Syria

[Maverick]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

[Ibrahim]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

No, this is not a viable option. Most of the partition schemes floated by outside observers are based on loosely accurate geographical distribution of various sects, but in most if not all cases there is no real means or desire for forming distinct states.

The obvious exception is the desire of Kurds to form their own state because they have none at all, except that this state would lop pieces off of several existing states, all of which would resist being dismembered in this way, and some of which possess substantial military power. So that even if, say, Syria were in no position to deal with a Kurdish separatist movement, other states would prevent it for them out of self-interest.

[Maverick]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

No, this is not a viable option. Most of the partition schemes floated by outside observers are based on loosely accurate geographical distribution of various sects, but in most if not all cases there is no real means or desire for forming distinct states.

The obvious exception is the desire of Kurds to form their own state because they have none at all, except that this state would lop pieces off of several existing states, all of which would resist being dismembered in this way, and some of which possess substantial military power. So that even if, say, Syria were in no position to deal with a Kurdish separatist movement, other states would prevent it for them out of self-interest.

Why Not? Assad's security apparatus and is pretty big, Not sure if Sunni opposition want a protracted war . Break away enclave would include 10-15 % Alawite population, Christians( who traditionally are closer to ruling regime). Break away region has two biggest ports of Syria. One of ports Tartus(sp?) has a Russian Naval base( Russia's only warm water port).

Meanwhile Israel is happy because one of her enemies have been balkanized. US and Western Nations would be happy that this does not escalate into a larger Middle Eastern conflict.

[Ibrahim]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

No, this is not a viable option. Most of the partition schemes floated by outside observers are based on loosely accurate geographical distribution of various sects, but in most if not all cases there is no real means or desire for forming distinct states.

The obvious exception is the desire of Kurds to form their own state because they have none at all, except that this state would lop pieces off of several existing states, all of which would resist being dismembered in this way, and some of which possess substantial military power. So that even if, say, Syria were in no position to deal with a Kurdish separatist movement, other states would prevent it for them out of self-interest.

Why Not? Assad's security apparatus and is pretty big, Not sure if Sunni opposition want a protracted war . Break away enclave would include 10-15 % Alawite population, Christians( who traditionally are closer to ruling regime). Break away region has two biggest ports of Syria. One of ports Tartus(sp?) has a Russian Naval base( Russia's only warm water port).

I don't understand what you mean. Nobody wants partition or is for partition, except the Kurds, who everybody is against. Also, you are playing up Assad's internal security apparatus as he is in the process of losing a civil war. This isn't Egypt, where some new guy can take over the old levers of power, this is total destruction of the old regime and its institutions.

Meanwhile Israel is happy because one of her enemies have been balkanized.

Well, TurkishJew/HAL9000 was saying that Assad was a potentially valuable ally for Israel, though some of the pro-Israeli fringe columnists love any situation where a bunch of Arabs die. Doesn't matter how or why.

[Maverick]

[/quote]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

No, this is not a viable option. Most of the partition schemes floated by outside observers are based on loosely accurate geographical distribution of various sects, but in most if not all cases there is no real means or desire for forming distinct states.

The obvious exception is the desire of Kurds to form their own state because they have none at all, except that this state would lop pieces off of several existing states, all of which would resist being dismembered in this way, and some of which possess substantial military power. So that even if, say, Syria were in no position to deal with a Kurdish separatist movement, other states would prevent it for them out of self-interest.

Why Not? Assad's security apparatus and is pretty big, Not sure if Sunni opposition want a protracted war . Break away enclave would include 10-15 % Alawite population, Christians( who traditionally are closer to ruling regime). Break away region has two biggest ports of Syria. One of ports Tartus(sp?) has a Russian Naval base( Russia's only warm water port).

I don't understand what you mean. Nobody wants partition or is for partition, except the Kurds, who everybody is against. Also, you are playing up Assad's internal security apparatus as he is in the process of losing a civil war. This isn't Egypt, where some new guy can take over the old levers of power, this is total destruction of the old regime and its institutions.
[

I agree no body wants partition. But it might end up being the only solution. Assad might lose the war,perhaps could also end up fleeing, but his apparatus could end up fighting a civil. Look at Iraq for instance , After Coalition forces disbanded the baath party in Iraq, they ended up fighting a long insurgency.

