Syria: End Game

[Shryke]

Well looks like the administration is trying to weasel out of the red line comment. At the press conference today Jay Carney said that since they dont have absolute confirmation they are going to try and develop better intelligence.

I guess that means they are going to wait for thousands more to die before they get their hands dirty.

Or for something more then a blood sample of unknown origin.

[Horza]

Pfft, who wants a high standard of evidence before jumping into a civil war?

[Paladin of Ice]

Yeah, we all know that it's no big deal to get into a war based on unclear, not entirely confirmed evidence. It's not like that has ever come back to haunt us, or made us wish that we had more thoroughly questioned the evidence beforehand...

This is not to say I think the evidence is faked, or that Assad hasn't used gas on people, I'm just saying it's good to be sure first instead of jumping in on the first excuse. Better to take the time to be sure of things first, rather than jump in and find out you were wrong afterward.

[Horza]

Doesn't have to be fake: accidental exposure to chemical munitions, either through handling, firing or other detonation are other possibilities.

[snake]

Now they're eating human hearts. Ewwwwww.

[Horza]

Turns out he only gnaws the entrails of really bad people.

[Kouran]

Yeah Time had an interesting article about the eating body parts/gross out videos. Apparently the rebels film themselves doing shit in some soft of barbaric game of one ups man ship. Welcome back to the 11th century enjoy your stay.

[Horza]

Spare me. Horrific stuff like this was codified into the law well into the 18th century.

Do you really think, had smartphones been around for the Siege of Troy, the Sack of Baghdad or the American Civil War that similar and worse would not be found?

[Serious Callers Only]

Boys being boys l-o-l

[thecryptile]

It's not America's job to defend Syrians, or fight their wars. Neither side is pro-American, both sides commit atrocities and are tied to Islamist extremists. Do Syrians really want US intervention? Other Middle Eastern nations haven't been so grateful for our help: think Libya and Afghanistan.

The first drone strike with collateral damage would be used to demonize the US. Any boots on the ground would be derided as "zionist crusaders" invading to destroy Syria and/or Islam in general. At a huge potential cost in lives, material, and money we might just be buying the enmity of another Middle Eastern nation. That doesn't seem like a good deal.

I don't even understand the people who in one breathe say "USA out of Iraq and Afghanistan!" then in the next: "We've got to intervene in Syria/Sudan/The Congo/Uganda!"

If either side has broken the rules of war, let the UN handle it. Then the Syrians can demonize them for being foolish enough to stick thier noses into this bloody conflict.

[Horza]

There pretty much isn't a Syria any more. The fractures are pretty much beyond repair, and that means a lot more fighting over the pieces. I've never been a proponent of greater US intervention, but when there isn't a Syria then it isn't so easy to walk away saying 'what happens in Syria stays in Syria;.

[The Progressive]

The russians have sent a fleet to patrol its base near syria ...... A clear signal to the US to stay the fuck out.

[thecryptile]

I've never been a proponent of greater US intervention, but when there isn't a Syria then it isn't so easy to walk away saying 'what happens in Syria stays in Syria;.

It's easy to say "We can't make this any better by spending our gold and blood to repair problems that were created by the French and British in the aftermath of World War I." Arthur James Balfour should've spent more time learning about the regions inhabitants and less time trying to come up with classicly inspired names for his creation.

Let Syria break into three. The Turks won't like an independent Kurdistan, and neither the Iran/Hizbollah dominated Asaad regime or the al-Qaeda inspired Sunni rebels will be friends and allies of the United States, but the united Syria was no friend of ours either, so the impact isn't that great for Americans.

To those who say: "We've got to do something or the place will be an incubator for terrorist plots!" Syria was already an incubator for terrorist plots long before the current civil conflict.

The russians have sent a fleet to patrol its base near syria ...... A clear signal to the US to stay the fuck out.

That's more likely to draw us into the conflict, unfortunately. Can't have the Russians establishing hegemony so close to our ally Israel.

[Horza]

It's easy to say "We can't make this any better by spending our gold and blood to repair problems that were created by the French and British in the aftermath of World War I." Arthur James Balfour should've spent more time learning about the regions inhabitants and less time trying to come up with classicly inspired names for his creation.

More the work of Sykes and Picot.

Let Syria break into three. The Turks won't like an independent Kurdistan, and neither the Iran/Hizbollah dominated Asaad regime or the al-Qaeda inspired Sunni rebels will be friends and allies of the United States, but the united Syria was no friend of ours either, so the impact isn't that great for Americans.

Turkey looks like it could live with Syrian Kurdistan so long as it's leaders follow the Iraqi model. As for the rest - I dunno, especially considering that there's ample possibility that this could re-ignite the Iraqi and Lebanese civil wars.

