Because they had the wherewithal to do what our emasculated leadership didn't.
Whether I like them after all this is over is irrelevant. I can still approve of what they did.
Whether I like them after all this is over is irrelevant. I can still approve of what they did.
If this is the way it is.
However, I think there is just as much credence that this is to shore up a regime and this is for show.
During the American occupation of Iraq in the 2000s, Bashar Assad aided Sunni jihadists fighting the US military. The Assad regime remained stable, but only because Damascus sewed chaos in Lebanon and Iraq in order to enhance the regime's regional power and paper over the internal contradictions of its rule.
In the end, either Syria becomes a rump state in Latakia or power-sharing, which the Russians have stated they are open to and they have met in Moscow with the "honest" opposition will happen.
Representing a minority of 12% in Syria, I think even the Russians know the whole Syrian state will not be feasible under Assad.