Since Alawites are concentrated in the Northern Syria along Mediterranean coast, they might end up carving a territory with or without Assad family. Christians make up 10 % of population , if they are reprisal attacks against christians, they could either end up fleeing Syria or joining Alawites in their territory.

Syria is an artificial construct. Partition of Syria could happen.

Meanwhile Israel is happy because one of her enemies have been balkanized.

Well, TurkishJew/HAL9000 was saying that Assad was a potentially valuable ally for Israel, though some of the pro-Israeli fringe columnists love any situation where a bunch of Arabs die. Doesn't matter how or why.

[/quote]
I doubt that, Assad's buddies in Lebanon (Hebollah)wouldn't be happy with that situation, nor would Iran.

About Arabs dying, Arabs don't care about their own brethren, so you can't expect others to lose sleep over it.

[Hans Bulvai]

.

"chemical weapons" same rubbish as WMD in Iraq case

just an excuse for west to get involved, maybe some "false flag" incident

Poor Arabs , poor Arabs .. they got fucked by Turks for 500 yrs, they getting fucked now by their own traitors helping the colonial beasts .. G_D only knows why Arabs deserve all this

Seems, Hans prefers all this to siding with Iran to chase the beast out of Arab home

Well , Hans



.

Amazing.

C'mon Azari. I know that you read at least some of my posts.
Hans does not prefer this one iota. Hans was against Moamar until the cruise missles started raining down. If Arabs are going to chase the beast out, it needs to be on their own. Not with Iran, Russia, Turkey and for sure not with the West. This is not about siding with anyone. Only when the Arabs are standing on their own two feet can they decide who they want to ally with as it suits their collective interest. Until then, they have no friends. Only entities looking for their own interests.

That region is bloodied and the people deserve peace and a good life. They have to earn it; but they are going down the wrong path (collectively that is).

[Hans Bulvai]

... Arabs don't care about their own brethren....

Sadly, there is truth in that; albeit not all.

[noddy]

... Arabs don't care about their own brethren....

Sadly, there is truth in that; albeit not all.

to be fair.. "whites" dont really care about other countries "whites" that often and nor do "asians" either... its hardly a barometer of reliability for any cultural lumping.

some would argue this is actually a good sign, we aint that racist ;P self interest does tend to come first.

[Hans Bulvai]

... Arabs don't care about their own brethren....

Sadly, there is truth in that; albeit not all.

to be fair.. "whites" dont really care about other countries "whites" that often and nor do "asians" either... its hardly a barometer of reliability for any cultural lumping.

some would argue this is actually a good sign, we aint that racist ;P self interest does tend to come first.

Also true and a good point.

[Ibrahim]

I agree no body wants partition.

Glad that's settled.

But it might end up being the only solution. Assad might lose the war,perhaps could also end up fleeing, but his apparatus could end up fighting a civil.

So the people currently losing a war to defend the regime will somehow continue to fight and form a breakaway state without the regime itself, even though it is already losing now?

Look at Iraq for instance , After Coalition forces disbanded the baath party in Iraq, they ended up fighting a long insurgency.

Yet no partition.

Since Alawites are concentrated in the Northern Syria along Mediterranean coast, they might end up carving a territory with or without Assad family.

Except they don't want to, and have expressed no plans or efforts to do so.

Christians make up 10 % of population , if they are reprisal attacks against christians, they could either end up fleeing Syria or joining Alawites in their territory.

Assuming that none of those Christians are Syrian nationalists or in any way patriotic. I don't know why Westerners assume that this is the case, absent any evidence.

Syria is an artificial construct. Partition of Syria could happen.

All countries are artificial constructs. Most things "could" happen. Syrian partition, however, isn't very likely.

About Arabs dying, Arabs don't care about their own brethren, so you can't expect others to lose sleep over it.

