Syria

[tet1953]

Is this the next target for NATO intervention? The administration, via SoS Clinton, has now openly declared that Syria would be "better off without Assad." Not likely that the world, and certainly the U.S. will let the slaughter continue much longer. Clinton's statement, and those certain to be heard in coming days, are trial balloons to guage public appetite for more aggessive moves.

It's disturbing how quiet the Arab states are in all this, but then most of them are going through the same thing or are at risk for it.

Regarding Syria and Assad, I'd like to see the UN announce immunity from war crimes prosecution (for crimes committed prior to announcement date) for whomever takes out Assad. Let them solve that problem from within.

 

[napa23]

Oh there will be some sort of action. That fool's no different from Gaddafi. I just hope the US will take the same stance as it did for Libya. Aerial support but no troops on the ground. We're tired of seeing our people dying in endless wars. It's time for the rest of the world to take charge. We're not the world police, even though some of our politicians would like to think so. I say send them or their sons and daughters over there and see how long these wars last.

 

[VTXDave]

I just hope the US will take the same stance as it did for Libya. Aerial support but no troops on the ground. We're tired of seeing our people dying in endless wars.

"Our" people...heh. But we're OK with killing...."those" people, right? We love killing those "towelheads"...Whether with troops or with smart bombs as in Libya (there's your aerial support), we're OK with war just as long as we're killing "those people". Ain't it great to be an American? Dontcha just love the smell of napalm in the morning?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20044969-503543.html

 

[tet1953]

None of us thinks all the violence is a good thing, no matter who is doing the dying. And, we do have a legitimate reason to suspect "towelheads".
It's damn hard to know who to support over there. Too many times, we have helped put in power the very dictators we now face. I am sure there are many everyday folk among the protesters who just want freedom and a better life. There are also fundamental jihadists who will take the opportunity to gain influence, or worse. Hard to tell them apart, right? well, it is.
It's a hard choice to make, a hard thing to say, but I really think we need to withdraw and let the region sort itself out. Get the hell out of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, stay out of Syria. Keep an eye on Iran. Protect the home front (no, really). It has just become to fluid and too confusing to be heavily involved now. Besides, we can't afford it!!!
Just my 2 cents.

 

[The Ruiner]

A destabilized Syria is integral to circumventing Iran's assymetric threat. al Assad's father did the same thing in Hama, but he killed tens of thousands (and nothing happened). Instead of the US having to do something, start thinking about it in terms of regional balance: Turkey and Israel have the most at stake, and would most likely be at the forefront of negotiating a settlement.

A win for the opposition is an unchecked Sunni ascendency in the government of the country. This is unacceptable to Iran (as well as Turkey and Israel because Assad and the Alawites are secular) and they will do everything to keep their proxy in power. I don't see anyone necessarily supporting a full ouster of Assad, because no one really wants to see who would replace him (either a figure head from the Muslim Brotherhood, or an Iraninan/Hezbollah-backed TBD). Either way, the bar is on the floor, and Assad's regime is the only option that can make it over.

Frankly, given the deep integration of the Ba'athist party into the mechanisms of the military, I do not see any sort of ouster in Assad's future. And if there is an attempt, it will no doubt come at horrific costs.

I personally see this as a manipulation of the Muslim Brotherhood to try and gain a foothold in Syria, regardless of the outcome. They will still be able to champion their "cause" while bemoaning the injustices of the Assad regime knowing that they never had a shot in the first place.

Just my observations.

 

[tet1953]

Thanks for your thoughts, The Ruiner. So hands off then, right? Seems like the slaughter could go on a long time. Not to mention, the whole region is a tinderbox imo.

 

[The Ruiner]

I think this is a situation that will best be handled "diplomatically" because of the circumstances. At this point Assad has two options: work with the outside world to retain power and regain stability, or shun everyone and continue to ostracize themselves relying on the new emergent regional power (Iran) for damn near everything while the manipulations of the MB continue to wreak havoc in certain parts of the country.

The tinderbox would come in the form of total upheavel with no real leadership. Now, if Assad gives up some concessions and allows a Sunni presence (read: Muslim Brotherhood), this will undermine Hezbollah and Iran (highly desirable to the Saudis, Turks, and Israeli's among the GCC as well).

 

[tet1953]

So rather than a trial balloon for intervention, you see Clinton's statements more as pressure on Assad right? One really almost needs to be a mideast scholar just to know who the players are. And this is just one country. There are a dozen (or two) with similar problems.

For me, the fact that most Islamics believe in Sharia, and many of them wish to impose it on the whole world, is reason enough to oppose them. However, I have always felt like Arabs got shafted when they created Israel. I mean, I have tried to research it and figure out the whys and whos but I still get confused.

 

[The Ruiner]

Exactly, put Assad in the position that his country cannot function without making some concessions. As far as the Sharia law, that is a goal of the Muslim Brotherhood, not Hezbollah, or the Alawites (secular).

Well, Palestine ceased to exist virtually over night, that's a catastrophe waiting to happen. And it gave Islamists their "holocaust" if you will, an event they can forever use as a greivance against the western world, and it's always ripe for sabre-rattling rhetoric like that of Iran.

 

[allSmilez]

Whoever said there will be action taken on Syria is wrong. First off, this has been going on for weeks now, if we didn't set foot in their once the snipers started taking out unarmed citizens, we're not going to do it NOW. Libya was political, SYRIA IS A COMPLETE DIFFERENT SCENARIO. Besides, if other Arab countries want to sit back and let them be slaughtered, then so be it. What is our jurisdiction over that? I'm not saying it's a good thing what is going on there, but it's about fucking time these PROSPEROUS ARAB NATIONS send their own troops in to protect theirs. But maybe that's what makes them so damn smart, they don't MEDDLE IN OTHER'S AFFAIRS.

