure. Likewise since Syria no longer has much of an army, it too is having even more of its land occupied at Netanyahu's whim.
That said, I do agree that at one point we were gonna cross this bridge. Even if Baa'thist Syria wasn't a dead end, Assad was not particularly good at bucking that trend.
I might sound like I'm Coping, but I never understand how Assad's regime is perceived as the backbone of the resistance when the regime is basically a fancier version of a gunrunner, Assad used to be a darling of the West where the west have sent suspected terrorist to be tortured in this country (granted Jordan and Egypt did the same). The Regime has opportunity to negotiate an end to the conflict (as Iran and Russia suggested years ago), but they never did.
As this point, the regime really bought this on themselves. Yes the regime of HST is not going to be good for anyone, but Assad stagnant governance created a environment for Nepotism and corruption not unlike the Karzai's regime. What is also buried under the whole critical support is that the Assads also cracked down on a lot of the opposition which included communists and Palestinian militant groups to insure the survival of the Regime.
Assad's regime was not really a backbone of anything, not even itself. But it was a sine qua non condition for the resistance to even exist. Without Syria it becomes very difficult if not impossible to supply Hezbollah, reducing Lebanon to the country it was designed to be: something that can be easily occupied at Israel's leisure. Likewise since Syria no longer has much of an army, it too is having even more of its land occupied at Netanyahu's whim.
That said, I do agree that at one point we were gonna cross this bridge. Even if Baa'thist Syria wasn't a dead end, Assad was not particularly good at bucking that trend.