T-72 with Homemade Slat Armor image - Tank Lovers Group

'Wow a T-72 from Syria not covered in battlescars? LIES!'

This could mean that the government forces are wining the fight and are seeing less and less opposition hence the lack of scars.

If the US stopped funding the "moderates" (yeah whatever, you give that much money and weaponry to some make believe group and then pretend it's not going to end up in ISIS hands? Give me a break) and stopped bombing Syrian military facilities and economic/civilian infrastructure then perhaps this would be the case. At the moment I can't see a resolution to the conflict within the foreseeable future.

Although in saying that, it would seem that the Syrian Army's morale isn't exactly low, and they're far better organised and equipped than the ISIS riffraff they're fighting, so take from that what you will.

According to Vanga's predictions the fall of Syria will mark the beginning of WW3. She died long before the conflict. So let's hope Syria doesn't fall.

lol, that's not true. I have a thousand and one ATGM videos to show you. Opposition are still kicking SAA's ***.
@OminousSpudd, Moderates do exist. They've been fighting both Assad and ISIS for 3 1/2 and 1 1/2 years respectively. Of course arms will end up in the hands of people they aren't intended for, that always happens. Russian and Iranian arms shipments end up in Rebel hands, ISIS convoys end up in Rebel hands, etc. That's normal in war.
The majority of SAA now are conscripted civilians (usually Sunnis, unwilling to fight), Alawites, and Shiites. Morale is extremely low. Assad has to rely on sectarian armed groups to keep afloat.
Syria's "fall" has little to nothing to do with WW3. Syria would be under the rule of Islamists (i.e. Islamic Front/Levant Front, majority of FSA are Islamist, etc.), and Islamists don't like either the Russian or American regimes (for good reason.)

Are these the same moderates that used Sarin on civilians? The US promises a half-billion in military aid to these "moderates" and you say it's not going to end up in IS hands, the strongest opposition to Assad in the country? Reports are coming out consistently stating that these "moderates" keep swearing allegiance to the IS' cause. Ever heard the old adage; "The enemy of my enemy is my friend"?

Syria's fall has as much to do with World War III as Libya, Afghanistan, Iraq et al. Interesting how Russia halted the US plans for Syria to begin with, and successfully orchestrated a deal to dispose of the bio-weapon issue, yet through ISIS Assad's government is again under pressure, and while everyone's attention is focused elsewhere (Charlie Hebdo and Ukraine, IS incursion into Iraq) the US is still achieving its goal of destabilisation in Syria.

The argument that moderates are the defining opposition in Syria is simply convenient bulldust.

Sarin gas was used in Eastern Ghouta. Rebels held and still hold Eastern Ghouta. Why gas themselves and their families? There is also plenty of proof to prove that Assad did it. Such as:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ilanR5_YeEo
https://www.bellingcat.com/resources/articles/2015/01/01/updated-google-earth-imagery-from-august-24th-2013-reveals-more-details-about-the-august-21st-sarin-attack/
Dude, ISIS are barely the strongest enemies of Assad. Assad and ISIS co-operated and Assad bought and helped maintain oil from ISIS areas. And no, there haven't been defections to ISIS since mid-2014. In fact, a lot of people have been defecting from ISIS recently. And that phrase is a simple view of the world.
As much to do with WW3 as those countries...as in nothing. Russia just lost influence in North Africa and Mid East, they still have plenty elsewhere. And the US didn't have "plans for Syria." This was a revolution by Syrians, for Syrians. Not by Americans. Not even close, they only gave money and weapons to certain rebel groups in Early 2014 (light support), and mid-2014 (heavy support, TOWs and the like for anti-ISIS missions, although mainly used against Assad.) And again, ISIS and Assad co-operate frequently, Assad attacked ISIS in only 6% of his force's total engagements, while ISIS attacked Assad in 12% of their engagements. These figures clearly indicate both sides fight essentially for PR. And again, even if that is the U'S' goal, the Revolution started by Syrians.
Moderates make up a rebel force of around 155,000. 90,000 from Levant Front and Islamic Front, 60,000 from FSA, and 5,000 from smaller groups. JaN makes about another 5,000, but they aren't moderates.

