0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
1,360 $
JUNE 2021

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Support SouthFront

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

The ISIS-held pocket in southern Damascus is slowly crumbling under the pressure from Syrian government forces.

The Syrian military has deployed a few pro-government Palestinian militias, including Liwa al-Quds, to advance more successfully in this mostly Palestinian-populated area. The adequate choice of roces as well as the advantage in military equipment and firepower are key reasons behind the government forces’ progress against ISIS.

Another important factor in favour of the Syrian Army is that the Damascus government had reached a ceasefire with “moderate” militants controlling the eastern part of the pocket.

Recently, government troops have liberated the districts of Al-Barradi and Al-Barradat as well as the Da’boul street in the Yarmouk refugee camp area. Warplanes of the Syrian Air Force and the SAA’s artillery have just destroyed a major part of the ISIS defense there.

According to local sources, the Syrian military is aiming to divide the pocket into two parts and to isolate the ISIS-held area. Then, when the ISIS-held pocket is cut off from the rest of the militant-held area, government troops will be able to supress the militants’ defense points one by one.

Pro-government forces involved in the Yarmouk operation:

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

In Photos And Videos: Government Forces Tighten Siege On ISIS-held Area In Southern Damascus

Click to see the full-size image

Support SouthFront


Notify of
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michał Hunicz

On one cap there was a sign “Iraq Special Forces”. If this is real, it means that Iraq is very deeply supporting Syria.


Soldier might be of Iraqi descent, or sometimes troops just like to make trades.
Seems that there is never any standard SAA gear or uniform in this conflict, except for maybe the Republican guard units?


Why is it that whenever normal soldiers of the SAA or Iran have beards, they are all nicely and neatly trimmed and well groomed, but the jihadists and radical Islamists beards are always all fucked up and raggedy?


You could tell just by looking at the faces of these fine men that they are genuinely good people, valiantly fighting for their country.

One look at any given FSA or jihadist scumbag, and I instantly feel a sense of disgust and revulsion.


Totally agree !!


Seeing a fine secular country being literally ruined right before our eyes is making me sick. Those who caused this grand tragedy are calling themselves democratic and civilized! This alone shows how fucked-up the World is today.


Strange thing is, even the called “civilized” western countries would be better off if they just stopped meddling in the internal affairs of middle eastern countries. Jihadists would be an almost non existent nuisance.

Every time we intervene, one way or another, the country ends up turning into some jihadist shithole. And most politicians never fucking learn, and are under the control of warmongers and the military industrial complex.


Agreed but must add here that if you don’t intervene, ”the boss” will get angry. And most -if not all- of the jihadist attacks in the West is False Flag attacks. Check this out:


and this (its well worth 10 minutes of one’s patience) :



No, I don’t buy into that “false flag” narrative. Jihadist organizations are very much real and independent entities with their own view of the world. However, they are directly or indirectly empowered by or manipulated by to advance certain people’s geopolitical interests. Moreover, the funding for the spread of ideologies like Wahhabism and Salafism often comes with the tacit approval or complete disregard by Western governments.

However this notion that “there’s no such thing as ISIS” or that each and every radical Islamist attacks against minority groups, free thinkers and civilians is somehow “orchestrated” by some “elite” is borderline fringe conspiracy nonsense. Yes, certain jihadist groups are useful idiots who often benefit the military industrial complex and who simultaneously benefit from the destructive foreign policies of many western countries, but this idea that radical Islamist groups are “inventions” by imperialists or that someone like Baghdadi takes direct orders from the likes of Bolton is just fridge propaganda.

I don’t know what your video, or your link to a Quora answer is supposed to show me. A lot of what he says resonates and makes sense, but a few of his remarks are gross overstatements. As for the Quora post, it’s just another random individual making claims without a lot of substance. Many of the points he makes are correct, but there are some remarks where he is stating some half truths and topping them off with exaggerations or overstatements. Quora is nothing more than a question and answer site where community members (which could be anyone in the world) can answer any given question. It’s not necessarily a source of credible evidence if you want to make the much stronger point that “most, if not all terrorist attacks” are “false flag”. Simply linking to something that restates the claim isn’t evidence.