Nice racial stereotype, but why are so many non-Syrian Arabs providing material support, direct aid, or their personal efforts as fighters, to the Syrian revolutionary forces if they don't care about their brethren? A fairly lazy, counterfactual claim, even Spenglerite standards.

[Crocus sativus]

.


US to declare leading Syrian opposition group foreign terrorist organization


.

[Crocus sativus]

.

Terrorists using chemical weapon against Syrian troops


.

[Crocus sativus]

.


Syria will never use chemical weapons against its own people, Lawrence Wilkerson, a retired US Army Colonel who was Chief of Staff to Colin Powell told RT. Instead, the reality is that US is “preparing the ground to intervene in Syria.”

­An act which would lead to a conflict “that would take at least a decade to settle – and there aren't going to be too many victors at the end of that decade, just losers,” Wilkerson says, as Washington's ultimate aim is to overthrow the Iranian leadership.

Simultaneously, some members of Congress are talking about "impeachment" of the US president for not consulting Congress before involving the country in conflicts.

RT: You were Colin Powell's chief of staff when the decision was made to invade Iraq. In 2003, Powell made a speech that laid out the case for that war. Let's take a listen to what he said. You helped prepare that speech, and have since described it as the biggest mistake of your life. Why?

Lawrence Wilkerson: Primarily because we – to the American people, to the international community and of course to the members of the US Security Council – presented that speech… it was not accurate, it was not true, it was not valid. We did not know that, but it was not just an intelligence failure. It was also the massive politicization of intelligence by the leadership in Washington.

RT: We're currently seeing very similar rhetoric in the US in relation to Syria. Will it end in war again?

LW: I would be highly skeptical of any of the intelligence rendered by the $140-billion-plus US intelligence community as to weapons of mass destruction in possession of another country. Period.

RT: Syria is not signed up the chemical weapons convention, one of the seven countries that isn't. Does that suggest perhaps that it has a reason to get signed up to it, and it does have chemical weapons?

LW: Well I'm not violating any confidence or any great prohibition in the intelligence community to tell you that we have known for years, years that Syria has chemical weapons stockpiles, just like Iraq had chemical weapons stockpiles for a while. But the fact that President Assad will be moving them around and preparing for use against his own citizens within his own territory, I frankly find preposterous.

RT: Why is it then that the US really wants to pursue this, and is using it for various reasons, not just to justify only rhetoric, but perhaps a serious talk of a military invasion?

LW: Well, Syria's question was just addressed by one of your previous commentators, and that is, why in the world would we put Patriot batteries on the Turkish border adhesively to protect Turkey with the largest and the most powerful army in the region, indeed one of the most powerful in the world? Turkey needs no protection by us against that sort of thing, and it would be utterly stupid for Assad to attack Turkey in that way. So why are we doing those things that look like they're not connected to the reality, unless the reality is that we're preparing the ground to intervene in Syria.

RT: What would be the implications if the US were to intervene in Syria? Some are saying that the fallout will be far more dramatic that what we saw in Iraq – would you agree with that?

LW: I think, if we were to intervene in a substantial way, that is to say if we were to put the troops on the ground, marines, soldiers and so forth; and we were to do in Syria what we began to do in 2003 in Iraq, I think those people are absolutely right. I think it will even be even worse than Iraq. I think, again, it will be as a backdoor into Iran, which as you know is the real threat that we have been putting out there for years now.

And I think we're looking into Syria and Iran being a combination that we would then take on – and you're talking about a conflict that becomes regional and maybe even wider, because we've got Russia, we've got China, we've got other players; as I've just mentioned, the Turks. We've got a significant interest in that region if Iran and Syria are seriously threatened by the US invasion. And I think, you're looking at a configuration that would take at least a decade to settle and there aren't going to be too many victors at the end of that decade – just losers.

RT: Can it actually afford to get involved, and is there an appetite among the American people for yet another military conflict?

LW: Absolutely not, but I'm meeting with several congressman at the end of the week, and that is next week, and we're going to talk about this very thing. For example about Libya, the way the Libyan operation was conducted without the consultation with the US Congress at all. There are some congressman that are so concerned about this that they're mentioning words like impeachment and so worth, because you're not supposed to take the American country to war without the permission of the Congress, the Constitution pretty much says that.