It was certainly within the rebel's interests to gas "their own" civilians, as can be seen by the result they nearly achieved. False-flag pretexts are all the rage currently.

Ibtimes.com

News.nationalpost.com

Uk.reuters.com

Yeah, no defections here whatsoever.

US didn't have plans you say? Youtube.com

Here's a good write up on how the US is handling its pig dog in the Mid East: Globalresearch.ca

Yes, quite the little relationship.

And yay, another drink to Bellingcat and good ol' Elliot Higgins who always seems to hit the party line bang on the head every time. Which, of course, makes sense once you look into his background.

I didn't say they never attacked ISIS. But only 6% of their attacks are direct at ISIS. Rest are directed at civilians and Rebels. Notice how rebels have to fight both ISIS and Regime most of the time, and sometimes at the same exact time, in areas near each other.
Never any moderates to begin with? I guess those army defectors that defected by the tens of thousands were just boogeymen. Also, they can easily brush off JAN, but they can't afford to open a third front. A 2 front war is already bad enough.
Politics aside eh? Check out this:
Spioenkop.blogspot.com

The rebels didn't join ISIS or Nusra, they joined Levant Front, which Hazzm was already a part of. This was confirmed by Hazzm themselves, after they had a battle with Nusra.
Oohh, scary. Syrians protest and suddenly it's a U.S. conspiracy because of some idiotic video.
Bellingcat and Elliot Higgins are always on the spot, they've never been wrong whenever I looked at their information, and all of their sources are open, meaning you can look at them too.

lol, I actually hate the US government, and never even said or suggested that they are the saviors of anyone.
ISIS was formed in 1999, unlike most idiots like you would believe. In Iraq. Under Saddam's era. They thrived off of chaos.
No, SAA are not even close to winning against the rebels, they are very very far from it. The rebels made significant advances in Northern Aleppo (counterattacked after regime offensive, most of the regime gains made in 2014 were now lost or under threat), Southern Syria (Shiekh Miskeen and Nawa gains, Dara'a supply chain almost completely cut, etc.)
Stop referring to me when talking about the U.S. I'm Syrian, I only live in America. And I hate this government's foreign policy.
Oh yes, Libya, a country ruled by 1 guy for 40 years will instantly become magic and ponies - said every idiot ever.
You can make all the BS claims you want, but the truth is still clear and evident. Rebels are fighting both ISIS (terrorists) and Assad (also terrorists.)
Might I remind you how ISIS and Assad co-operate? Here, have this:
Syrianobserver.com
Not to mention the oil being sold and cooperation between them there, as well.

ISIS is as fictional as Al Qaeda =) Also you are a fool to leave your country just to live in the 'American dream'... and boy what a dream it is.

I didn't leave my country at my own will, that was my parents' decision. And considering there is much better education (at the high school level and lower) here than there is in Syria, it's a better choice. However the college system does suck.
And good job responding to my arguments. And ISIS and Al Qaeda both exist. Saying they don't is an insult to all the Syrians, Iraqis, Afghanis, Libyans, Americans, and everyone else they've killed.

Of course there is physical evidence of acts of terror but 'ISIS' and 'Al Qaeda' are just labels which western media and governments stick at whatever they choose to. You should realise that. They will do whatever it takes to justify their actions (mostly military interventions) in order to gain control over natural resources and gain influence over certain region of the globe. Funding radical militants and fueling local conflicts by selling weapons to both sides is what they do for a living.

Really? Natural resources?
FFS, the United States gets most of its oil and natural resources from the Americas (Canada, Mexico, etc.) They only get around 13% of the oil from the ME.
And don't pretend that Russia and the "East" don't fuel conflicts. Assad would have been toppled in 2012 because Damascus was surrounded by the rebels, completely. He only had a few supply routes out of the city. Then heavy weapons and ammo shipments + Iranian/Hezbollah troops and other foreigners came in and turned the tide. Now the tide is in the favor of the rebels again because they have organized themselves and actually train.