So again to reiterate, it’s not that I disagree with the general thesis that much of the radicalization in many Muslim communities has resulted from decades of US and European foreign policy, but I would not go as far as saying these ideologies are in “invention” of western imperialism.

I know some Muslims in my personal life who really do hold highly abhorrent and intolerant views that are short of committing acts of violence. They are not Mossad agents nor do they do the bidding of western imperialists. However, one can definitely argue that the reason some of these radical views are so widespread in many of these communities is because Western foreign policy has crushed moderate secular movements throughout the Middle East and elsewhere, and have in many cases funded and propped up radical ideologies. However, these various strains of radical Islamist political views are in fact very real things, and have existed in the absence of external meddling.

It’s just that prior to the breakup of the Ottoman empire, they were relatively fringe views. Salafism and Wahabbism were fringe sects in the Muslim world relegated to a few tribes in the Arabian peninsula. They were certainly empowered by imperialists coddling and arming the House of Saud, and encouraged the Saudis in many cases (as in the case of Afghanistan) to spending their vast oil wealth in spreading radical Islamist propaganda throughout Muslim majority countries and funding Jihadist madrassas.

But no, going as far as saying that these terrorists are actually just agents of the New World Order taking direct orders from Bolton or some shit like that is really overstating and oversimplifying and very nuanced situation.

Radical Islamic ideologies very much do exist and are very pervasive and are the primary motivating factor for numerous Jihadist attacks, not just in the west but across the world. However, the reason they are so widespread, unlike in say… the 18th or 19th centuries is precisely because of flawed western foreign policy, which in some cases was unintended blowback, and in other cases was very deliberate and malicious.


I must admit that you are very close to discovering the whole truth but just cant admit it. What you say above also is somewhat justifying these ”fringe” theories that I put forward in that;
– ignorance and radicalism in Islam makes those people somewhat violent.
I agree, violence inherent in Islam’s book and ignorant/underdeveloped area lads are intolerant towards other people.
this alone does not constitute a threat.

They need to be trained/organized/funded/armed, and more brainwashed by professionals to commit terror attacks and/or wars. Furthermore, you will note that the people they kill/wage war on are 99.9 per cent other muslims.

This (train/arm etc) can not be done without help from other countries (which can be us-friendly arab nations such as Qatar or Saudis in funding, and UK/Israel/France intelligence and special forces on the ground incl those of the US) and their military personnel + intelligence agencies. One can not believe that a few arabs get together and form such big scale terror organizations and fight Russians or make 9/11 (very complicated and special op) or occupy land from Iraq or Syria.

Sorry to refer you to another website but here you’ll see Brzezinski (Bolton?) admitting they started islamic terrorists (afghanistan) and used them against Soviets (later these people became Al Qaeda and likes, fought in Yugoslavia, Chechnia, Iraq, Libya, Syria and where have you. Africa…

(this interview was given to a french magazine in late 1990’s and 100% genuine – you can google and find other replicas of same interview)



Well, ok, what you just said makes a lot of sense. The only issue I have is the proximity of the relationship between the radical Islamist sects and what you would call the “elite” who got the ball rolling by intentionally arming and funding radical Islamist ideologies, with full knowledge of the destruction and unintended (or even maliciously intended) consequences that they would subsequently benefit from.

So let me give you 2 scenarios to kind of illustrate my point. There are many many different variations of this scenario, including scenarios where the outcome ends up being that neither the imperialists nor their victims end up benefiting, but a country is nevertheless destabilized and destroyed, but I’m not gonna go into all the different variants, I just dont have the time. For instance, contrast Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan/Afghanistan. All of these areas became either highly unstable shitholes or highly repressive shitholes as a result, intended or unintended, of US/western foreign policy adventures, but all 3 of them ended up that way in a different manner from one another. But anyways…
Scenario 1:

Imperialists/CIA/foreign policy hawks etc. hate a certain country or want to overthrow it leadership or want to exploit its resources.

