Akka
Moody old mage.
And I literally said :You just misread my post. Didn't get that I was telling you that "we don't know what will happen and it can be better or worse or the same" is not logically compatible with "people who literally self-identify as jihadists taking over".
(and even if Assad regime falls there is no guarantee that it won't just stay at the civil war situation for the years to come, or that something even uglier replaces it)
Assad falling doesn't necessarily means that "Jihadists take over", it just (like, again, explicitely said) mean that the civil war continue (you know, the "there is no guarantee that it won't just stay at the civil war situation for the years to come" bit, which I naively thought was a pretty clear sentence), or a non-Jihadist group can manage to take over, or Syria can break up with each factio ending up with its own mini-country, or Turkey can push farther and just put a puppet government, or a lot of other things.
Religious fanatics are always bad. Due to being fanatics. Which is bad.Unless, of course, your view is that jihadists can be good or bad, or in between; after all, they are humans too, just by definition view non-muslims as subhumans
![]()
They can be "less bad" than a murderous regime like Assad (though unlikely considering, well, Jihadists).
They just aren't the only ones involved in the Syria civil war - and even among them, there are some a lot worse than others, and some a bit better, and a whole lot of Jihadist factions shooting at or allying with each others.
That's the "fun" part about Syria, it's a mess. The "best" side is the Kurds, who seem to be content to be left alone, but they don't seem to be interested in taking over Syria - because precisely they look like to just, well, want to be left alone - and Turkey would never allow them to do it in any case. In fact they are ironically the ones the most at risk if the Assad regime fall, and said Turkey can put all its efforts into destroying them.