"The Battle For The Syrian City Of Aleppo Rages On" Topic

"Syrian government forces and rebels fought battles in the center of Aleppo and north of the city on Friday, a week into a Russian-backed offensive by the Syrian army to take the entire area, a war monitor and sources on both sides said.

There were conflicting accounts on the outcome of Friday's fighting. The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights and a Syrian military source said government forces had captured territory north of Aleppo and buildings in the city center.

Rebel sources however denied there had been any additional advances north of the city by government forces that seized the Handarat camp area north of Aleppo on Thursday. A rebel official said government forces had advanced in the Suleiman al-Halabi district of central Aleppo, but were then forced to withdraw…."

link

Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Aleppo = Syrian Stalingrad. It would be a seesaw battle and struggle to the death of epic proportions. The rebels still hold the east but government and pro-Assad forces are trying to alter that.

Yes, some have made that analogy … and I think it is appropriate. Mosul will be similar …

Agree.

Amicalement
Armand

I think Aleppo is the real game here.

Mosul is not as critical to survival of the Iraqi regime in Bagdhad as Aleppo (once Syria's biggest city) is to Assad.

The future of Syria will be decided there.

We'll have to wait and see. Assad has to retake Raqqa, as part of reclaiming his country. For better or worse. And it does not matter who he takes from, Syrian Rebels, Daesh etc., …

But both Raqqa and Mosul are key cities to Daesh. Part of defeating them has to include reclaiming those cities. And removing as many Daesh as possible from the battlefield.

Removing ISIS doesn't resolve anything though. There's still a myriad of insurgent groups, semi-official militias and national players in both Syria and Iraq.

There's actually no political solution at all. Removing ISIS simply takes out the only thing unifying the various ad hoc coalitions. It makes the world less stable by taking out the tenuous links between Russia and USA, Iran and USA, Kurds and Arabs, Shia and Sunni.

And taking out ISIS does not stop terrorism either.

Aleppo will be the new Grozny, levelled and depopulated to a vestigial shell of its former self because of the interference of foreign powers in a civil war. Thank you Russia, Iran, Turkey and the USA for your valuable support.

Rod Robertson.

Though Aleppo is on a much larger scale. Grozny was only about 400,000 people (now 270,000). Aleppo was a city of over 2 million people.

Aleppo's destruction is also being waged on a longer scale which will impact on future habitation.

Grozny was 1994-96 than a break and then a return to war 1999-2000 which meant many displaced people could return home without setting permanent roots elsewhere.

Aleppo's been smashed for 4 years straight. People will have started setting up permanent residences elsewhere.

Also bare in mind Grozny warfare was essentially locals versus a foreign power (Russia). Aleppo is further dismembered by sectarianism.

Finally the Russians actually spent a ton of money rebuilding Grozny. Whatever is left of Syria won't and I doubt the international community will be coughing up huge amounts of cash to rebuild the country one day when the war finishes.

So Aleppo's future is far darker than Grozny's.

Deadles:

Your points are correct and are well made. I however was involved in some rather maudlin and metaphorical teeth-gnashing rather than an objective analysis. Thanks for slapping me out of the clouds and back into the real world.

Cheers.
Rod Robertson.

Sorry Rod. I guess I was merely pointing out Grozny is a happy ending story unlike Aleppo so far! :P

And taking out ISIS does not stop terrorism either.

True … but it has been said many times. This will most likely be a generational conflict. However IMO, if Raqqa and Mosul fall to Assad and Iraq respectively. And of course eliminate many Daesh members in doing that. It may go a long way to attempt to possibly stabilizing both those countries. Now that may be easier said that done.

But I see both those cities being taken away from Daesh … A good, albeit small victory for those nations … Less Daesh in both Syria and Iraq can't possibly be a bad turn of events. They both need to try to regain and stabilize their countries. Daesh is just another obstacle in the way …

Whatever is left of Syria won't and I doubt the international community will be coughing up huge amounts of cash to rebuild the country one day when the war finishes.

China could make loans to Syria with the caveat that they have to be spent on Chinese construction companies, somewhat like US military aid to Israel. It would essentially subsidize China's over-capacity construction industry, totally rebuild Syria to a modern standard, and be a great diplomatic coup too ( "America and Russia broke it, China fixed it! Let us into your country: we bring buildings instead of bombs.")

