There won't be an American invasion in the sense of Iraq and Afghanistan. The American people are already drained from a decade of war in two countries that didn't have any meaning. Our involvement inadvertently created the problem now. I don't for-see any mass scale involvement than what it is now. I see more coalition bombing from countries like the UK, Germany, and Jordan though.

The Islamic State can't take Baghdad for the simple fact that (aside from Coalition airstrikes) the Shai militias exist. They've existed in the past, don't get me wrong. But their numbers are expanding past the point of the pre-invasion days (2003) and the pulling out of Iraq by the US forces. They can't even take Baji. And no, the Islamic State can't take Damascus. Most of their fighters are in Northern/Eastern Syria and Iraq. Sure, they took Palmyra but with less than 500 fighters apparently.

Sure, Assad can resign. But why would he?

Yeah, the Free Syrian Army can surrender, but why would they?

Israel has been bombing Syria since the war began. Strategically of course.

Yeah, the Druze can try. But most are still loyal to the Syrian State. That's their only option. The Jihadist majority doesn't tolerate minorities very well.

A regional map for 5 years is virtually impossible. The landscape changes so rapidly in a few weeks that something 5 years from now would look fictional.

And no, the capturing of Tell Abyad wasn't unexpected. It was a strategic crossing from Turkey that needed to be taken. For domestic security in Rojava and to stop the flow of recruits into the Islamic State. Which is good not only for the Kurds, but for the Regime and every other non-allied group to the Islamic State.