[Atlantis]

Frankly I don't oppose him winning, but what he did was probably the root cause of the civil war.

There is discontent and dissension in any society. The civil war is the result of foreign interventions. The US has tried to topple Assad for at least 10 years. That is long before the Arab Spring. Assad could not have survived for so long the combined onslaught of the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, the Kurds, IS, Al Qaeda and numerous groups of Islamist fighters if he didn't have substantial support in the Syrian population.

Assad is the only guarantor for the safety of ethnic and religious minorities who have lived there side by side for centuries. Even the Vatican, which has unparalleled diplomatic experience in the region, opposes regime change in Syria because Christian communities that have lived there for nearly 2,000 years will be wiped out by the Islamist head-choppers.

The West has never tolerated any strong national leaders in the region.

The West just handled this very poorly.

There is nothing for the West "to handle" in Syria. Syria is a sovereign country. The West doesn't have any right whatsoever to promote regime change in Syria.

[Rugoz]

As long as the west strikes Assad only, the Russians will try and stay out of a direct conflict with the west. I don't think that Russia is unable to defend itself - although obviously no match to the west strictly speaking - but hitting back would almost certainly lead to escalation and both sides know that this means everybody loses. The way this has played out is just representative of the power dynamics - the west is more powerful than Russia overall and even with a Russian presence in Syria they can "punish" Assad, as long as Russia is not involved directly. This wouldn't be the case if the roles were reversed.

The main danger, in my view, is escalation by mistake and/or putting Putin in a position where he might feel he has to do something to save face. In a way this was the position of Trump in response to the chemical weapons attack. I thought it was unlikely that he would let this slide as Obama did. However, as mentioned earlier, the response is limited enough to be spun against the west by Assad if he chooses. It looks like Assad is pretty safe in his position at the moment and he knows that regime change is off the table.

People love to see the Syrian conflict as an antagonism between the West and Russia. This war has been going on since 2011, the first chemical attack happened in 2013, Russia intervened in 2015. There was plenty of opportunity for the West to do its usual regime change thing like it did in Libya. The West cannot openly support Assad, because it would be against everything it stands for. Russia filling that void is actually quite useful for both, from a propaganda perspective.

[noir]

Some here take too much seriously the Islamists hipsters in telegenic beheading rituals. What bother the Sunni states is the Iranian station on the "soverine" Syrian state. This is what the war is all about.

[Patrickov]

There is discontent and dissension in any society. The civil war is the result of foreign interventions. The US has tried to topple Assad for at least 10 years. That is long before the Arab Spring. Assad could not have survived for so long the combined onslaught of the US, the UK, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, the Kurds, IS, Al Qaeda and numerous groups of Islamist fighters if he didn't have substantial support in the Syrian population.

Assad is the only guarantor for the safety of ethnic and religious minorities who have lived there side by side for centuries. Even the Vatican, which has unparalleled diplomatic experience in the region, opposes regime change in Syria because Christian communities that have lived there for nearly 2,000 years will be wiped out by the Islamist head-choppers.

The West has never tolerated any strong national leaders in the region.

Two things:
1. I believe that Assad only stands now because Putin stepped in in the last minute.
2. As a matter of fact, the West do tolerate or even support a strong national leader in the Middle East. That person's name is Netanyahu.

There is nothing for the West "to handle" in Syria. Syria is a sovereign country. The West doesn't have any right whatsoever to promote regime change in Syria.

Conceptually I am against this principle. Human Rights should be higher than sovereignty if the latter has to seriously breach the former to continue.

[Zionist Nationalist]

As a matter of fact, the West do tolerate or even support a strong national leader in the Middle East. That person's name is Netanyahu.

Well its not that simple they simply dont have a choice
The west was maddening in the recent Israeli elections they tried to replace netanyahu unsuccessfully and they eventually only made him stronger

Conceptually I am against this principle. Human Rights should be higher than sovereignty if the latter has to seriously breach the former to continue.

Human rights is bullshit there is no such thing

[B0ycey]

As long as the west strikes Assad only, the Russians will try and stay out of a direct conflict with the west. I don't think that Russia is unable to defend itself - although obviously no match to the west strictly speaking - but hitting back would almost certainly lead to escalation and both sides know that this means everybody loses. The way this has played out is just representative of the power dynamics - the west is more powerful than Russia overall and even with a Russian presence in Syria they can "punish" Assad, as long as Russia is not involved directly. This wouldn't be the case if the roles were reversed.

