Talk:Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian civil war/Archive 1

This is an archive of past discussions about Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian civil war. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Map

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

A map would be good to give the sense where the conflict is happening..--Reader1987 (talk) 23:15, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Raqqa

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I suggest an article split, thus the creation of the page Battle of Raqqa (2014)! :) --93.137.182.66 (talk) 19:10, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Any proof?

Latest comment: 10 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion

Any proof that the Army of Mujahideen is part of the FSA, as the infobox states?.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 23:10, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

It is in the Daily Star ref: "The Mujahedeen Army, an alliance of seven Islamist groups largely loyal to the FSA, gave ISIS militants a 24-hour ultimatum to leave the group." However, two newer sources [1], [2] don't explicitly state that the MA is part of the FSA, so I will remove the bullet that indicates it is part of the FSA. David O. Johnson (talk) 01:47, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

OK.--HCPUNXKID (talk) 18:57, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Jund al-Aqsa

Latest comment: 10 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Jund al-Aqsa declared their neutrality in this conflict. They have a good relation with both sides. we should remove Jund al-Aqsa from the infobox.3bdulelah (talk) 15:56, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Summary needed.

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

A Summary is needed to better define the conflict and its stages, right now we couple of general sentences and a long list of events that doesn't help me( and presumably others) understand what is going on. --PLNR (talk) 23:50, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

If possible please highlight any major operations and expand its background/context info, over progress updates of captured this/that. --PLNR (talk) 00:16, 27 February 2014 (UTC)

"Rebels capture ISIS bases"

Latest comment: 10 years ago4 comments3 people in discussion

I have to question language like this. Surely ISIS are rebels too, so it would be better to specify which other group of rebels captured the bases from them (whether it be Al-Nusra, the Islamic Front, the FSA, etc) - saying "Rebels capture ISIS bases" implies that ISIS aren't rebels, when surely they are. Any force in Syria fighting against the government are rebels, even if the rebels are simultaneously fighting each other. SJK (talk) 06:16, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

That would mean ISIS are not rebels, as one the causes of this conflict was that ISIS had not fought the government. There are even indications that they may be secretly allied to Assad.--41.50.7.69 (talk) 03:41, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

I am not aware of any reliable evidence to support the claim that ISIS are secretly allied with Assad; vague, unsourced assertions by anonymous users are not evidence. SJK (talk) 08:14, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Why not simply "ISIL" vs. "anti-ISIL rebels" (or "ISIS" and "anti-ISIS rebels" if you prefer)? Being anti-ISIL and rebels is all that holds these groups together.

That said, it's worth noting that almost all Syrian rebel groups can be placed in one of five categories:

1) Islamic Front

2) Free Syrian Army (lately Aymenn Jawad Al-Tamimi has been using the expression "FSA-banner" in articles on Joshua Landis's site. That sounds about right to me: influential commanders such as Bashar al-Zoubi and Jamal Maarouf maybe are not meaningfully part of the same organization exactly, but they term themselves FSA; they fight under its banner).

3) Jabhat an-Nusra

4) ISIS

5) Kurdish militias such as the YPG

So, if we want to be more specific than "anti-ISIL rebels", it shouldn't be so hard to specify who did what. The Syrian opposition–Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant conflict is essentially a coordinated offensive by #1, #2, and #3 against #4. Although, of course, #5 has been at war with #4 and #3 (as well as parts of #1 and #2) all along.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 00:32, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Title

Latest comment: 10 years ago10 comments5 people in discussion

ISIL is "Syrian opposition" as well. The article should be called "rebel infighting during the Syrian civil war" or some such instead. FunkMonk (talk) 01:07, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

I am inclined to agree. I think we should be sensitive about NPOV issues here, because almost everyone editing en.wikipedia and almost all English-language media have a strong anti-ISIS bias. I personally find them thoroughly contemptible. Therefore, we should be careful to check out own biases. Perhaps the title should Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant–Free Syrian Army and allies conflict. Certain FSA-banner elements, in particular the Syrian Revolutionaries Front, seem to have been the driving force in starting the current hot war phase of the conflict; but the war would be much less notable without the three-way FSA/Islamic Front/an-Nusra alliance against ISIS. This title also makes the article's focus sharper, because it excludes the ongoing conflict between Kurdish and allied Christian militias (which are generally anti-government, i.e. they are themselves part of the opposition) and other opposition groups, including ISIS, but also an-Nusra and many of the other Arab militias (both Islamist and secular).

I can think of one argument against changing the name, which is that, while ISIS is an anti-Assad opposition force, they are not strictly speaking a Syrian opposition force: ISIS is Iraqi-Levantine by self-description, is avowedly opposed to Syrian nationalism, and is led by non-Syrians in practice. I'm not sure if this argument by itself is strong enough to justify the current title. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 17:58, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Most Jihadis, whether Syrian or not, are against Syrian nationalism, or at least they don't care about it. That is even true for the Muslim brotherhood. It is all about the wider ummah to them, and Syria is only the first step in obtaining the Caliphate. FunkMonk (talk) 18:20, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Like Communists, Sunni fundamentalist radicals are opposed to nationalism on principle ... until it starts to seem useful, at which point they typically have a change of heart. No one on the scene in Syria is nearly as enthusiastically opposed to Syrian nationalism as is ISIS. Jabhat an-Nusra are probably revolutionary internationalists in principle, but they don't play that up. I believe Ahrar ash-Sham is on record in favor of an Islamic republic with Syria's current borders. In any event, every major opposition militia in Syria other than ISIS at least has a predominantly Syrian leadership. – Greg Pandatshang (talk) 22:16, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

