NATO trained Turks vs disorganized Soviet-trained Syrians. My money would be on the Turks.
American-trained ARVN did drop the ball against the Soviet-trained NVA. As did American-trained ROK's against the Soviet-trained NKPA. Note that the Soviet-trained Syrians almost overran the Golan in 1973.
The press that makes a big deal about Syrian use of artillery and air assets against the rebels as a sign of regime weakness don't seem to see American use of these assets as a sign of American weakness. Bottom line is that the Sunni-loving media don't like Assad, but that doesn't mean the Turks will suddenly become this all-conquering military, given their lousy record against the Kurds.
There's this myth that NATO membership converts member countries into lean mean fighting machines, when it's merely a way for them to cut their defense budgets while retaining the right to call on us for help when they need us. It was no accident that Cameron and Sarkozy needed our help to suppress Libyan air defenses.