[amitkr]

I'm no expert in international politics, but am pondering on these questions.
If someone more well informed than me has better insights, please answer me or
help me understand.
(No spam please, and please don't hijack this to discuss Islam).

1. Why ISIS had't attacked like its doing now, for past 5 years USA had been bombing them, but starts these attacks within 3 weeks Russia started bombings?
2. Given USA (and west) claims that Russia is *not* attacking ISIS but "moderate" rebels, does that even makes sense? I mean according to USA Russia is helping ISIS cleaning up moderate rebels? Why would ISIS attack someone who's helping them (re: the Russian airplane bomb recently)?
3. Differentiate "moderate" rebels and "terrorists"? Is supplying arms to anyone in middle-east at present a good idea?
4. Is it just by chance that these terrorist attacks are happening just before G20 summit?
5. Where do these terrorists get the arms and ammunition from? Would that be the first thing to cut if anyone seriously wants to beat these fanatics? There must be a constant supply of this and i find it hard to believe that they are manufacturing it.

PS: This is my first post so please forgive me for mistakes and feel free to correct me.

[layman]

Why ISIS had't attacked like its doing now, for past 5 years USA had been bombing them, but starts these attacks within 3 weeks Russia started bombings?

ISIS have been fairly clear about this themselves. Before they were encouraging people to come and join the caliphate. Now they are encouraging people to attack their home countrys using terrorism.

This is because the military situation is looking bad for them in iraq/syria, despite the confidence and fear they inspire. Yes, the painful logic is that them losing in more traditional war will result in non-traditional terrorism increasing.

Sad but true.

Given USA (and west) claims that Russia is *not* attacking ISIS but "moderate" rebels, does that even makes sense? I mean according to USA Russia is helping ISIS cleaning up moderate rebels? Why would ISIS attack someone who's helping them (re: the Russian airplane bomb recently)?

No, noone is claiming russia is helping ISIS. It is true though that russia bombs other rebels more than ISIS. The reason for this is mostly because the west are bombing ISIS anyway so call it the division of labour.

3. Differentiate "moderate" rebels and "terrorists"? Is supplying arms to anyone in middle-east at present a good idea?

Good heavens thats a tricky one. I dont beleive all rebels in syria are islamists but a lot of them are. More importantly, if assad is defeated and there is a power vacum, only islamists have the political capital to fill it.

4. Is it just by chance that these terrorist attacks are happening just before G20 summit?

Probably yes. I expect the only timing they care about is launching attack before their plans are foiled. In other worlds ASAP.

5. Where do these terrorists get the arms and ammunition from? Would that be the first thing to cut if anyone seriously wants to beat these fanatics? There must be a constant supply of this and i find it hard to believe that they are manufacturing it.

Very hard to do this in europes free movement zone. Also, the number of refugees means you simply cannot search everyones bags. It is likely they have weapon mules similar to 'drug mules'.

Getting weapons into the UK would be considerably harder I am told. I hope this is true. We do have border controls after all and a history of keeping assault weapons out.

[kira]

How likely is a Turkish invasion of Syria?
http://rbth.com/international/2016/02/1 ... ria_568603

[Noelnada]

If someone more well informed than me has better insights, please answer me or
help me understand.

Consider Syria more like a multidimensional conflict.

Shia vs Sunnis (Iran vs Saudia Arabia)
East vs West (Russia vs US/UK)
Rebels vs Regime
Kurds vs Turks
ISIS vs Syria/Irak

NATO forces have been trying to weaken ISIS but at the same time direct it against it's opponents in the region (Damascus/Baghdad).

And so on...I don't have time to extensively write about it right but i will come back try to explain the situation more comprehensively.

[JohnRawls]

How likely is a Turkish invasion of Syria?

Less likely than most would think. Invasion doesn't solve any issues for the Turks and SA because otherwise they will have to fight Assad directly and potentially Russia/Iran also. So the benefits don't outweight the costs. If intervention happens, it would most likely be anti-kurdish and not even anti-isis. Helps Turkey solve a problem short-term.

Turks and SA might also attack ISIS but that is debatable. In their eyes ISIS does a lot more good than bad. Unless they have some kind of political solution/agreement with Nato, it is unwise to destroy ISIS for them. Long term this empowers Assad and makes him win the civil war.

[AuRomin]

2. Given USA (and west) claims that Russia is *not* attacking ISIS but "moderate" rebels, does that even makes sense? I mean according to USA Russia is helping ISIS cleaning up moderate rebels? Why would ISIS attack someone who's helping them (re: the Russian airplane bomb recently)?

Moskovia isn't helping ISIS. You are hearing that Moskovia is not attacking ISIS because the media profits more from propaganda than news.

It does't help that the US is allied with Saudi Arabia and Turkey, two huge supporters of ISIL. The US is basically helping terrorists fight Assad because we have problems with him, and Moskovia is helping Assad get rid of terrorists. The US hates this, event though it is the right move.

5. Where do these terrorists get the arms and ammunition from? Would that be the first thing to cut if anyone seriously wants to beat these fanatics? There must be a constant supply of this and i find it hard to believe that they are manufacturing it.

There are many private businesses that supply weapons to governments, and could easily provide weapons to aspiring governments as long as they make money. The US also directly supplies terrorist while supporting Assad. If anyone really wanted to cut the violence in the Middle East they have to take out all of the radicals wealthy on oil that secretly find terrorist organizations. Corporations should also stop letting their oil get stolen (by ISIS) and re-sold. If you wonder who buys the oil (stolen by ISIS), that would be largely Erdogan, the leader of Turkey (whom we protect )

[anasawad]

1. Why ISIS had't attacked like its doing now, for past 5 years USA had been bombing them, but starts these attacks within 3 weeks Russia started bombings?

The US didn't bomb critical targets, it was just for show.
How ever Russia is bombing their supply and trade routes, and thus they started losing so they became desperate.

Where do these terrorists get the arms and ammunition from? Would that be the first thing to cut if anyone seriously wants to beat these fanatics? There must be a constant supply of this and i find it hard to believe that they are manufacturing it.

Many sources.
For example, the weapons the west is sending to the rebels most oftenly end up with ISIS or Nusra front.
They gain weapons from fleeing enemies.
Arms dealers all across are selling them weapons like some here in Lebanon for example.

For the whole conflict, Syria is a battle ground for dozens of entities so its not very simple.

[AuRomin]

5. Where do these terrorists get the arms and ammunition from? Would that be the first thing to cut if anyone seriously wants to beat these fanatics? There must be a constant supply of this and i find it hard to believe that they are manufacturing it.

The US sends 'rebels' weapons. This is the government supplying terrorists weapons (however we want to classify the extent of their extremism). The US also send Saudi (many) weapons, and they support ISIL (pretty openly, too). Many weapons, such as AKs, have come in from the Balkans where civil war has ceased. Saudi is actually a great place to investigate if you plan on doing any more in depth research.

3. Differentiate "moderate" rebels and "terrorists"? Is supplying arms to anyone in middle-east at present a good idea?

Basically, you can't. The idea of a moderate (mostly) just propaganda. NATO and the US specifically it seems has an interest in destabilizing Syria to put in an oil line to pass by Russia in the process (they are the largest supplier). The 'rebels' are indistinguishable from what we call terrorists. Sometimes we call them rebels then we change and call them terrorists (e.g. AL-Qaeda). And, you already seem to know the answer on this one, but it is a horrible idea to pump weapons into a region (except if you are trying to destabilize it, in which case you probably don't care).