And yet we're on this track where executives start wars on their own will, and I think this is the kind of thing that is really dangerous for this republic. Iran will give this a different patina, though, because you have a Congress that is really itching to go to war with Iran. So, I think you're looking at a combination here – not just Syria, and ultimately the target is Iran.

RT: What is the answer then for Syria? Isn't some intervention justified on humanitarian grounds? In fact, that justification was given for the intervention in Libya. In fact many say that is what brought the conflict to an end, disposed of colonel Gaddafi and ended the loss of innocent lives. Can you apply the same to Syria?

LW: Well, I would differ with that resolution in Libya. Libya still has enormous problems. We have a disconcerted Mali. We have the government being overthrown in Mali, we have Al -Qaeda operating in the North of Mali – all of that is partially a result of what we did in Libya. So, I would be very hesitant to classify Libya as a success. Syria and Iran would be classified even less as a success in my view. What you would have there, a I said, is a long-term occupation, increasing insurgency, increasing civil war-like fighting and so worth.

The answer in Syria, I think, as lamentable as the casualties are, is to let the Syrians settle the situation for the Syrians. There are a lot of Iranians on the ground fighting with Assad's forces, advising with Assad's forces. And since that is taking place, it makes better sense for us to take on Syria because we're going to encounter the Iranians in Syria if we go into Syria. But this is not the time to be doing this.

RT: Do you think rebels could dispose of Assad?

LW: I think Assad's days are numbered. I don't know what those days are, I did not think he would last through 2012, and he is apparently going to do that. He may hang on to several factions in Syria that are powerful and still with him, but I still think the best resolution for Syria is a resolution brought about by the majority of the Syrian people.

If they can get their act together to the point where the opposition, as it were, to Assad is sodded enough, it has enough good leadership to topple him, than that is what should happen. But there should be no outside assistance, and that goes for Iran too. Iran should get its people out of Syria and let Syria handle its problems by itself.

.. all roads end in Rome (opps , Tehran)

if and when it comes to that, West will be sorry and will be missing the Ayatollahs (Iraq comes to mind)


.

[monster_gardener]

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work?

Any thoughts?

No, this is not a viable option. Most of the partition schemes floated by outside observers are based on loosely accurate geographical distribution of various sects, but in most if not all cases there is no real means or desire for forming distinct states.

The obvious exception is the desire of Kurds to form their own state because they have none at all, except that this state would lop pieces off of several existing states, all of which would resist being dismembered in this way, and some of which possess substantial military power. So that even if, say, Syria were in no position to deal with a Kurdish separatist movement, other states would prevent it for them out of self-interest.

Why Not? Assad's security apparatus and is pretty big, Not sure if Sunni opposition want a protracted war . Break away enclave would include 10-15 % Alawite population, Christians( who traditionally are closer to ruling regime). Break away region has two biggest ports of Syria. One of ports Tartus(sp?) has a Russian Naval base( Russia's only warm water port).

I don't understand what you mean. Nobody wants partition or is for partition, except the Kurds, who everybody is against. Also, you are playing up Assad's internal security apparatus as he is in the process of losing a civil war. This isn't Egypt, where some new guy can take over the old levers of power, this is total destruction of the old regime and its institutions.
[

I agree no body wants partition. But it might end up being the only solution. Assad might lose the war,perhaps could also end up fleeing, but his apparatus could end up fighting a civil. Look at Iraq for instance , After Coalition forces disbanded the baath party in Iraq, they ended up fighting a long insurgency.

Since Alawites are concentrated in the Northern Syria along Mediterranean coast, they might end up carving a territory with or without Assad family. Christians make up 10 % of population , if they are reprisal attacks against christians, they could either end up fleeing Syria or joining Alawites in their territory.

Syria is an artificial construct. Partition of Syria could happen.

Meanwhile Israel is happy because one of her enemies have been balkanized.

Well, TurkishJew/HAL9000 was saying that Assad was a potentially valuable ally for Israel, though some of the pro-Israeli fringe columnists love any situation where a bunch of Arabs die. Doesn't matter how or why.

