Aleppo: Government forces with the backing of foreign nations try to retake the city of Aleppo, Syria, from the hands of Islamic militants backed by U.S money and arms. Civilians used as human shields by Islamic militants suffer as the battle rages around them.
Mosul: Government forces with the backing of foreign nations try to retake the city of Mosul, Iraq, from the hands of Islamic militants backed by Saudi money and arms. Civilians used as human shields by Islamic militants suffer as the battle rages around them.
The similarities are startling. Of course many will cite the indiscriminate bombing of Aleppo as a major difference and it’s true that the bombing in Aleppo is indiscriminate. It’s also true that a full scale battle will surely ensure in Mosul in days and weeks to come and then the civilian casualties will rise immeasurably.
What then the difference between indiscriminate bombing and a slow-motion destruction of a city and its people. Both outcomes will not be good for those of either city. Perhaps then in the end the only difference is one of methodology rather than intended outcome.
That wouldn’t be apparent from the way things are being spun in the media. The media is quick to show the US and Iraqi forces as heroes ready to liberate those in the militant held city of Mosul, whilst the Syrian forces in Aleppo are the enemy killing civilians randomly with as little mention as possible about the militants holding that city by force. As much as the people of Aleppo may see the militants as their revolutionaries in some ways they are also surely blinded by the fact that their continued hold on the city is leading directly to their deaths. Human shields by any other name.
The intended outcome for both cities is the same, to rid it of militant Jihadists, both of which are funded by foreign nations and as it turns out the U.S and the West must take some responsibility for what’s going on and in Iraq that’s what they seem to be doing, after all after what happened during and after the Iraq war they have every reason to right their wrongs but what of Syria? The West has openly and on record admitted that they are funding and arming the rebels, these are the same rebels that are now embedded into Aleppo and in many people’s eyes using the civilians as human shields.
Perhaps if the US and West had not backed the militants like they did this war would have been over a long time ago and Aleppo would now not be under seige.
No one, least of all us, is saying that what Syria and Russia is doing in Aleppo is the right way to do things, far from it, the casualties there are too much to bear for any sane person to think otherwise but the truth is there is no easy way to rid your country of terrorists and in any case the damage is now done because whatever happens in Syria now, if Assad stays or goes the US has opened another pandoras box that can not be closed again. The Jihadist groups are now in Syria and even when the war is over it would take an extreme optimist to think things will now ever return to how they were before and what then for the people of Syria?
Even when the Syrian conflict is over regardless wether Assad steps down or not the likelihood is that the Syrian people will not see peace for many years to come and the US will once again be seen as the ones which led them to that moment in time when stability in Syria ceased to exist, regardless of who was in power at the time.
The West may, in the end, get what it wants regardless how this plays out.