transition Assad out and fight ISIS, etc. etc. US officials have not come to a "firm conclusion" about Russia's intent? Well, Russia will do whatever strengthens Russia in the region, and they probably don't give a shit about humanitarian issues or peace or anything else, so work backwards from there, you fucking geniuses.

And replace him with who? No matter which way we jump in this mess, it is going to be bad.

the more things change the more the stay the same.

All the rest is speculation, apparently in service of a foregone conclusion.

Apparently some Russian troops are being told they'll be deploying or likely to be deploying.

As for "factual evidence," that is a loaded term. You can catch two Russian majors with IDs and their orders, they can confess and tell their stories, and all it takes is for some low-level Russian military officer to say, "Nopity, not ours" and many "factualists" move those Russians' status from "fact" to "hearsay." You can catch a video of 20 tanks being driven across the Russian border, or Russian bodies belong loaded onto a truck and driven back into Russian and if the Russian government says, "Nope," then it's all hearsay.

For some, failure of the Russians to actively confirm video or a report = denial.

The Russians are getting fully involved at the request of the Iranians. Reports have that Gen Qassem Soleimani went to Moscow practically begging for Russian involvement. Looks like he got it.

All of this has to put the Israelis on edge. They won't have free reign for military ops in Syria and Lebanon anymore.

against Iran, too. Apparently there are no consequences for that, either.

just to transfer the EU gas market from Russia to Qatar.

All we have to show for it is two colossal messes and hundreds of thousands dead/displaced.

Was Qatari greed ever worth it?

Maybe the Russians can get a handle on this. It is their backyard.

Or maybe they will just give training and weapons to independents who get captured immediately. Like we do.

Your info may be more recent than mine, but I remember an article in the last couple of months that said the Chechen govt was opposed to IS gaining any foothold there. I do believe it's true that some Chechens have individually joined IS, but not the country. With all the Russian pipelines that run through that area, I can't imagine the hell that would break loose if ISIS was in control. I am far from a complete understanding of the whole situation though.

NATO and the west, on the other hand, well that's different. Because freedom and stuff. Something like that anyway. I am sure someone can explain it, even if I can't. Right?

They don't want Assad at the same time, they don't want ISIS. On one hand, they do like the Kurds, but Turkey is throwing a monkey wrench into that machine. And then you have a mish mash coalition of rebel groups...that could turn on each other if they succeed. They want a friendly western government, but don't have any clear way of obtaining it.

Return to "status quo" with Assad propped up by Iran and Russia may be the better option and reduce the bloodshed. Plus Assad will be at the mercy of Iran and Russia after this. Which could mean Western governments could negotiate with them for his eventual "transition out" at some point. But the country won't be friendly and open to the West for the foreseeable future.

Europe drew up the borders in the Mid-East with the intention of keeping many nations weak as possible. So their would be plenty of internal issues that would keep them at bay and have them less involved. Pretty safe to say it backfired.