I doubt that, Assad's buddies in Lebanon (Hebollah)wouldn't be happy with that situation, nor would Iran.

About Arabs dying, Arabs don't care about their own brethren, so you can't expect others to lose sleep over it.

Thank You VERY Much for your Post, Maverick.

Largely Seconded.

I agree no body wants partition.

I think I might prefer partition if the alternative is worse: Say something like Iraq for instance where the Christian population has fled in large numbers to Syria

Partition with or without Assad....

Though if Assad somehow wins without totally wrecking Syria and remains the protector of the Syrian and Iraqi Christians, that would/could be good too.......

And like you said, Partition would Probably be a Plus for Israel....

Which might buy time to reach a peace settlement before the situation goes nuke........

Or time to get the space programs going and get some Chaos Monkey Humans off planet before the situation goes nuke...........

None of this is guaranteed..... Chaos Monkeys often fritter away opportunities..........

About Arabs dying, Arabs don't care about their own brethren, so you can't expect others to lose sleep over it.

Sometimes they do....... When Israelis or other Infidels are doing it.......

Sometimes it seems they don't........ At least not as/that much.........

Note: Here I am using Arab and Muslim largely interchangeably.... *

But IMVHO Islam is largely a malignant infectious meme for Seventh Century Arab Culture with some other malicious meme codons like Atrocity Justifying Occasionalism added later..

*I know there are Christian Arabs and other Minority Group "Arabs".........

[Crocus sativus]

.

... Arabs don't care about their own brethren ....

.

reason for that is, neither Syrians, nor Egyptians, nor Libyans or Algerians or Lebanese or Tunisians are Arabs

Only common they have is each speak their own sort of Arabic language .. that is all

Islam does not unite them, as Turks, Iranian, Indonesians, Filipino and the 2nd biggest Muslim Nation India are Muslims but no Arab

that is why, Maverick, it looks like Arabs do not care about each others, they no Arab


.

[Crocus sativus]

.

Is partition for Syria a viable option? . An Alawite- Christian enclave stretching from Turkey to Lebanon could work ?

Any thoughts ?

.

that could be the plan of west

but

things could easily work unexpected, unintended consequences

Look,

people of that space want "Greater Syria" .. meaning present Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Palestine = Greater Syria

will take time, but things might end that way



.

[Crocus sativus]

.

.

"chemical weapons" same rubbish as WMD in Iraq case

just an excuse for west to get involved, maybe some "false flag" incident

Poor Arabs , poor Arabs .. they got fucked by Turks for 500 yrs, they getting fucked now by their own traitors helping the colonial beasts .. G_D only knows why Arabs deserve all this

Seems, Hans prefers all this to siding with Iran to chase the beast out of Arab home

Well , Hans



.

Amazing.

C'mon Azari. I know that you read at least some of my posts.
Hans does not prefer this one iota. Hans was against Moamar until the cruise missles started raining down. If Arabs are going to chase the beast out, it needs to be on their own. Not with Iran, Russia, Turkey and for sure not with the West. This is not about siding with anyone. Only when the Arabs are standing on their own two feet can they decide who they want to ally with as it suits their collective interest. Until then, they have no friends. Only entities looking for their own interests.

That region is bloodied and the people deserve peace and a good life. They have to earn it; but they are going down the wrong path (collectively that is).

.

B assured read all your posts, twice

you see, Hans , that is what I mean "Hans was against Moamar until the cruise missiles started raining down" .. you siding with the beast until the time when their cruise missiles start raining down on an Arab patriot .. well, Hans, by the time the cruise missiles start raining it is too late to wake up realizing Arabs were again fooled .. you must not let beast into your homes .. once they in your home, you done no matter what .. read the history how Zionist entered Palestine acting as a friend to Palestinians and when they in, they stuck the dagger into Palestinian back

Look, west throwing all lavender you can imagine towards mad mullahs & Iran, you name it, they throw .. but Iran people not budging .. Ayatollahs corrupt, Monster ridiculing Mehdi, Ahmadinejagt Hitler and and and .. Iranians not budging .. Arabs too must act this way .. issue not Assad no dictator, issue he Arab patriot and that is what counts at this point and time, otherwise Arabs will lose their house


.