Ni Hao, Noble713!

Legion 4,

Taking out Daesh doesn't stop the massive changes that are occurring in Islamic societies that are the underlying cause of Islamist terrorism and fundamentalism. A recent article in the Atlantic saw even President Obama commenting on increasing Islamic conservatism in previously largely secular Indonesia.

Elements of Wahhabism are spreading throughout the world and critically infecting Moslem middle classes. In the longer term this creates even more support for Islamic terrorism and insurgency.

China could make loans to Syria with the caveat that they have to be spent on Chinese construction companies, somewhat like US military aid to Israel. It would essentially subsidize China's over-capacity construction industry, totally rebuild Syria to a modern standard, and be a great diplomatic coup too ( "America and Russia broke it, China fixed it! Let us into your country: we bring buildings instead of bombs.")

Chinese do indeed invest in roads and hospitals etc and don't really do the whole bombing thing. There's a caveat though – you have to have something to offer in return.

Lots of Chinese civil infrastructure programs in Africa but all are tied into resource rights.

Syria was never resource rich in the first place. I doubt the Chinese will cough up large amounts of cash as such.

Taking out Daesh doesn't stop the massive changes that are occurring in Islamic societies that are the underlying cause of Islamist terrorism and fundamentalism. A recent article in the Atlantic saw even President Obama commenting on increasing Islamic conservatism in previously largely secular Indonesia.

Elements of Wahhabism are spreading throughout the world and critically infecting Moslem middle classes. In the longer term this creates even more support for Islamic terrorism and insurgency.

Never said military actions alone will be totally effective. Let me quote what COL Scott ret said on another thread. TMP link

Like most enemies it will take all aspects of DIME in varying amounts.

D-Diplomatic
I-Informational
M-Military
E-Economic

I totally agree. And as a retired US ARMY Gen. just said on the news. Allude to/said something like. Based on current events. We may be on the way to another war with militant islam as it has happened in the distant past.

I believe we can't stick our heads in the sand and hope it goes away. Especially with islamists' predilections for attacking the West and targeting civilians directly. That just does not sit right with me. And it appears many others feel similarly …

But again, military action is only part of the equation. And neutralizing Daesh is only one piece of a much bigger pie. As you noted with more moslems becoming more conservative. Which would be fine if they didn't continue targeting the West …

Aleppo battle: Assad sends thousands of reinforcements

"The Syrian government has sent thousands of reinforcements to mount a counterattack in Aleppo after rebels broke through government lines two days earlier, a monitoring group said.

The Lebanese Shia Hezbollah movement and the government have mobilised more than 3,000 troops and militia fighters for an attempt to recapture the areas where the rebels made their breakthrough, according to the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR).

"Hundreds of opposition fighters have also arrived in Aleppo from the [neighbouring] province of Idlib to help in the expected battles," said Rami Abdel Rahman, head of the group…"
More here
link

Amicalement
Armand

A bit more recently:

Syrian government press in their offensive on Aleppo

Posted: Oct 05, 2016 7:32 AM

By BASSEM MROUE
Associated Press
BEIRUT (AP) – Forces backing Syrian President Bashar Assad pressed their offensive Tuesday on Aleppo's rebel-held zone from the south, after capturing areas on other fronts in recent days. As reinforcements arrived, including Shiite fighters from Iraq, the strategy appeared to be to retake rebel-held areas bit by bit, backed by massive Russian airpower, rather than risk a potentially costly all-out ground battle.

Tuesday's offensive on the city's besieged rebel-held eastern neighborhoods came a day after Washington suspended direct U.S.-Russian talks on a Syria cease-fire – a move U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry blamed on Russia's rejection of diplomacy in favor of helping Assad's government achieve a military victory over the rebels.

The latest tactic of whittling away at rebel-held areas of Aleppo rather than launching an all-out offensive has proved successful in the past: The government reasserted control of the suburbs of the capital, Damascus, and most of the central city of Homs using the strategy.
"The Syrian army and its allies are in a sustained offensive to recapture rebel-held eastern Aleppo," wrote Robert Ford, a veteran diplomat and former ambassador to Syria.