The main danger, in my view, is escalation by mistake and/or putting Putin in a position where he might feel he has to do something to save face. In a way this was the position of Trump in response to the chemical weapons attack. I thought it was unlikely that he would let this slide as Obama did. However, as mentioned earlier, the response is limited enough to be spun against the west by Assad if he chooses. It looks like Assad is pretty safe in his position at the moment and he knows that regime change is off the table.

I think your analysis here is very accurate Kaiser. I couldn't fault any of its logic. But perhaps its accuracy is the reason both the far right and far left are actually in agreement in regards to being opposed to this mission.

The voice on PoFo is most definitely against this strike but the consequence of doing nothing is almost being ignored by everyone. If you allow someone a green light to use chemical weapons, then where do you draw the line with someone else doing likewise? Or even prevent them from continuing? Obama's restrain should have been a warning to not do this again - but was ignored. Now we have action but very controlled and in the grand scheme of things small. This time I do believe Assad will listen, because realization of the consequences of not doing so is now real. So I guess you might be right that Trump was backed into a corner to do something and Putin's controlled approach to retalliation is a sign he knows this too. But perhaps Trump should have given the U.N. security council more time before taking action nonetheless. But let's not kid ourselves, the Russians would have vetoed any proposal put on the table. So ultimately what would have been the point I guess?

Also, currently from reading responses on here it is almost like users (and rightly so) are more concerned about the possibility of WWIII than human rights infringements that they will just side with Assad regardless what he seems to do. Fair enough, but by taking such approach you do bury you head in the sand and basically say that the rules of engagement and UN resolutions should only be applied to the West. Shame really.

[Suntzu]

I don't believe Assad had any chemical weapons or any chemical weapons facilities. Looks like the U.S. and it allies used this as an opportunity to test some of their new toys on an abandoned facility. Can you imagine a strike on an active facility with no casualties? A cruise missile strike carries little risk except the $150,000,000 price tag. Russia claims that 70 of the 100 or so were shot down. That number could be be accurate. I will be interesting to see if the Russian put the S-400 missile system in Syria.

[Patrickov]

Well its not that simple they simply dont have a choice
The west was maddening in the recent Israeli elections they tried to replace netanyahu unsuccessfully and they eventually only made him stronger

It still makes your statement factually wrong.

Human rights is bullshit there is no such thing

Erm... are you denying your own rights to live decently?

[Zionist Nationalist]

Erm... are you denying your own rights to live decently?

no such thing as "rights" for example people living in France dont have the same "rights" as people living in Iraq or Iran every country is different you cant say that there are some universal rights because every culture have different perception of individual "rights"

It still makes your statement factually wrong.

How? I simply said that the west dislike Netanyahu but they have to tolerate him because they have no choice
Same as Europe have to tolerate Trump but they obviously dont like him

[Zamuel]

Two things:
1. I believe that Assad only stands now because Putin stepped in in the last minute.

You are correct. And that is qualified even further, the Russian/ Syria / Iran axis that developed was uncontested only because it fought Isis (at least some of the time.)

2. As a matter of fact, the West do tolerate or even support a strong national leader in the Middle East. That person's name is Netanyahu.

Kind of, sort of ... His narrow viewpoints are a matter of contention and his support from the west might be called "reluctant."

I'm struck by the resemblance of the Syria situation to the Afghanistan fiasco. It's complicated in this incarnation by the need to discern Isis and Jihadist groups from less extremist rebels. Obama's guys didn't pay enough attention to that and (I think) have now learned their lesson. It will take time to filter and remove those extremists. Eventually, I think, a reliable Mujahidin militia will form in the north and advance into a south that will welcome and empower them (along with a little help from their friends). Beyond that, the west's job is to discover a credible leader for a liberated Syria.

Zam

[Patrickov]

How? I simply said that the west dislike Netanyahu but they have to tolerate him because they have no choice
Same as Europe have to tolerate Trump but they obviously dont like him

Re-quote:

The West has never tolerated any strong national leaders in the region.

IMHO you suggested the West never did such thing, even under no-choice situations.

[Zionist Nationalist]

they didn't tolerate them out of choice but rather out of no other option

there is a difference between tolerate and "tolerate"

[Patrickov]

they didn't tolerate them out of choice but rather out of no other option

there is a difference between tolerate and "tolerate"

Sorry but I usually read things quite literally.

[noir]

Well its not that simple they simply dont have a choice
The west was maddening in the recent Israeli elections they tried to replace netanyahu unsuccessfully and they eventually only made him stronger

Human rights is bullshit there is no such thing

The "West", whatever it means, start to understand Netanyahu. Simon Whistler about his ground breaking relations with the Arab (Sunni) world

[Patrickov]

The "West", whatever it means, start to understand Netanyahu. Simon Whistler about his ground breaking relations with the Arab (Sunni) world

An uncommonly neutral sharing from you.

