Syria Daily, March 14: Regime Airstrikes on Douma Near Damascus, At Least 16 Killed



Syrian airstrikes have killed at least 16 civilians in Douma, northeast of Damascus, since Friday. Ten of the dead are women.

Shaam News Network reported that the targets of the raids have included a mosque and a charitable institution.

Victims being pulled from rubble:

An estimated 250 people were slain in regime bombardment of the suburb, which has been under rebel control since 2012, in early February. The airstrikes only eased after Jaish al-Islam, the leading rebel faction in Douma, fired hundreds of rockets on military positions in Damascus.

Jaish al-Islam threatened at the time, and again last week, that it would launch more attacks — this time with 600 to 1000 rockets — if bombing was renewed.

So far, there has been no sign of a reply from rebels to the latest series of airstrikes.

Video and Pictures: Demonstrations Mark 4th Anniversary of Uprising

Demonstrators in the Salaheddin section of Aleppo mark the fourth anniversary of the start of the Syrian uprising:

Children with protest placards in Kafr Hamra, northwest of Aleppo:


A rooftop display in Hanano in Aleppo:


Related Posts





    —China already got one huge oil deal in 20124 an another is expected this year. at cost and could get a second later this year.

    –To finance the war in the Ukraine at a time of revenue sjhortages, Russia proposes to sell China a 50% stake in oil and gas. A high government dismisses concerns thus: “we NOW have a strategic partnership with China (what about later?)

    Long-run Russian national interests are far more at risk in the east (from China) and in the south and internally (thanks to growing Islamist radicalization than from the West.

    –A border official disclosed that in an 18-month period starting Jan. 1, 2013, about 1.5 million illegal Chinese immigrants entered the Russian Far East. The Chinese government encourages this. Within a decade or so, the Chinese are expected to be a majority in the RFE. By then China’s economy, population and military will far surpass Russia whose present economy is about the size of Italy’s and is becoming increasingly third world in nature. Add China’s geographical proximity and imagine what it can do in Siberia by copying Putin’s proxy war tactics.

    In “Selling the Family Jewels” at The Interpreter Stephen Blank finishes by demonstrating that “Even if Putin should, by some miracle, return Ukraine’s territory to it, Russia’s economy remains not ready for prime time.” I’ll add a few more long-term problems Blank does not include:

    1.How does Russia benefit when Putin backs a Shia Empire in the Mideast simply to screw the West. Iran is the only beneficiary. As Saudis strike back by driving oil prices down, the economic cost in lost revenues is far greater than in the Ukraine. No one benefits more than the West in economic benefits.

    2. Demographic trends in other parts of Russia and the Central Asia Republics also threaten Russia internally and on its southern borders. In the short term Putin’s pumping up Russian ultra nationalism and his support for an Iranian Shia Empire must make the long-run racicalization threat all the worse

    3. Any present threat from NATO, the USA and Eastern Europe is fictional and Putin created. Long term the above ranks dead last after China and the Islamist threat when it comes to Russian security. Indeed the best move Putin could have made in that area and to improve the economy would have been to court the West, not alienate it. As it is, the mistrust Putin created would take decades to undo even if he stepped down and Russia reversed its foreign policies 1980 degrees now Russia does not have decades.

    4. Finally shale isn’t the only threat to oil prices long term and that’s bad news for a country too dependent on oil. A recent article in foreign affairs quarterly on new battery developments explains why the impact could be even greater in this case.


    A united Sunni front is forming to counter the Iran-Russia-USA threat. Members must have nukes due to previoius western sellouts and upcoming ones intentionally designed to inance further Iranian aggression against Sunni neighbors.

  2. From Lebanon’s NOW:



    “One day, when Barack Obama becomes a highly-paid fixture on the speakers’ circuit, it will perhaps dawn on Americans that their president disgracefully permitted one of the worst crimes of recent memory to continue unabated for many years…the Obama administration seeks to turn Syrian moderates into cannon fodder in its own war against ISIS; and it wants to deceive most people into believing that Washington is on the side of good in Syria, in order to better cover for the fact that it has absolutely no intention of undermining Assad.”

    From The Interpretor

    Putin has Lost Monopoly on Use of Force and Balance among Force Structures


    Many ISIS fighters were killed in an ambush by the FSA near Chelebi village in NE Aleppo–archicivilians

      • SOHR did just report this. So maybe there are two Mohammed Assads (its a common enough name) and they were shot in two separate incidents in Qardaha three years apart.

        • Mohammed is one of the most common names on the planet. Assad is Arabic for Lion common in English I would assume other languages too, Bashar’s pack are not the only family with that name, the founder of the FSA was called Raid Al-Asaad and he is of no relation. Assad is not even the real name, his grandpa changed it to Assad from Al-Wahhish (the wild beast-how much more fitting) like how Adolf’s dad was born Aliois Schuckguber but changed it before his son was born.