"Unless the balance on the ground drastically shifts, the Assad regime will eventually retake from opposition fighters all of Aleppo and the outlying districts of Damascus," wrote Ford, a fellow at the Middle East Institute in Washington. "This may take months, but the balance is certainly in the Syrian government's favor."

"Aleppo is … the Syrian crisis and its liberation will end plans to divide Syria," agreed Amin Hoteit, a former Lebanese army general and expert on military and strategic affairs.

Syrian troops and their allies have laid siege to rebel-held parts of Aleppo since July 17, except for a few weeks when the militants were able to break it in August, until it was re-imposed in early September. Soon after the government opened a corridor for civilians and fighters to move to government-held parts of the city, and dozens of people and gunmen crossed after a general amnesty was offered by authorities.

link

An example of a particular action reported 5/10/16:

AlMasdarNews reports: The Syrian Arab Army (SAA) continued their large-scale offensive inside the eastern districts of Aleppo City on Tuesday, attacking several axes near famous Citadel and Suleiman Al-Halabi area.

Led by the 800th Regiment of the Republican Guard, the Syrian Armed Forces stormed the Suleiman Al-Halabi District tonight, capturing a number of buildings near the western axis of the Water Pumping after a fierce battle with Nouriddeen Al-Zinki.

North of Suleiman Al-Halabi, the Syrian Armed Forces attempted to advance east of the Shuqayf-Oweija axis on Tuesday night; however, the jihadist rebels were able to maintain their hold on the district's first-line of defense.

Intense clashes are still ongoing at the moment, as the Syrian Armed Forces launch another wave of attacks tonight in order to weaken the jihadist defenses.

Good intel guys !

Syrian regime forces gain control of key Aleppo area

"The Syrian military and its allies have gained control of part of a key neighborhood on Aleppo's front line, pushing into the city's rebel-held east, Syrian state media and a UK-based monitoring group said.

"An army unit in cooperation with the supporting forces carried out a 'swift' operation against the fortified sites of the terrorist organizations in Bustan al-Basha neighborhood in Aleppo city," state-run SANA quoted a military source as saying.

Bustan al-Basha is located on the front line between besieged rebel-held eastern Aleppo and government-held areas in the center and west of the city. It is the first time the government has made gains in that neighborhood since losing the area to rebels three years ago, the London-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights reported…"
Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Mosul will be similar …

Not sure about that. I don't doubt that taking Mosul will be bloody and the city will take a lot of damage.

However the air support will be a lot more precise and proportionate.

A lot of the Russian air strikes seem to be intent of destroying the utilities making Aleppo uninhabitable – hence the use of bunker buster son streets to get the water mains.

A doubt the Coalition ill be doing that.

Yes, those are some valid points. However, it may be as bloody because the Coalition is much more accurate in our strikes, etc., … Than the Russians and Daesh will use that to it's advantage.

HOWEVER … I totally agree that the Coalition should and will perform in a much more "humane" manner, etc., …

Bottom line, I strongly feel, regardless it will be a very messy urban insurgency with the underlining hatred for the different arab/moslem factions. Which may only make the slaughter that much worse. And the US/UK, etc., "advisors" really most likely have a hard time controlling it, IMO. But as always we will have to wait and see.

The big problem will be booby traps and indeed the behaviour of the troops towards the civilians afterwards.

Says Bangorstu:

A lot of the Russian air strikes seem to be intent of destroying the utilities making Aleppo uninhabitable – hence the use of bunker buster son[sic] streets to get the water mains.

A[sic] doubt the Coalition ill[sic] be doing that.

There is reason to doubt your expectation about how USA will carry out its bombing of Mosul.

The U.S. military understood the havoc the 1991 bombing unleashed. A 1995 article entitled "The Enemy as a System" by John Warden, published in the Air Force's Airpower Journal, discussed the benefits of bombing "dual-use targets" and noted,

A key example of such dual-use targeting was the destruction of Iraqi electrical power facilities in Desert Storm…. [Destruction] of these facilities shut down water purification and sewage treatment plants. As a result, epidemics of gastroenteritis, cholera, and typhoid broke out, leading to perhaps as many as 100,000 civilian deaths and a doubling of the infant mortality rate.