[Crocus sativus]

.

Clashes between Kurdish militias and "Wahhabi & Salafi" have raised the specter of a possible Arab-Kurdish civil war in Syria and likely diverted Ankara from supporting the overthrow of the regime.

Serious clashes erupted on November 19 between Islamist groups and fighters of the Syrian Kurdish Partiya Yekitiya Demokrat (PYD - Democratic Union Party) in the border town of Ras al-Ayn (Kurdish: Serekaniye), killing at least 18 combatants. This is the second time serious fighting has erupted between Islamist groups fighting Assad and combatants of the PYD, which is affiliated to the larger Partiya Karkeren Kurdistan (PKK - Kurdistan Workers Party) but publically denies such ties for fear they could lead to placement of the PYD on international terrorist lists.

[..]

The Syrian Kurds are a non-Arab minority that comprise up to 10% of the population and are spread over three Kurdish-dominated enclaves in the provinces of Aleppo and Hasakah. [1] These areas are close to the Turkish border, and since 2011 the PYD has managed to extend its control over large parts of these enclaves through its Yekineyen Parastina Gel (YPG - People's Defense Units) to the despair of Turkey.

The recent clashes came after Massoud Barzani, the president of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq, failed in his efforts to prevent PYD influence from spreading in Syria. Barzani supported an agreement in July between Syria's Kurdish National Council (KNC) - a weak coalition of more than 11 political parties and youth groups supported by Barzani - and the PYD in order to prevent a Kurdish civil war.

For Barzani, Kurdish infighting, or Kurdish fights with the Syrian armed opposition could destabilize security in the Kurdistan region of Iraq, and he has warned against this publically. These tensions indicate that a new battlefront near the Turkish border could be opened between anti-Assad Islamist fighters and combatants associated with the PKK, slowing down rebel progress against Damascus and Aleppo.

[..]

much more @ link

.

Islamist will fail in Syria , thanks G_D


.

[Crocus sativus]

.


Russian policy towards the Syria crisis may be more about Grozny than Tartus.
Vladimir Putin and Dmitry Medvedev have already managed to "lose" Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Muammar Gaddafi's Libya during their tenure.
A repeat of the Kremlin's tactics against Chechnya may prevent Bashar al-Assad's Syria becoming yet another domino.

[Hans Bulvai]

.

.

"chemical weapons" same rubbish as WMD in Iraq case

just an excuse for west to get involved, maybe some "false flag" incident

Poor Arabs , poor Arabs .. they got fucked by Turks for 500 yrs, they getting fucked now by their own traitors helping the colonial beasts .. G_D only knows why Arabs deserve all this

Seems, Hans prefers all this to siding with Iran to chase the beast out of Arab home

Well , Hans



.

Amazing.

C'mon Azari. I know that you read at least some of my posts.
Hans does not prefer this one iota. Hans was against Moamar until the cruise missles started raining down. If Arabs are going to chase the beast out, it needs to be on their own. Not with Iran, Russia, Turkey and for sure not with the West. This is not about siding with anyone. Only when the Arabs are standing on their own two feet can they decide who they want to ally with as it suits their collective interest. Until then, they have no friends. Only entities looking for their own interests.

That region is bloodied and the people deserve peace and a good life. They have to earn it; but they are going down the wrong path (collectively that is).

.

B assured read all your posts, twice

you see, Hans , that is what I mean "Hans was against Moamar until the cruise missiles started raining down" .. you siding with the beast until the time when their cruise missiles start raining down on an Arab patriot .. well, Hans, by the time the cruise missiles start raining it is too late to wake up realizing Arabs were again fooled .. you must not let beast into your homes .. once they in your home, you done no matter what .. read the history how Zionist entered Palestine acting as a friend to Palestinians and when they in, they stuck the dagger into Palestinian back

Look, west throwing all lavender you can imagine towards mad mullahs & Iran, you name it, they throw .. but Iran people not budging .. Ayatollahs corrupt, Monster ridiculing Mehdi, Ahmadinejagt Hitler and and and .. Iranians not budging .. Arabs too must act this way .. issue not Assad no dictator, issue he Arab patriot and that is what counts at this point and time, otherwise Arabs will lose their house


.