  3. The airstrikes only eased after Jaish al-Islam, the leading rebel faction in Douma, fired hundreds of rockets on military positions in Damascus.

    in reality, the rebels bombed central damascus, their rockets are even more primitive than the governments and you are telling me they hit military installations in a metropolis, wow.
    Plus the bombing stopped, when the government totally pummled the rebels after they started bombing central Damscus.

  4. One thing I really want to know is were did all the people get the red stared flag from? That flag was scrapped with Syria’s democracy after the Baathist Putsch, so they would still sell them in Syria. And they look really professional not hand made so where did they get them from? When the old flag was taken down in 63 did the Syrians just put them in there attics and rake them out now? Did they buy them online? Unlikly they would be allowed since the Baathists vilified the old presidents Kudsi and Quwatli so bet censor the internet for positive things assocated wih them. Where did they got those flags from someone tell me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

      • What about back in the really early days of the revolution? Did put them away only wait for time when the Baathism falls and freedom returns? I like to believe that but I doubt it.

    • You want to embarrass yourself again with your complete ignorance of syrian history? The current syrian flag has of course nothing to do with the Baath party – it was first introduced in 1958 when Syria formed together with Egypt the UAR. An event that, in fact, temporarily led to a significant power loss for the Baath party …

      That the FSA did choose a flag that was introduced under colonial rule, is of course entirely appropriate.

      • Just add an extra green star and you get the flag used after 1963 coup (and used in Baathist Iraq), which they kept changing (till they went back to the Nasser flag. Since Baathism is really a more extream version of Nassers views (FYI he called the Baathists “Facsist” & “Murderers”) it makes sence for them to use simmilar symbols. Also it take the logic that one star makes it a tottally diffenrt that would mean todays US flag would be only 54 years old as they added a star when Hawie became a state in 1960. Now stop being Fastidious.

        Also if the flag is colonial why did none of the Syrians President like Shishakli, or Kudsi or Quatli change it then?

  5. Advances against IS, Saudi Arabia is a quasi IS state itself why should we care if IS loses to Iran backed Shia militia, they are not perfect but even Sunnis prefer them to oppressive IS rule.

    This is getting off track in regards to Syria, are the Kurds advancing against IS? will the moderate rebels start getting back into the regime fold as they realise IS and JAN are much worse than the regime. Will this stalemate continue. When will Jan declare its own Caliphate etc. We know about Russia and Iran and even though they back the Regime there is no need fully analyse their politics to the level here.

    • Sorry to disappoint you BB but persuading the FSA to ally with the Baath Party against Daesh is never ever going to happen it would be like at the end of the Second World War the UK asking Poland to fight under Germany against Russia.

      As for Iran being better than Saudi? Yes and no. Iranians have more civil liberties and political rights as they can elect the president-only if the candidates are politically vetted first than the Saudis do they have elections for local government (probably again vetted in advance) not the national one. However the Iranian Regime has killed way for its own people than the Arabian Dynasty the KSA execute about twice as many as the USA the IRI executes about 8 times as many as the USA, personally that for me tips the balance in favour of Saudi but I can understand if you think its less bad than Iran.

      See the execution rates of the world hear.

      • I can assure you that I have no soft spot for Iran although when you are looking at the battle of Tikrit, I can only hope that IS gets what it deserves with the Sunnis now turning against them as in the reawakening against Al Qaeda years before. Now with the Regime on the offensive around Damascus, Aleppo, Hama and Deraa province it is clear that the moderate rebels (also under threat from the extremist IS, JAN and Ahrar) will have to face the fact that Assad is not going anywhere and they are in danger of extinction themselves. The Sunni states should be pressuring Iran on human rights in regards to those Shia militias as well Assad however it has been 4 years and the Sunni states haven’t done anything so why would they start now.

      • The large number of executions in Iran is due to the massive increase in drug trafficking that took place after the US occupation of neighbouring Afghanistan turned it into a narco fiefdom. Whereas in Saudi Arabia you get your head chopped off for such crimes as witchcraft.

        Of course, there is nothing that ISIS does that is not also practised in Saudi Arabia. The only difference is that the Saudi regime is and always has been a reliable puppet of the US/Israel, whereas ISIS turned out to be somewhat of a loose cannon, which caused the US to turn against its creation.

        • Saudi Arabia allows smoking and football, two of the most prominent bans of the Caliphate. The argument that Saudi Arabia’s official religion is Vahabism has been attempted to be touted to ultimately discrediting the Syrian rebels.

          This argument is of course fallacious, as Saudi religion is a watered down version compared to even mainstream Vahabism, much less the radical version of ISIS.

