Hypocrisy Reigns in the West as Syrian Government takes back Aleppo

Bashar Al-Assad, the legitimate ruler of Syria, with widespread support from Syrian Christians, Alawites, Druze and upper-class Sunni Muslims, is closer than ever to retaking control of Aleppo for the first time since 2012.

The outcome of this bloody battle would be one of the best for the Middle-Eastern region: Terrorism would be driven out of its largest stronghold in Syria.

But if one reads the news, there is nothing but screaming bloody murder towards the Syrian Government. The legitimate President in Syria, with unbelievable support from the army, surrounding government and people, is continuing to be called by Western Media and politicans as illegitimate and in need of removal.

Of course, if Bashar Al-Assad is removed from Syria, it would lead to the worst conflict of the Middle-East in the last century. Yes: worse than ISIS' invasion of Iraq in June 2014. We would have a radicalised Hezbollah in western Syria, fighting for control with Al-Qaeda, ISIS and a dysfunctional Muslim Brotherhood Syrian Government.

But the West seems to just ignore that every decision they've made thus far against certain sides - whether in Afghanistan in the 80's, Iraq in 2003, Libya in 2011 or Yemen in 2015 - all of these are increasing terrorism in the region and bankrupting the West, both morally and financially.

In the 80's, funding the Mujahideen gave rise to the Taliban in Afghanistan. While this destroyed Russian influence in the country, it was replaced with a government which Al-Qaeda leaders pledge allegiance to. Really, US support of terrorists in Afghanistan gave themselves 9-11.

Removing Saddam Hussien in Iraq 2003 was even worse. ISIS is worse than Al-Qaeda, more brutal and more explosive for the region. Whereas Al-Qaeda focused largely on western targets, ISIS have ignited a Sunni-Shi'ite war in the Middle-East that has been raging ever since ISIS first emerged in 2003. Back then, ISIS was known as Al-Qaeda in Iraq, but its founder, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi is more aligned with self-proclaimed Caliph Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi than with Osama Bin Laden, the latter who he pledged allegiance to.

Iraq borders Saudi Arabia, and the hardcore ISIS ideology has great sympathy there. If ISIS are able to successfully detonate in Saudi Arabia, the whole region could undergo a sysmic shift as the Arabian Peninsula completely destabilizes.


The results of removing Gidaffi in Libya 2011 are not yet felt in the region, but if Gidaffi loyalists continue to be persecuted and kept out of power in Libya, they will try and find another way as Saddam loyalists did: through terrorism. This will mean that, even if powers in the region successfully deal with Al-Qaeda and ISIS - which seems to me unlikely, with the exception of Russia - terrorism would still have a stronghold in Libya.

Western support for Saudi Arabia's war in Yemen is strengthening Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula to an alarming extent. As if ISIS didn't threaten Saudi Arabia enough, Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula is becoming one of the most powerful contenders for Yemen, right on Saudi Arabia's doorstep.

When all of these foolish blunders of the West are weighed up against Western criticism of the Syrian Government, one cannot help but feel that the West are either completely oblivious to what they are doing, like a child with his father's gun, or that the West are just destabilizing the Middle-East because they like terrorism.

The best thing America and the West can do in Syria is shut their mouths about its government gaining back their city, and focus on undoing their erroneous work: replace terrorism with strong governments.

Yet only Russia seems to have the sense to do that.