A coup/insurgency/regime change ensues as the imperialists/co. provide funding for armed fringe groups that otherwise wouldve never posed any real threat to anyone in the targeted country.

These fringe radical/terrorist groups now thrive in a destabilized environment, start spreading to other countries, start being funded by puppet regimes (like in Saudi Arabia, or as you correctly point out, the “mujahideen” in Afghanistan).

These radical terrorist/jihadist forces are not actually “pro-western” nor are they interested in promoting savage ideologies like zionism. The morons themselves really do believe in reverting back to a literalist 7th century Islamist caliphate.

What they (the jihadists I mean) don’t realize is that they are unwitting participants and “useful” idiots in furthering the goals of imperialists/co. for more destabilization (so that they can justify even more military intervention/adventurism) in their host countries as well as committing horrific terrorist acts both against moderate Muslims (which you correctly point out are the vast majority of their victims, although for the sake of accuracy its not quite 99.9%, but still overwhelmingly and predominantly its other Muslims that targeted, with particular savagery committed against Shias/Alawites/Secular sunnis).

They also commit terrorist attacks against western targets, which further enables interventionists to “justify” even further interventions against terrorists that they themselves in fact had a huge hand in empowering and creating.

And so what is the result? The result is that these jihadists and their ideology goes from being fringe to becoming more widespread, better funded, better organized, more resourceful, etc. It is this pervasiveness and resourcefulness and power that the jihadists have gained as a result of these imperialist interventions that allow them to pull off these deadly complex attacks in the west and against innocents in their home countries.
Scenario 2:

Basically the same thing as the above, but instead the CIA etc or something is actually on the ground giving the precise planning and details to clueless low IQ jihadist foot soldiers and directing them to attack civilians in specific places like the Bataclan.
The first scenario is what I generally find to be plausible. This second scenario is the part that I don’t buy. I mean I understand ultimately that maybe I’m just splitting hairs here. Scenario 2, not so much.

I guess what I am really trying to say is that I agree with like everything you just said here. I just think that there’s a larger, less obvious, chain of events.

So for instance, when you said:

“They need to be trained/organized/funded/armed, and more brainwashed by
professionals to commit terror attacks and/or wars.”

I mean I find this mostly correct. I think that instead its not the CIA directly or even the Saudi government that are meticulously planning out specific terror attacks, but rather, they are training/organizing/funding/arming/educating/brainwashing certain groups which are then training/organizing/funding/arming/educating/brainwashing other groups which are then training/organizing/funding/arming/educating/brainwashing other groups which are then training/organizing/funding/arming/educating/brainwashing other groups which then self organize and commit terror attacks at home and abroad against Western countries or Gulf states, which then use the terror attacks as an excuse or pretext for more intervention, more warmongering, more Zionist expansion, more funding for the military industrial complex, more exploitation and the cycle repeats all over again.

If I was part of the “elite”, this is how I would do it. I would not directly come up with specific terror plots and start directly hiring Salafi radicals to do my bidding. Funding/arming/educating the ideological base is more than enough for useful idiots who I armed/trained/educated/funded to come up with their own terror plots. That way I would have plausible deniability.

Again, I know I’m probably splitting hairs here. But I just have an issue with referring to specific attacks like in Paris as “false flag”, which often makes someone come off as some kind of conspiracy cook who thinks that everything is some kind of inside job. I see the overall interventionist policy as a false flag strategy, but not individual attacks or operations. Or at least not the ones against western targets. I am sure the mujahideen in Afghanistan or the “rebels” in Syria probably got more direct operational guidance.

I just don’t think that Arabs or South Asians or North Africans are somehow clueless bums, and then some high IQ Mossad agent comes along and gives them instructions to go blow up a Shia mosque or shoot up a theater in Paris. I think its much more broad than that.

The Salafi jihadists, both the violent ones, as well as the non-violent ideologues that provide the platform, education, funding, and support for the violent ones are very much real. However, this education, funding and support and brainwashing has been decades in the making by western interventionists and their gulf partners.