To those who say: "We've got to do something or the place will be an incubator for terrorist plots!" Syria was already an incubator for terrorist plots long before the current civil conflict.

Not really. It was in the Iranian axis but it wasn't actively hostile to the US, and the Assads kept a tight rein on things. Now large parts of the country are stateless and Al-Qaida affiliates are seizing territory.

That's more likely to draw us into the conflict, unfortunately. Can't have the Russians establishing hegemony so close to our ally Israel.

Uh, newsflash: Tartus has been a Russian naval base for fucking ever. Russia sending ships there has more to do with their worries about securing and evacuating equipment and personnel.

[thecryptile]

More the work of Sykes and Picot.

As you say, then let my criticism of Balfour be applied to Sykes and Picot as well.

Turkey looks like it could live with Syrian Kurdistan so long as it's leaders follow the Iraqi model. As for the rest - I dunno, especially considering that there's ample possibility that this could re-ignite the Iraqi and Lebanese civil wars.

Did the civil war in Iraq ever stop? Bombings and sectarian attacks are commonplace.

Not really. It was in the Iranian axis but it wasn't actively hostile to the US, and the Assads kept a tight rein on things. Now large parts of the country are stateless and Al-Qaida affiliates are seizing territory.

The Assaad regime is one of the principal backers of Hezbollah, a terror organization which had killed more Americans than any other prior to 9/11. That's hostile by my definition.

Uh, newsflash: Tartus has been a Russian naval base for fucking ever. Russia sending ships there has more to do with their worries about securing and evacuating equipment and personnel.

Russia has controlled Georgia "for fucking ever" as well, yet in 2003 US military advisors were sent there to aid the Georgian government in the Ossetian conflict. Cold War power politics are still being played in the new millenium.

[Horza]

Did the civil war in Iraq ever stop? Bombings and sectarian attacks are commonplace.

Bad as things are they're not the horror that was 2005-07, and that probably can't happen again like it did, but we're already affiliation and co-ordination between Sunni insurgents in Iraq and Syria, and that includes these lovely people setting up shop in Raqqa and elsewhere. If Syrian territory becomes a rear area for the Iraqi insurgency that isn't going help the Iraqi political process, and could drag it further into this looming sectarian Cold War.

The Assaad regime is one of the principal backers of Hezbollah, a terror organization which had killed more Americans than any other prior to 9/11. That's hostile by my definition.

By this you mean 'killed 241 US soldiers in Beirut, thirty years ago'. Syria hasn't been friendly with the US since you guys tried to topple one of their juntas back in the day but it has not been a source of support for groups planning attacks on the US itself. Now that it's territory is fracturing that could well change.

Russia has controlled Georgia "for fucking ever" as well, yet in 2003 US military advisors were sent there to aid the Georgian government in the Ossetian conflict. Cold War power politics are still being played in the new millenium.

Uh, yeah, but you and Lev were getting in a flap about 'Russian hegemony' when they've only had that middling port facility for forty plus years.

[thecryptile]

Horza, if it was Australia being called upon to intervene, would you be in favor of sending young Australian men and women to die in this vicious sectarian conflict?

[Bronson]

The problem for Syria , is that once Assad goes , The opposing factions fighting him will turn on each other. As bad as it is now, it will then get a whole lot worse. It's best stay clear of that mess.

[Horza]

Horza, if it was Australia being called upon to intervene, would you be in favor of sending young Australian men and women to die in this vicious sectarian conflict?

Have I made any suggestions to that effect, for either of our countries?

The point I'm making is that there are consequences for washing hands of this conflict, regionally and for US allies, if not the US directly. The Obama administration has approached this mess with an appropriate degree of caution and circumspection, and ideally I'd like for that to pay off and some kind of political solution be reached.

If that doesn't pan out, however, an unenviable choice is going to be made, and while I think the chances of positive outcomes from a US military intervention are very slim, there is a case for the alternative being worse.

[snake]

I don't think there is a good outcome for Syria in the cards. Too many factions pushing and pulling for their share. Russia, Iran, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, US, France, UK and the gods know who else. The only consideration is which scenario is the least bad. Intervention will be no good with a very strong peacekeeping force because the retribution facing loyalists is gonna be horrific once Assad's forces are beaten.

I mean look at Libya, which is often touted as a success. Armed factions have the country divided up. No security. No central authority. Hell it was just recently the US and UK pulled embassy staff out because of the bombing of the French embassy. Armed militias took over government buildings and forced the government to do as they bid. Black Africans are targeted constantly. Armed fighters from Libya are now in Syria as well as other African nations causing havoc.

You can bet that the fallout from Syria's eventual collapse is gonna be much greater unless the international community do something about it. And that's gonna mean boots on the ground. Do we, as in NATO and it's allies, have the will to do that? Time will tell I guess.