 

[allSmilez]

Well, Palestine ceased to exist virtually over night, that's a catastrophe waiting to happen. And it gave Islamists their "holocaust" if you will,

How so? Overnight? You do realize that Jews have been on that land for the last 2000 years, no? The Jewish people gave Palestinians the opportunity to live in peace with them, but the Palestinians refused. They were the ones that did not accept peace. Not even the Jordanians wanted the Palestians, despite the fact there was so much unused land in the area. Nope, the media never reports that historical fact though.

 

[tet1953]

It isn't all that cut and dried, is it allSmilez? Arabs have occupied the same land for 1000s of years too haven't they? And Jerusalem, critically important to 3 religions. They have been fighting in the Middle East for all of that time, and I cannot see a resolution in my lifetime. Not when there will always be people who will not compromise, and hold peace hostage to getting their way.
Hmm..waitaminnit..that sounds familiar. I digress lol

 

[napa23]

"Our" people...heh. But we're OK with killing...."those" people, right? We love killing those "towelheads"...Whether with troops or with smart bombs as in Libya (there's your aerial support), we're OK with war just as long as we're killing "those people". Ain't it great to be an American? Dontcha just love the smell of napalm in the morning?

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-20044969-503543.html

Umm thanks for attacking me, putting words in my mouth, and trying to make me sound like a racist. Big fail though. I'm not against arabs, I'm against an oppressive government that murders its own people. I hate the term towel head, just like i hate any other racist term. Nice sarcasm by the way, real nice. I'm all for diplomacy, but do you see it working right now? I just told you americans are tired of war, do you not listen at all? I agree that arab nations should be able to take care of their own problems, that's why I'm happy that some of them are calling him out.

 

[VTXDave]

Umm thanks for attacking me, putting words in my mouth, and trying to make me sound like a racist. Big fail though. I'm not against arabs, I'm against an oppressive government that murders its own people. I hate the term towel head, just like i hate any other racist term. Nice sarcasm by the way, real nice. I'm all for diplomacy, but do you see it working right now? I just told you americans are tired of war, do you not listen at all? I agree that arab nations should be able to take care of their own problems, that's why I'm happy that some of them are calling him out.

I'm not buying it. You specifically said "tired of OUR people dying". Had you said something to the tune of "tired of people dying" I would not have even had bothered. You didn't say americans were tired of war. And when you use a term like "our people" you're creating a distinction between "us" and "them". Nice try though.

 

[tet1953]

fwiw, when napa said "our people", I never considered that it meant anything other than the American people. What do you think napa means by it VTX?

 

[VTXDave]

fwiw, when napa said "our people", I never considered that it meant anything other than the American people. What do you think napa means by it VTX?

I've already explained that.

 

[napa23]

I'm not buying it. You specifically said "tired of OUR people dying". Had you said something to the tune of "tired of people dying" I would not have even had bothered. You didn't say americans were tired of war. And when you use a term like "our people" you're creating a distinction between "us" and "them". Nice try though.

Wow you're dumb. I did mean Americans. I'm Black, I've experienced racism and I wish it on no one. Get the fuck out with that nonsense, trying to paint me as that kind of person. I didn't think I would need to dumb it down for you.
Edit-Ok, I didn't say Americans are tired of war, but trust me we are. We want our troops home, not dying because of lies of weapons of mass destruction. I can't believe this guy. Bravo, congrats on making this about something it wasn't. Dipshit

 

[redivider]

How so? Overnight? You do realize that Jews have been on that land for the last 2000 years, no? The Jewish people gave Palestinians the opportunity to live in peace with them, but the Palestinians refused. They were the ones that did not accept peace. Not even the Jordanians wanted the Palestians, despite the fact there was so much unused land in the area. Nope, the media never reports that historical fact though.

wow, you really have to read up on your history. jews had for the majority of history been a nomadic tribe moving from africa to the middle east to europe... the israeli state was formed a few decades ago via WAR. from then on the israeli nation has expanded it's borders and basically STOLEN palestinian land. they have then militarized the border between jewish and palestinian neighborhoods and forced around a million people to live in extreme poverty.

they blame 'hezbollah'... they tout it as some sort of military force, it's more like a street gang.... and not a very good one.... the bloods would erase hezbollah in 2 weeks.... israel could make hezbollah disappear in a heartbeat but that would mean the rise of peace, and then they would have no excuse for having such a modernized war machine.....

 

[The Ruiner]

Whoever said there will be action taken on Syria is wrong. First off, this has been going on for weeks now, if we didn't set foot in their once the snipers started taking out unarmed citizens, we're not going to do it NOW. Libya was political, SYRIA IS A COMPLETE DIFFERENT SCENARIO. Besides, if other Arab countries want to sit back and let them be slaughtered, then so be it. What is our jurisdiction over that? I'm not saying it's a good thing what is going on there, but it's about fucking time these PROSPEROUS ARAB NATIONS send their own troops in to protect theirs. But maybe that's what makes them so damn smart, they don't MEDDLE IN OTHER'S AFFAIRS.

Libya is FAR less political than Syria, there are numerous reasons for "intervention" in Libya. The reasons for any campaign in Syria would be entirely politically based (the killing is old-hat), and they are too numerous to list. The countries of the middle and near east meddle, spy, incite, arm, lambast, plot, and scheme about damn near everything concerning themselves and their neighbors. Read some books. The truth is that it's a nasty world out there.

How so? Overnight? You do realize that Jews have been on that land for the last 2000 years, no? The Jewish people gave Palestinians the opportunity to live in peace with them, but the Palestinians refused. They were the ones that did not accept peace. Not even the Jordanians wanted the Palestians, despite the fact there was so much unused land in the area. Nope, the media never reports that historical fact though.

Rhetoric much?