The western interventionists prop up the ideology, fund the education/brain washing, provide the training to intermediaries and then allow this ideology to wreak havoc across the world, which they then leverage to their own advantage to scare and divide the public, to curtail civil liberties, and to conduct endless war.

Again though, I’m probably splitting hairs here. I think we pretty much agree on 99% of things on this issue and are really on the same side. There’s just some nuance in terms of word usage that is really hard for me to explain over the internet. I’ve personally had far greater success in convincing overly zealous pro-interventionist people of the flaws in US foreign policy when I used terms like “blowback” rather than “false flag” for instance.

That being said, I am keeping an open mind. If I find evidence of terrorist attacks of not only being blowback and unintended consequences (or perhaps intended, if you look at it from an imperialist’s perspective) but are in fact completely staged, then I will completely come around to your way of thinking 100% instead of 99.5%.

Either way though, I think we’re on the same side. By the way, thanks for the article. That was very interesting and refreshing. I did not know that the support for the “mujahideen” actually started before the Soviet invasion. That was very eye opening. Infuriating, but very eye opening.


I know its a bit hard to accept those about false flags but government agents everywhere. Any major terror attack in the West can not be done without being noticed by intelligence agencies and/or the police or the agents. Did you notice that most of these attackers are killed or vanished. Suicide bombers always (always) leave an ID at the site. Like Kennedy Murder, most of it is unfo false flag.

Look at this recent case in the UK : Manchester terror attack by UK resident Salman Abedi. His father Ramadan Abedi (UK resident), a MI6 agent, was ex Libyan intelligence officer. He took part in the field on taking down Qaddafi. His son had fought together with Al Qaeda in Libya. MI6 was sending Ramadan in/out Libya from UK. More of this on the net. http://www.voltairenet.org/article196621.html

but the main point I want to make here is that our governments have dirty people on payroll.

When you rihtfully pointed out that ”the individual jihadi soldier thinks he is serving his people/god but only serving Israel or US and he does not know” is also true, unfortunately, in our intelligence agencies’ case, police and/or officials. They think the false flags are for greater good. But they are not.

Back to middle east; There are evidences NATO soldiers training ISIS/Al Qaeda militants. France officers’ training and US officers commanding ISIS on the field are documented. ISIS soldiers being treated in Israeli hospitals is an undenied fact. You dont see these on mainstream media ofc.
(btw, although all radical islamists demonize jews/israel for mainly the palastinians , ISIS or other ”terrorists” never thought of fighting Israel but other arab countries only.)

The radical terrorist bunches consist of many different origins;
– Mercenaries (recruited/hired by private international security firms who are in turn hired to do jobs for some countries’ intelligence agencies to do their dirty works like taking down an un-cooperative king /dictator in Africa or creating an uprise against Qaddafi in Libya)
– Volunteers (when jihad is called for, many young adventurers flee their homes from all over the world and join training camps which are organized by vassal states of US or like.)
– Checheni milita; nearly half of ISIS militns come from Chechenia. they are convenient,
– locals
– soldiers of fortune

– check the list of private security companies in the world :

– check the list of private military companies in the world : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_private_military_contractors

think what these companies profit from. why are they needed and why private.

below from globalresearch :


1. The US has supported Al Qaeda and its affiliated organizations for almost half a century since the heyday of the Soviet Afghan war.

2. CIA training camps were set up in Pakistan. In the ten year period from 1982 to 1992, some 35,000 jihadists from 43 Islamic countries were recruited by the CIA to fight in the Afghan jihad.

“Advertisements, paid for from CIA funds, were placed in newspapers and newsletters around the world offering inducements and motivations to join the Jihad.”

3. Since the Reagan Administration, Washington has supported the Islamic terror network.

Ronald Reagan called the terrorists “freedom fighters”. The US supplied weapons to the Islamic brigades. It was all for “a good cause”: fighting the Soviet Union and regime change, leading to the demise of a secular government in Afghanistan.

