My unofficial briefing to anyone who is confused (including our politicians) courtesy of
President Assad of Syria (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty that his people rebelled and the rebels (who are good) started winning (hurrah!).
Then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty too and started calling themselves Islamic State ( which is definitely bad!). But other rebels continued to support democracy (and they are still good)
So the Americans (who are good) started bombing Islamic State (who are very bad) and giving arms to the other Syrian rebels (who are good) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad), which was good.
By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north of neighbouring Turkey run by the Kurds who want to fight Islamic State (which is a good thing). But the Turkish authorities think that they are bad, so we have to say they are bad, whilst secretly thinking that they’re good and giving them guns to fight Islamic State (which is good) but that is another matter.
Getting back to Syria…
So President Putin of Russia (who is bad, because he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine) has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking Islamic State – which is sort of a good thing.
But Putin (still bad) thinks the other Syrian rebels ( who are good ) are in fact also bad, and so he bombs them too. That is much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are still good) who are busy backing and arming the good Syrian rebels.
Now Iran (which used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now considered good) are going to provide ground troops to support President Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have their own ground troops and aircraft in Syria.
So a Coalition of Assad (still bad), Putin (extra bad) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way) are going to attack Islamic State (who have become exceedingly bad) which is a good thing. But they’re also attacking the good Syrian rebels – which is terribly bad!
Now the British (obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack President Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good and bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to Islamic State (who are the baddest people on the planet).
So bad Assad is now probably good, being better than Islamic State. And since Putin and Iran are also fighting Islamic State, that may now also make them good. Or at the very least better.
America (still good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran (also good) and so they may be forced to say that the good rebels are now bad – or at the very least abandon them to their fate.
This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join Islamic State (still the only consistently baddest people).
To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a “Holy War”, and the ranks of Islamic State will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only jihadis fighting in the Holy War – and hence many good Muslims may now also see Islamic State as good.
Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their good Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal and thence see them as bad.
So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni rebels (bad), many of whom are looking to Islamic State (good and bad) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also good) and Putin (also, now, unbelievably, good) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started?