I love it when online commenters display more confidence in their opinions than experts in the field. Really shows how much value their opinion has.
Yes, I would argue the islamic state was indeed worse. And so far I see nothing preventing them or a similar force taking hold again. I mean turkey is the moderating factor here and turkey under Erdogan has gone the authorian islamic way since a while.
Erdogan is as much pro-ISIS as one can be. Maybe just a political game during complex conflict to fight against US-supported kurds at all costs, maybe not. We don't know.
I said I am sceptical for the outcome, if Erdogan is the moderating factor. Or do you think, he cares much for human rights and democracy?
That is far from saying he is like IS.
Btw. I just read, a pro SNA news source:
https://www.aa.com.tr/en/politics/russia-astana-format-meeti...
It seems the war will continue.
Edit: Also your linked article no longer reflects the current stance of Russia.
It was just to illustrate that Erdogans goals are not peace, after Assad is gone.
No, it implies the focus on the authorian aspects of Islam, just like certain groups in the US would like a authorian christian rule of law.
They don't know that Turkey has been delivering oil to Israel all the time and that Israel is in favor of the current events in Syria.
If all of Turkey, the U.S. and Israel support the Syrian rebels, we may assume that the goal is to install a U.S. friendly government (perhaps supervised by Turkey) and have more buffer states against Iran.
Except Germany and Japan, the third and fourth largest economies in the world…
Which is a shame because the 1950s strategy of investment and prosperity made the world much better and the modern strategy of destabilisation tends to make it worse.
"live" is a strong word to use there.