Syrian army´s southern offensive

[rylah]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

 

[Bleipriester]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

 

[irosie91]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ BS

 

[rylah]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

 

[Bleipriester]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

 

[irosie91]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

sssshhhhh sssshhhh Capt. Blei seeks a SURPRISE ATTACK

 

[Bleipriester]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

sssshhhhh sssshhhh Capt. Blei seeks a SURPRISE ATTACK

And the Americans won´t come to aid Israel? You´re so silly, sometimes.

 

[rylah]

Bleipriester answer me this one -

2 countries are at war, one day thousands of civilian - looking people gather at the border and build camps. What happens when these people suddenly run towards one side of the border trying to cross it?

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

 

[irosie91]

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

sssshhhhh sssshhhh Capt. Blei seeks a SURPRISE ATTACK

And the Americans won´t come to aid Israel? You´re so silly, sometimes.

sheeeeesh captain........ for no reason at all you threw in that
OFT TOUTED bitter Baathist complaint------"DA USA HELPS
ISRAEL" force of habit??? mommy America like isreal betta that bbbb...
Baathists------<whine whine>

 

[Bleipriester]

That is certainly a problem. The bigger problem is the presence of terrorists, though.

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

 

[Bleipriester]

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

sssshhhhh sssshhhh Capt. Blei seeks a SURPRISE ATTACK

And the Americans won´t come to aid Israel? You´re so silly, sometimes.

sheeeeesh captain........ for no reason at all you threw in that
OFT TOUTED bitter Baathist complaint------"DA USA HELPS
ISRAEL" force of habit??? mommy America like isreal betta that bbbb...
Baathists------<whine whine>

What has that to do with the impossibility of Iran invading Israel?

 

[Marion Morrison]

What's Syria going to do about Turkey? And the Kurds?

I've been following this for like..4 years now. The Syrian Army are not the bad guys. They save towns from ISIS.

 

[Bleipriester]

What's Syria going to do about Turkey? And the Kurds?

I've been following this for like..4 years now. The Syrian Army are not the bad guys. They save towns from ISIS.

Turkey is an official guarantor of the de-escalation zone of Idlib. Their presence in Idlib is officially approved by Damascus (except for one of the observation points). The other Turkish presences are not approved. Turkey will have to withdraw, it officially supports the territorial integrity of Syria.
Unlike western media claims, the de-escalation zones are not there to be for ever. They are there to give "moderates" time to separate from Al-Qaeda and prepare for a political solution. The time will be up soon and the Turkish observation points will be obsolete.

As for the Kurds, President Assad said he prefers negotiations. But he has other means, too. I guess, the Kurds will agree to a limited authority within the Syrian Arab Republic after negotiations.
US-Backed Syrian Kurdish Forces Prepping Team For Talks With Damascus

 

[irosie91]

What's Syria going to do about Turkey? And the Kurds?

I've been following this for like..4 years now. The Syrian Army are not the bad guys. They save towns from ISIS.

there are several WARRING parties in the conflict in Syria----not just two. Not just DA GOOD GUYS vs DA BAD GUYS. your comment is-----for an adult person (assuming you are an adult) ---
extremely Juvenile. A good friend of mine told me that her relatives
back home in Italy LOVED EL DUCE' ------he made the trains run
on time----SUCH A GOOD GUY

 

[rylah]

So You are familiar with the issue I'm referring to.
All scenarios were already simulated, we're talking about the possibility of Syrians running in their thousands towards Israel, and vice versa Israeli Druze might end up fighting against Assad inside Syria.

This is a peak moment, when an outside player has the most of potential to provoke an all-open war between 2 states, neither of which it borders.
The key point here is that such a scenario plays only into one hand, but that hand also has the choice. Those might be refugees, or not, if yes they might be used as a cover for an attempt at ground invasion.

I'm not convinced either of the 2 countries are favoring such a development.

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

 

[Bleipriester]

Those civilians have hardly to do anything with possible Iranian war plans. They simply escape the fighting. There are many Iranian provided fighters in Syria but as I told you before they are deployed in southern Aleppo.
The Syrian offensive in the south takes place without any foreign militias.

There are good news. Early reports of a complete surrender of the rebels in the south emerged.
Breaking: Early reports of rebel surrender in Al-Quneitra

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:

MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.

No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador

 

[irosie91]

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:

MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.

No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador

^^^^^^^^^ROFLMAO

 

[rylah]

It's not a question of debate, foreign militias ARE taking part in the offensive.
And they're pretty much bragging about it.

I was talking about a specific scenario, everything else was made clear in a straight manner.
But in this issue neither Israel nor Assad make the decision.

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:

MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.

No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador

I'm sure even Kinshchak doesn't believe the words he utters.
The concerns were laid on the table, possible outcomes are being discussed.

Trying to convince me not to use common sense is not a sign of a constructive exchange, definitely not a way to reach an understanding, it only raises more concern and distrust between the sides.

 

[Bleipriester]

No, there are no foreign fighters partaking. No Hezbollah or any other. And by the way, Israel or other countries do not have a say in that Syrian affairs. It is only about avoiding Israeli attacks.
Assad will not allow Iran to start a war from Syrian soil. All what you have heard, Islamic army, end of Israel, is just the spiel of a single IRGC commander. It is not the point of view of Iran. They have only some advisers embedded in the Syrian army.

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:

MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.

No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador

I'm sure even Kinshchak doesn't believe the words he utters.
The concerns were laid on the table, possible outcomes are being discussed.

Trying to convince me not to use common sense is not a sign of a constructive exchange, definitely not a way to reach an understanding, it only raises more concern and distrust between the sides.

You ignore that Israeli attacks would not benefit the Syrian offensive.

 

[irosie91]

I like it when You try to sooth me with fairytales, about what happens in an hour drive from my home.

You're trying to deny the most evident

You won´t have peace ever with that attitude.

My attitude is that for the sake of having an independent country,
all foreseeable scenarios must be analyzed.

One doesn't get peace by neglecting the art of war, it also doesn't mean that alternativas to worst scenarios are not considered, or that they will occur in the first place.

I mean the denial of the fact that there are no Iranian or Iranian-backed forces partaking. The Russians just confirmed it:

MOSCOW, July 19./TASS/. There are no pro-Iranian armed units in the south of Syria, Russian Ambassador in Damascus Alexander Kinshchak told reporters on Thursday.

No pro-Iranian units in southern Syria — Russian ambassador

I'm sure even Kinshchak doesn't believe the words he utters.
The concerns were laid on the table, possible outcomes are being discussed.

Trying to convince me not to use common sense is not a sign of a constructive exchange, definitely not a way to reach an understanding, it only raises more concern and distrust between the sides.

You ignore that Israeli attacks would not benefit the Syrian offensive.

"Israeli attacks" Capt. Blei? Israeli "attacks" are related ONLY
to Syrian aggression. Are you blaming the kurds of attacks on Israel?