Correction. Hans against the dictators and with the legitimate aspirations of the people living under them until foreign powers decide to manipulate the situation for their own purposes; and the people go along either knowingly or not. Either way, when the dust settles, all will be too late. The revolutions have all been hijacked. Syria is no different. Asad no patriot; he is a scumbag like his dickhead father, but for sure better than what is coming.

[Ibrahim]

but for sure better than what is coming.

Dead wrong. Its never better to take things lying down.

[Hans Bulvai]

but for sure better than what is coming.

Dead wrong. Its never better take things lying down.

I agree but things will not go the way those that are standing up want them to.
Syria is already dissolving into chaos to a point of no return. You know this and have to admit that things are not going quite as you had hoped.
The Syrians, like the Libyans and Egyptians, will not get what they deserve and what they lost their lives for; at least not in the forseeable future.

The better part is where only the regime had a monopoly on violence like any government does and that the country was held together (except for the Golan which is evidence that Asad and his father are no patriots but a mafia-like regime more interested in their own survival and rule than what is good for the Arabs). Don't get me wrong, I hope Asad dies a horrible death, but the future is bleak. Yo simply can't look at what is going on in Syria today and think that things will just fall into place. Hell, what the kurds alone are doing should be a wake-up call for Turkey. New borders are being drawn and Syria will go the way of Iraq. A failed statelet ruled by yet another petty dictator and violence.

[Ibrahim]

but for sure better than what is coming.

Dead wrong. Its never better take things lying down.

I agree but things will not go the way those that are standing up want them to.
Syria is already dissolving into chaos to a point of no return. You know this and have to admit that things are not going quite as you had hoped.

They are certainly not going as I'd hoped, but neither of us knows what will happen, and it its up to me then I'll pick chaos over the certainty of dictatorship.

We now know, for a fact, that Assad and his circle are monsters of historic proportions. Would it have been better to let them be, killing slowly and comfortably, given what we now know? To my mind there isn't really a choice, even with an uncertain outcome.

[Hans Bulvai]

but for sure better than what is coming.

Dead wrong. Its never better take things lying down.

I agree but things will not go the way those that are standing up want them to.
Syria is already dissolving into chaos to a point of no return. You know this and have to admit that things are not going quite as you had hoped.

They are certainly not going as I'd hoped, but neither of us knows what will happen, and it its up to me then I'll pick chaos over the certainty of dictatorship.

We now know, for a fact, that Assad and his circle are monsters of historic proportions. Would it have been better to let them be, killing slowly and comfortably, given what we now know? To my mind there isn't really a choice, even with an uncertain outcome.

A catch 22. But, to answer your question honestly, My opinion is that even with the bleak future that we both know is coming, you are right. History can say what it wants by those who lie, but there is no denying the heroism of those that refuse to live under the boot and who will pay with their lives and die standing up rather than live bending over. This applies to all of those Arabs that have decided to face their destiny head on.

[Ibrahim]

but for sure better than what is coming.

Dead wrong. Its never better take things lying down.

I agree but things will not go the way those that are standing up want them to.
Syria is already dissolving into chaos to a point of no return. You know this and have to admit that things are not going quite as you had hoped.

They are certainly not going as I'd hoped, but neither of us knows what will happen, and it its up to me then I'll pick chaos over the certainty of dictatorship.

We now know, for a fact, that Assad and his circle are monsters of historic proportions. Would it have been better to let them be, killing slowly and comfortably, given what we now know? To my mind there isn't really a choice, even with an uncertain outcome.

A catch 22. But, to answer your question honestly, My opinion is that even with the bleak future that we both know is coming, you are right. History can say what it wants by those who lie, but there is no denying the heroism of those that refuse to live under the boot and who will pay with their lives and die standing up rather than live bending over. This applies to all of those Arabs that have decided to face their destiny head on.

Well said and I largely agree.