Ronald Reagan meets Afghan Mujahideen Commanders at the White House in 1985 (Reagan Archives) (PICTURE PROVIDED)

4. Jihadist textbooks were published by the University of Nebraska. “. “The United States spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan schoolchildren with textbooks filled with violent images and militant Islamic teachings”

5. Osama bin Laden, America’s bogyman and founder of Al Qaeda was recruited by the CIA in 1979 at the very outset of the US sponsored jihadist war against Afghanistan . He was 22 years old and was trained in a CIA sponsored guerilla training camp.

Al Qaeda was not behind the 9/11 Attacks. September 11, 2001 provided a justification for waging a war against Afghanistan on the grounds that Afghanistan was a state sponsor of terrorism, supportive of Al Qaeda. The 9/11 attacks were instrumental in the formulation of the “Global War on Terrorism”.


6. The Islamic State (ISIL) was originally an Al Qaeda affiliated entity created by US intelligence with the support of Britain’s MI6, Israel’s Mossad, Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) and Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Presidency (GIP), Ri’āsat Al-Istikhbārāt Al-’Āmah ( رئاسة الاستخبارات العامة‎).

7. The ISIL brigades were involved in the US-NATO supported insurgency in Syria directed against the government of Bashar al Assad.

8. NATO and the Turkish High Command were responsible for the recruitment of ISIL and Al Nusrah mercenaries from the outset of the Syrian insurgency in March 2011. According to Israeli intelligence sources, this initiative consisted in:

“a campaign to enlist thousands of Muslim volunteers in Middle East countries and the Muslim world to fight alongside the Syrian rebels. The Turkish army would house these volunteers, train them and secure their passage into Syria. (DEBKAfile, NATO to give rebels anti-tank weapons, August 14, 2011.)

9.There are Western Special Forces and Western intelligence operatives within the ranks of the ISIL. British Special Forces and MI6 have been involved in training jihadist rebels in Syria.

10. Western military specialists on contract to the Pentagon have trained the terrorists in the use of chemical weapons.

“The United States and some European allies are using defense contractors to train Syrian rebels on how to secure chemical weapons stockpiles in Syria, a senior U.S. official and several senior diplomats told CNN Sunday. ( CNN Report, December 9, 2012)

11. The ISIL’s practice of beheadings is part of the US sponsored terrorist training programs implemented in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.

12. Recruited by America’s ally, a large number of ISIL mercenaries are convicted criminals released from Saudi prisons on condition they join the ISIL. Saudi death row inmates were recruited to join the terror brigades.

13. Israel has supported the ISIL and Al Nusrah brigades out of the Golan Heights.

Jihadist fighters have met Israeli IDF officers as well as Prime Minister Netanyahu. The IDF top brass tacitly acknowledges that “global jihad elements inside Syria” [ISIL and Al Nusrah] are supported by Israel. See image below:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon next to a wounded mercenary, Israeli military field hospital at the occupied Golan Heights’ border with Syria, 18 February 2014″ (PICTURE PROVIDED)

14 The ISIL are the foot soldiers of the Western military alliance. Their unspoken mandate is to wreck havoc and destruction in Syria and Iraq, acting on behalf of their US sponsors.

15. US Senator John McCain has met up with jihadist terrorist leaders in Syria. (see picture right)

for more and for the pictures : http://www.globalresearch.ca/twenty-six-things-about-the-islamic-state-isil-that-obama-does-not-want-you-to-know-about/5414735


Conceived by the the American Joint Chief of Staff in 1962, the “Northwoods” operation foresaw a series of attacks killing civilians and American military men to mobilize the public opinion against Fidel Castro. An attack against a warship and a hijacking had notably been planned. Among the conspirators were people in charge of the the United States’ army by that time . The realization of this mentally ill plan was prevented, at the last minute, by the president John F. Kennedy.



Toni Liu

Does little greeney area over ISIS area got attacked too?


Don’t proclaim victory to soon, there’s still a lot of men and weapons in there. Also, the SAA strategy appears effective, but it is also obvious. Everyone expects a repeat of the assault on Gouta so why not shift and do something unanticipated.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x