The article concluded that the U.S. Air Force has a "vested interest in attacking dual-use targets" that undermine "civilian morale."

link

And besides, attacking Mosul's water system can be justified as attacking the support system of the target defenders. Any effects on whatever civilians are inside the city can be chalked up to Collateral Damage, that great moral cleanser. So, no problemo.

We'll have to wait and see. If the US drops a bomb even near anything that is not 100% conclusively Daesh. It will be all over the news. And Daesh knows it. This is an urban insurgency and Daesh is basically using the populous as human shields. And everybody knows that too.

The Russian-Iranian-Syrian alliance has 4 months to clear all rebels (Daesh or otherwise) out of eastern Aleppo: link

It also appears any plans for regime change would mean fighting the Russians: link

Begemot- I don't think there is any reason to doubt given they've not done so in any of the bombing campaigns recently in Iraq in support of the Iraqi Army.

stu … In a very rare occasion, I do have to agree with you on that. [ ] And let me add that Begemot is a former US ARMY Infantry 1LT, IIRC ? So that makes my agreeing with you even more incredulous !!!!! "May miracles never cease !"

Someone email Hell and see if it has frozen over !

He does raise an interesitng point however because, as he notes, NATO air forces do go for utilities when they feel the urge. I think we did the same to the Serbs.

But in Iraq we're helping out the government and not waging war on the populace. Hence we're doing the bare minimum to get the job done sparing the Iraqi government any more expense than necessary.

That the Syrians and Russians are not doing so for Aleppo speaks volumes about their attitude towards the Syrian people.

Russia did more or less the same thing to pacify Grozny (lay waste to the whole place, drive out most of the populace, rebuild the city under a loyalist strongman), and…it worked.

They are pretty pragmatic, results-driven, and somewhat callous. I think this is a multi-generational military cultural impact of the Great Patriotic War.

Exactly. Eastern Aleppo is mostly held by anti-regime rebels anyway, not a group that's high on their list of preserving. Once the rebels are cleared out the area can be resettled by Alawites.

Russia did more or less the same thing to pacify Grozny (lay waste to the whole place, drive out most of the populace, rebuild the city under a loyalist strongman), and…it worked.

They are pretty pragmatic, results-driven, and somewhat callous. I think this is a multi-generational military cultural impact of the Great Patriotic War.

That's the difference between Russians and Westerners. Russians lack the military capability of the West but fight to win and obtain real objectives.

Westerners have the most advanced militaries in the world but objectives are confused and the military is restrained to the point of being ineffective.

I remember reading one book by a SEAL operator who described how they went from lethal operations against the Taliban and Al Qaeda to merely apprehending them. After a couple of months they found out they were apprehending the same guys over and over again.

No doubt the Russians wouldn't have that problem.

He does raise an interesitng point however because, as he notes, NATO air forces do go for utilities when they feel the urge. I think we did the same to the Serbs.

Yes, it is a standard tactic if needed. To end the conflict quickly and limit overall loss of life. But as we see that is always not the case … the quickly part …

But in Iraq we're helping out the government and not waging war on the populace. Hence we're doing the bare minimum to get the job done sparing the Iraqi government any more expense than necessary.

That is how I understand it …

That the Syrians and Russians are not doing so for Aleppo speaks volumes about their attitude towards the Syrian people.

Not just the Russians but how Assad and his force's attitude towards their own people.

Deales … I agree with much of your post. It seems no matter what the West did or does in the Mid East or A'stan. The desired results seem not to happen.

but how Assad and his force's attitude towards their own people.

But most of them are not his people. His people are Alawites. The one's who are dying are mainly Sunnis.

Loyalty in the Middle East is to family, tribe and religious sect. Countries are just something someone else invented.

That is a valid point … and we see that loyalty to family, tribe, religion, etc., has turned out to very problematic for the arab/moslem culture in the 20th and now 21st Centuries.

However, regardless of all that, if they are a citizen of Syria, they are considered by the Western world, UN, etc., as Syrian. Even if Assad does not feel that way. There are Sunni, Shia, Christians, etc., that live in Syria … Whether Assad likes it or not. But it appears he is trying to change that with Russian support.

they are considered by the Western world, UN, etc

Alas both of these are increasingly meaningless to the rest of the world.

Assad is a great example of this.

No argument there …