How about "inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian civil war" or something? Long, but not as hard to read as what we currently have. FunkMonk (talk) 20:38, 11 May 2014 (UTC)

I support FunkMonk's proposition. David O. Johnson (talk) 05:30, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

I'm neutral on this proposal. I think the title inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian civil war would have a somewhat larger subject area than the current article.—Greg Pandatshang (talk) 00:18, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

A subject that needs coverage in any case. So the question is whether the scope of this article should be broadened, or if it should be a separate article. FunkMonk (talk) 00:25, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

I agree with the move to "Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War". The old title was really bad and misleading, and the new one is accurate and reasonably concise. Everyking (talk) 23:56, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

I was surprised no one had moved it earlier, after reading this discussion, so that's why I moved it. RGloucester — ☎ 23:58, 25 June 2014 (UTC)

Background

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

I think the "background" section ought to include a bit more about relations between ISIS and other Syrian rebel groups before the ISIS capture of Azaz in September 2013. Does anybody know enough about this to add a few sentences? --superioridad ^(discusión) 12:31, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

Relations were good, and ISIS was welcomed by the other groups. FunkMonk (talk) 14:07, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

The Kurds.

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

The Kurds are NOT, I repeat NOT irrelevant to "inter-rebel conflict" Their armies are in rebellion against Assad as much as ISIL is. Revise and add detail if you must, but don't just say "it's irrelevant"Ericl (talk) 11:41, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Most of the info you added was irrelevant to the article. I removed everything but the first sentence and added more info on specific FSA and YPG involvement. David O. Johnson (talk) 17:05, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

FSA-Nusra clashes

Latest comment: 10 years ago2 comments1 person in discussion

Does anyone else recall the widespread clashes between FSA and Nusra (and "Islamic Front", which seemed to have been within the scope of this article when it was created) before ISIS entered the scene? Should be mentioned here as well. FunkMonk (talk) 20:35, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Seems Nusra clashed with FSA, and that they are increasingly working with ISIS. Rebels fought each other even before ISIS arrived, so this article is inaccurately framed. It should also cover the preceding period. FunkMonk (talk) 11:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)

Three columns

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The FSA has clashed with Nusra, Islamic Army/Front whatever, and other groups as well. There should be three columns, one for FSA and allies ("moderates"), one for Nusra and allied Islamists, and one for ISIL and allies. FunkMonk (talk) 18:28, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Non-free image use

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Non-free images are also not allowed to be used in "tables" (i.e., infoboxes) and "galleries" for purely decorative purposes per WP:NFLISTS and WP:NFTABLES. These non-free images are immediately followed by a wikilink to the respective organization's article, which almost always uses the image in its infobox, so no addtional information is provided by using the image in this article. For this reason, using such images would not satisfy WP:NFCC#8 meaning that the acceptable non-free use rationale required by WP:NFCCP cannot be provided for this article. - Marchjuly (talk) 13:17, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:41, 26 February 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 8 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.syriahr.com/index.php?option=com_news&nid=20553&Itemid=2&task=displaynews

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:19, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150713012909/http://bigstory.ap.org/article/jihadis-capture-northern-syrian-town-near-turkey to http://bigstory.ap.org/article/jihadis-capture-northern-syrian-town-near-turkey

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:35, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned references in Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War

Latest comment: 7 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Inter-rebel conflict during the Syrian Civil War's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "all":

From Jund al-Aqsa: "Source: hundreds of fighters to leave their factions (Jund al-Aqsa) within two month". All4Syria. 7 October 2016.
From Eastern Qalamoun offensive (September–October 2016): "Dozens of dead of wounded in eastern Qalamoun". All4Syria. 10 September 2016.

Reference named "defect to ISIS":

From Tahrir al-Sham: Charkatli, Izat (23 February 2017). "Over 2,000 radical rebels defect to ISIS following intra-rebel deal". Al-Masdar News.
From Khan Shaykhun chemical attack: Charkatli, Izat (23 February 2017). "Over 2,000 radical rebels defect to ISIS following intra-rebel deal".
From Military intervention against ISIL: Charkatli, Izat (23 February 2017). "Over 2,000 radical rebels defect to ISIS following intra-rebel deal".

Reference named "split":

From Jund al-Aqsa: "Jund al Aqsa leaders join Al Nusrah Front". The Long War Journal. 17 February 2016.
From Jaish al-Muhajireen wal-Ansar: "Chechen commander in Syria pledges to Islamic Caucasus Emirate". Long War Journal. 10 July 2015. Retrieved 12 July 2015.

Reference named "leaves for Raqqa":

From Russian military intervention in the Syrian Civil War: "Search for the dead begins in Idlib after Islamic State-linked brigade leaves for Raqqa". Syria Direct.
From Military intervention against ISIL: "Search for the dead begins in Idlib after Islamic State-linked brigade leaves for Raqqa".
From Khan Shaykhun chemical attack: "Search for the dead begins in Idlib after Islamic State-linked brigade leaves for Raqqa". Syria Direct. 22 February 2017. Retrieved 5 April 2017.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT ⚡ 16:11, 13 July 2017 (UTC)