          • Given that the right to smoke is increasingly under attack also in “progressive” western states, I fail to see what is so radical about a smoking ban. At least women in ISIS land, in contrast to Saudi Arabia, are allowed to drive cars and bicycles.

            So, please stop your neocon hypocrisis. The only thing that you are interested in when judging governments and organisations is “How useful and subservient to US imperial interests is it?”.

            • I just love how the leftist amerophobes are ignorant enough to not even realize they’re not talking to an american at all. Back in the day, you would of been all for Pol Pot as well.

              • LOL, this is just hilarious.

                First, a neocon is simply someone that admires and propagates US imperialism and war of aggression. This must, of course, not necessarily be a USian (note for the geographically challenged: America stretches way more than the USA). There are suckers for power and violence all the world over and since the USA is currently the top dog they tend to project their loyalties this way. David Frum, for instance, of “Axis of evil” (in)fame is from Canada. The maintainer of “Enduring America” is British.

                Regarding the charge that opponents of neoconservatism are “leftists”, this is simply ludicrous. It is in fact, the neocons that are the leftists. There was a saying “Neoconservatives are liberals (social democrats) that got mugged”. Much better would be to say, that they are social democrats that fully understand and embrace the logical consequences of government interventionism. The logical external pendant of the oppressive internal welfare and nanny state is imperialism and war of aggression (As Rothbard put it: The welfare-warfare state).

                As for Pol Pot, you seem to conveniently forget that it was the destabilisation of Cambodia by the USA during the Vietnam war that allowed him to gain power. Of course, the US government had no qualms to prop up the Khmer Rouge as “freedom fighters” during the 80’s when it suited them (Notice some parallels with Al Kaida, ISIS & Co?).

              • Firstly, US imperialism does not exist. Imperialism is most commonly defined as expansion of one state at the expense of another. The last event of this type in US history was the 1905 US-Spain war. The state we are in now is the dominance of the US over the rest of the world.

                This period of US dominance has been (check the statistics before you say something stupid again) the most peaceful time in human history, so I am not really opposed to it, but I wouldn’t say I support it. The reason I don’t oppose it is that removing the dominant world power from world stage would only result in another power filling the vacuum. I’d rather not see Russia taking the role, thank you very much.

                I’m mostly used to leftist being the ones to oppose any US policy on international forums. Fascists who never forgave the US for winning WWII is something I have not encountered outside of forums on my native language. Perhaps you are not that far right, but lumping two opposing concepts like socialism and liberalism into one puts you pretty far from the center. I’m actually skimming the wikipedia article on Murray Rothbard right now, and I definitely can tell from which crackpot you got your opinion from. Don’t really know why I’m writing all this actually, as I know your mind is too closed to register anything I say. Guess I got nothing better to do right now, and since I started, I might as well finish.

                I’m not forgetting anything, including the fact that destabilization of Cambodia began when Viet Cong began using it as a staging area for attacks in Vietnam, not when the US army crossed the border to confront them. As for parallels, there are none. Us support for Al-Qaida is a lie spread mostly by Al-Qaida itself.

              • @Ivan

                I think Menschmaschine uses the term “Liberal” in the sense it is used inside the USA -to signify what in other countries is called socialism o progressives leftism-. They have inverted the terminology.

              • Firstly, US imperialism does not exist

                LOL, and you have the nerve of accusing other people of being crackpots. I guess a good working definition of imperialism would be like this: the behaviour of a state that seeks to control other states, including by coercive means. The important words are ‘control’ and ‘coercive means’.

                This period of US dominance has been (check the statistics before you say something stupid again) the most peaceful time in human history

                Ah yes? So why don’t you provide these statistics? Do you mean statistics like this:

                “The number of people living as refugees from war or persecution exceeded 50 million in 2013, for the first time sinsce World War Two, the UN says.

                The overall figure of 51.2 million is six million higher than the year before, a report by the UN refugee agency says.

                Antonio Guterres, head of the UNHCR, told the BBC the rise was a “dramatic challenge” for aid organisations.

                Conflicts in Syria, central Africa and South Sudan fuelled the sharp increase.

                “Conflicts are multiplying, more and more,” Mr Guterres said. “And at the same time old conflicts seem never to die.”


                Well, it seems that if someone is saying something stupid here, it certainly ain’t me. Even the worst periods of the bad old days of the cold war were still more peaceful than the brave new world of unchecked US imperial dominance.

