The battle for Aleppo is pivotal- This fact was made clear weeks ago here at the blog.January 16/2016: Syrian Endgame Could Begin in Aleppo- Who Would Block This Pivotal Win?
‘Ask yourself what group or organization would want only to deny Syria’s combined allied forces from taking back Aleppo? The answer is NATO”
Oh a baby in a blanket... Not! Look at all the men in the vicinity?I would take this staged photo, with the requisite 'baby' imagery, as a manipulative device being used for maximum emotional appeal.CTV-Syrian Troops are within kilometres of the Turkish border Are The “refugees” at the border wanting to flee the bombing? I'm not seeing 'refugees' These are fighters I would think they are from the US/NATO bases that succored them in Turkey- That psyop photo makes it very clear. Are they leaving Syria? Or, are they entering Syria? Smart money says these "refugees" are entering Syria.These are the fighters, most probably already trained, mentioned in this post from January 7/2016: The Top US Military Official Arrives in Turkey. Who Greets Him?...
‘Syrian army troops recaptured a new village north of Aleppo Monday, bringing troops and allied militiamen to within a few kilometres of the Turkish border as part of a major Russian-backed offensive in the area”Turkey has come under mounting pressure to open its border to assist the fleeing Syrians, many of whom have been sleeping in cold weather in open fields near the Bab al-Salameh border crossing.“The army gains have allowed troops to almost fully encircle Aleppo, Syria's largest city and one-time commercial centre, preparing the way for a blockade. The main supply line to the Turkish border has already been cut and many residents of the city were looking to leave, anticipating severe shortages in the coming days”
Sleeping on ‘open fields’ In tents of course. Hmmmmmm....Syrian army cut the main supply line to the Turkish border- The one that is/was held by the 'rebels'That supply line will be mentioned again, below in the linked article: From the European Council on Foreign Relations. They (ECFR) lay out the response to Syrian/Russia gains- I’m ignoring the spin. And pointing out what the concerns are and what the response will be via ECFR.
“But the real question remains what can usefully be done? The idea of continued negotiations is clearly out of favour. The government’s military advances have been accompanied by the predictable collapse of intra-Syrian talks”
"With the regime appearing to build momentum toward victory on the back of wider recent gains in Latakia and Daraa the desired response by many is to put negotiations on hold, increase lethal support to the various factions of the opposition and seek a more favourable military balance for a deal"
SAA gains ground. Syria is taking back her territory. Negotiations out the door- So obviously a military solution, as repeatedly mentioned, is the only option. In order to create a more favourable military balance to force a deal. The talk of war makers and mass murdering minded psychos.
Just as Russia and Iran stepped in as the government teetered on the alleged brink last summer, so the backers of the opposition can now be expected to step up their own gameThe regime is not on the verge of outright victory. Certainly, the Russian-facilitated advance has made a huge difference, consolidating the regime’s position and putting it back on the offensive. The removal of Assad in the near future, whether militarily or politically, is now off the table - whatever Western diplomats may choose to read into Russian messaging suggesting greater flexibility over his position during recent ISSG talks.
For Russia and Iran alike, Assad remains the immediate guarantor of their interests, even if they are not tied to him for the long term. Both know that in the current climate any rapid transition away from Assad, even if tightly managed to secure their wider interests, would risk a potentially uncontrollable wider unravelling”
Assad’s (SAA) forces remain over-stretched and it is not clear that the regime has the resources to maintain activities on multiple fronts, let alone engage in a long siege of Aleppo or move towards actually taking control of the city. Unlike elsewhere, the rebels are less likely to be willing to surrender, even under siege conditions, given the strategic importance of the city.The opposition and its backers remain focused on denying them that strength. The extent to which they succeed depends a great deal on the US position. (It depends entirely on the US/NATO position)A more likely outcome is that Washington will succumb to pressure to open up the flow of advanced weapons to the Syrian opposition, namely the provision of more TOW anti-tank missiles which made such an impact in blunting initial regime advances under cover of Russian air power in September and October.
In order to enable Washington to up the weapon flow- The US needs Turkey to open the border in the immediate area of the last border crossing held by NATO’s mercs. The article discusses the no fly zone as no go.
Allies are “likely to put considerable pressure on Washington to find a way to re-open the supply route into Aleppo city, possibly through the last remaining Turkish border crossing still in the hands of rebels, Bab al-Hawa”
For the United States, increased weapons flows are a more palatable alternative than direct intervention. These new weapons will be aimed not so much at securing decisive victories, but at keeping the opposition alive as a viable fighting force, preventing the fall of Aleppo and making Russia pay a higher price for their ongoing support. 2017 will usher in a new US president and hope that the new office holder will be willing to up US intervention in the conflict, something that is distinctly possible given US political dynamics and the expected desire of a new president to project assertiveness as a mark of contrast with Obama’s perceived timidity. Keeping the rebels ready for this moment is likely to have already emerged as a critical strategy of the opposition and its backers.
To summarize- The NATO global army and it’s minions will supply more weapons. To keep the opposition viable as a fighting force. To prevent Syria from retaking it’s territory. At all costs. Until a new president is in place. And it will be the evil & ruthless Hillary Clinton. Because the self identifying lefties always accept war under the democrats- And Hillary will kill with glee!