Dude, you need to watch some of those educational clips for kids such as this one Youtube.com then you move to geopolitics not the other way around.

I don't need joke videos to tell me what is going on in my country and the middle east. Instead of throwing a random video, why not actually reply to my arguments? Or at least defend your idiotic far-left view of the world?

'idiotic far-left'

So I'm an idiot for believing that the military industrial complex should go **** itself? OK.

This has nothing to do with the MIC. The Syrian Revolution had nothing to do with any foreign power. America sees a chance to have its interests fulfilled in Syria, but that won't happen. Not when Islamists are essentially the majority of the opposition (which isn't a bad thing, at all.) And what I mean by idiotic far-left is the belief that anything that is anti-US and/or pro-Russia must be glorious. Which is entirely false. Both gov'ts are huge ******** to everyone.
Although i do agree the military industrial complex is terrible, that has literally nothing to do with Syria. The Syrian Revolution was started by Syrians for Syrians.

'pro-Russia'

Quote me, where have I said anything about Russia? Or you just simply assume that I am pro-Russian because I judge USA interference in other countries' problems? That's so American of you =) Putin is an ex-KGB agent what are you expecting from him? Commend the US government? =)

@ CadianConscript

Dude stop it. You can help him. Hes lost. There is no arguing with his kind.
You yust wasting time on that kid. If his mind isn't capable of seeing or accepting the truth whats happening, or what happend. Then there is no point in explaining the obvious. If he dont get it. Leave him

His answers are getting more and more ridiculous

You literally repeated the same exact propaganda that comes out of the mouths of people who worship Russia and Putin. It's ridiculous, you made all of these claims about the Syrian Revolution and the Opposition, backed it up with no evidence whatsoever, and then tried to change subjects.

Ok. Last one, then I stop =) Look man you are in USA and I am in Bulgaria. We harbour refugees from the 'Syrian revolution' and the USA does not. Can we agree upon that? No other country in the the entire 'mighty' EU wants them. So were stuck with a lot of people with no place to go. I've seen them, some of them are just desperate others boldly claim that they've been paid to come here. Ain't that the weirdest **** you've ever came across? So why doesn't the EU help them? Why some of them are paid to come here? What's the grand scheme behind it? Is it Russia? Why would they do that? I have plenty of reasons to believe that the US government is behind it. If we're going to be so bipolar about it then state your reasons why do you think it's the Russians?

No other country in the EU? I guess 85,000 in Sweden is nothing. While US barely takes in any refugees, I never celebrated them doing so. Bulgaria takes in refugees because they have to, EU regulations require that. Let me ask you a question: How many refugees have glorious Iran and Russia taken in? 0. They fund Assad, claim to help Syrians, and take in 0 refugees. Not that any Syrians would go there, anyways. I highly doubt refugees are paid to go places, considering they're damn refugees. Refugees are given allowance yes, but not paid to be refugees in another country.
Russia is at the core of the conflict because they helped Assad. Damascus was surrounded in 2012 by the rebels but b/c of Russian, Iranian, and Hezbollah interference that changed. Now rebels are back with the advantage and are advancing. If Russia hadn't intervened I would be in Syria right now and we wouldn't be arguing about this.

'If Russia hadn't intervened I would be in Syria right now and we wouldn't be arguing about this. ' And USA is not involved at all, right?

Also when this whole thing ends (if ever) I'll ask you how do you like the 'democracy' =) Good riddance.

The first TOWs came to rebels in April 2014. Two years after lethal support came from Russia, Iran, and shiite foreign fighters. And no, I want Sharia Law (none of that ISIS crap,) which is better than democracy. If you actually knew what it is. But you don't, so you'll laugh at that statement.

So its okay for anti-Muslim riots to take place because reasons?

No, it's not ok, but I feel like this conversation is over.