                It is also interesting to look at this problem regionally. According to your “benevolent imperialism” theory those regions should be most peaceful where US interventionism is most concentrated. This region is without doubt the Middle East, which was always of pretty high priority for the USA, and even more so after the end of the cold war – leading to a climax with the invasion of Iraq. A counter example would be Latin America, which has very much declined as priority for US imperialism since the end of the cold war. So, accordingly we would expect that the Middle East would now be a model of peace and harmony, whereas Latin America which was during the cold war rife with coups, revolutions and civil wars should be even worse. But, of course, we observe exactly the opposite: the Middle East – well I don’t think I need to expand on this. Latin America, in contrast, has generally become significantly more stable and peaceful.

                another power filling the vacuum. I’d rather not see Russia taking the role, thank you very much.

                Of course, there is no way that Russia would be able (or want to) practice imperialist politics on a scale comparable to the USA. And even if we assume it for a moment, it would be difficult to imagine how it could be worse than what the US does.

                but lumping two opposing concepts like socialism and liberalism into one puts you pretty far from the Center

                I meant of course ‘liberal’ in the US sense, where the word was hijacked by leftists and now means something like ‘social democrat’ or even ‘socialist’.

                and I definitely can tell from which crackpot you got your opinion from

                Thank you for your reasoned and thoughtful critique (hint: that was sarcasm)

                I’m mostly used to leftist being the ones to oppose ny US policy on international Forums

                I don’t know what leftists you mean, but here in Germany the vast majority of the left has embraced the cause of US imperialism after the collapse of the Soviet Union (and in the rest of the western world, as far as I can observe, it is no different). This includes even many of the most hardcore groups; in fact here we find (unsurprisingly) the most rabid adherents. There is, for instance, a very vocal faction that calls itself “Anti-Deutsche” or anti-Germans; their vileness is simply beyond description. For instance, they celebrate the allied terror bombing of civilians in WW II with such slogans as “Bomber Harris, do it again”.

                Of course, this shift is in no way surprising. Leftists are by definition worshippers of state power and violence; once the Soviet Union wimped out, the only global imperial power left to root for was the USA.

                Fascists who never forgave the US for winning WWII is something I have not encountered outside of forums on my native language. Perhaps you are not that far right

                So you think that fascism is the same as libertarianism? This is beyond embarrassing.

                Us support for Al-Qaida is a lie spread mostly by Al-Qaida itself.

                Care to share an example for such lies “spread by Al-Qaida”? Anyway, to only look at recent events, the US has delivered weapons to Syrian insurgent groups that openly collaborated and shared weapons with Al Nusra, the official Syrian Al Qaida branch. Qatari officials have tried to convince Al Nusra to at least in public hush up its Al Qaida membership, which they refused. And why should they? They can get all the weapons they want anyway. Israeli officials have declared that Al Qaida fighters are treated in their military hospitals and some – like Israel’s Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren – have openly said that they would prefer al Qaeda to the current Syrian government.

  6. “None of us, Russia, the United States, coalition, and regional states, wants to see a collapse of the government and political institutions in Damascus.”

    The United States does not want to see the chaotic collapse of the Syrian regime, CIA Director John Brennan said on Friday, according to AFP.

    Speaking at a Council on Foreign Relations event, Brennan, who took over the CIA’s top spot in 2013, highlighted the possibility of a catastrophic breakdown whereby “extremist elements” seize power in Damascus.

    The White House has endorsed a transition of power in Syria in the past, expressing its support for moderate forces within the Syrian opposition whom it sees as possible successors to the Assad regime. But advances by more hardline groups have eclipsed any success enjoyed by US sponsored rebels.

    but it’s more fun to pretend Obama is a gay atheist Kenyan Islamocommunazi in a secret sadomasochistic menage a trois with Khamenei and Assad.

    • No because of what we have seen in Libya and Iraq. Not all parts of a dictatorship are bad there are elements that provide law and order, essential services, ensure secular values and most importantly prevent extremism and sectarianism. This is what the Syrian people (including many Sunnis) are realising that life under the regime can not be nearly as bad as life under IS and JAN especially for Christians and other minorities.

      • BB,

        That’s only about half true. Sectarianism was actually promoted by Hussein and Assad as a means of maintaining power. And provision of state services is part of the regime, however configured in such a way that they can only be maintained as long as the regime itself is maintained. They are not equipped to withstand regime overthrow.

        ISIS and JAN are arguably more repressive in intent than the Assad regime, however they are also less effective in carrying out said repression. They have not (yet) built the network of informants and technical capabilities that the regime has, so people under JAN and ISIS rule can be argued to be more free than those under regime control. This is why areas under ISIS rule have not seen a pro-government uprising. People may feel bad about being stuck with ISIS, but to claim they want the regime back is not true.

        And I seriously am peeved at the regime supporters parroting the “minority protection” lie. There was no minority protection in Syria, period. Just ask the Kurds about that. In reality, minorities were the ones being used to protect the regime, not the other way around.

Leave a Comment