Aleppo City: "Why is Britain supporting the terrorists in Syria’s civil war?"

"Government-held Aleppo was under siege from jihadi forces until late last year. That was never reported." 

From Peter Oborne's report, Aleppo Notebook: the city’s terrorist besiegers will now be besieged: Again and again I was asked: Why is Britain supporting the terrorists in Syria’s civil war? 

(February 13, The Spectator; H/T SST commentator):

[...]

My time in Aleppo coincided with the turning point in the Syrian civil war. Assad’s forces, with the help of Russian air power, cut off the line of supply from the Turkish border to the jihadist forces encircling the government-held areas of the city. Deprived of fresh fighters, guns and ammunition from their Turkish sponsors, Al Nusra and other groups encircling the city are, over the long term, doomed. Islamic State, which sells its oil through Turkey, will start to run short of money. Think of Stalingrad in 1942: the besiegers are now the besieged.

When I returned to London I read in the newspapers that this turn of events was regarded as a calamity. Of course, it does depend on your point of view. Government-held Aleppo was under siege from jihadi forces until late last year. That was never reported. Now the areas of Aleppo held by the rebels are coming under siege. That is reported in the western press as a catastrophe, and has brought a concerned response from the British Foreign Secretary.

Again and again I was asked: why is Britain supporting the terrorists? Western media rightly emphasise Assad’s atrocities. But the Aleppans I spoke to regularly pointed out that under Assad’s regime women can walk alone down the street and pursue a career; that a broadly liberal curriculum is taught in the schools; that Christians can worship at their churches and Muslims in their mosques. 

These Aleppans have lived under siege from groups hellbent on the imposition of a mutant version of Wahhabi Islam. They know that many of their fighters are foreigners whose ambition, encouraged by Turkish and Saudi sponsors, is to extinguish Aleppo’s tolerant culture and drive every last Christian out of the city.

These Aleppans have a point. When the history of the Syrian civil war is finally written, historians will indeed have to confront the question: why has it been British government policy to turn the ancient city of Aleppo into present-day Kandahar?

Peter Oborne is political columnist for the Daily Mail and an associate editor of The Spectator.

[END]

It was never a civil war; it was an invasion sponsored by a handful of savage rulers who received support from supposedly civilized governments, including mine. Time will not fade the stain. My government, the American government, the greatest government in modern history, threw it all away -- every single noble value, every mark of civilization. So the Aleppans will have to stand in line when it comes to asking why.   

********