So what do you think?

[Independent_Srpska]

Bloody Nazis from NATO pact cannot handle the fact that their babies ISIL and Al-Qaeda simply could not win in the whole Middle East. Western morons destroyed relatively prosperous countries like Syria, Libya or Iraq turning them into terrorist lairs who could jeopardize the whole world (like they do) . Civilized world couldn't allow American rape of Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq or Libya to happen in Syria.
This, what lunatics Trump, May and Macon did is nothing but madness of disappointed pack of hyenas whose pray safely escaped their rabid teeth.

Thank God the era of NATO lunatics is passing!
Russia once again is saving the world from Nazi barbarians!
God speed, Mr. Putin.

[Rich]

Two things:
1. I believe that Assad only stands now because Putin stepped in in the last minute.
2. As a matter of fact, the West do tolerate or even support a strong national leader in the Middle East. That person's name is Netanyahu.

OK so the next question is, do you really think Putin intervened without the permission of the Jewish state? Israel did not create ISIS. No that was a product of Sunni Islam. But Israel and their gentile western boot lickers certainly fancied ISIS as government for a large part if not all of Syria. our Zionist leaders could hardly hide their glee as ISIS raped, tortured and genocided their way through North West Iraq. Israel did not create the vile sickness that is called Hamas either. Again this is the product of Sunni Islam. But like, ISIS Israel did seek to protect and nurture Hamas in its early days. And of course the Israelis have been richly rewarded for their very wise if cynical nurturing of Hamas.

The Israelis, liked Hamas, but they loved ISIS. The problem was that ISIS would not behave. they insisted on beheading journalists and aid workers and publishing the videos on YouTube. And then they started making attacks in western countries. The whole sales pitch for ISIS had been that unlike evil Al Qaeda, ISIS weren't interested in "international terrorism". So our leaders were forced to take on ISIS. Our leaders like to carry out the wishes of their Jewish Israeli masters, but there are limits. The so called moderate opposition were unacceptable to both Israel and Saudi Arabia. ISIS wouldn't behave themselves and while Israel is perfectly fine with Al Qaeda, our leaders can't be seen to cooperate with them.

If Sunni Arab Muslims got democracy in Syria, then the demand for the Sunni Arab Muslims in the West Bank and Gaza to get democracy might become irresistible.

[annatar1914]

Bloody Nazis from NATO pact cannot handle the fact that their babies ISIL and Al-Qaeda simply could not win in the whole Middle East. Western morons destroyed relatively prosperous countries like Syria, Libya or Iraq turning them into terrorist lairs who could jeopardize the whole world (like they do) . Civilized world couldn't allow American rape of Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq or Libya to happen in Syria.
This, what lunatics Trump, May and Macon did is nothing but madness of disappointed pack of hyenas whose pray safely escaped their rabid teeth.

Thank God the era of NATO lunatics is passing!
Russia once again is saving the world from Nazi barbarians!
God speed, Mr. Putin.

Good to see you again, friend! Yes, this world Disorder is passing, and another post-modern phase is beginning.

[One Degree]

Bloody Nazis from NATO pact cannot handle the fact that their babies ISIL and Al-Qaeda simply could not win in the whole Middle East. Western morons destroyed relatively prosperous countries like Syria, Libya or Iraq turning them into terrorist lairs who could jeopardize the whole world (like they do) . Civilized world couldn't allow American rape of Yugoslavia, Serbia, Iraq or Libya to happen in Syria.
This, what lunatics Trump, May and Macon did is nothing but madness of disappointed pack of hyenas whose pray safely escaped their rabid teeth.

Thank God the era of NATO lunatics is passing!
Russia once again is saving the world from Nazi barbarians!
God speed, Mr. Putin.

The inclusion of Trump is a blind spot. Without the coercion of the establishment, Trump would have been a world defender of your view. I don’t think he would of even had much interest in world affairs without being manipulated with the ‘Russian scare’ political dirty tricks. Every anti Trumper is more responsible, than Trump.

[Zionist Nationalist]

If Trump had 100% control he wouldn't had bombed Syria even if they did used chemical weapons because he doesn't want the US to be the moral police of the world but he is forced by the establishment
This attack did not serve the interest of the US and its allies it only make the US look like a paper tiger
bombing empty facilities thats a joke and now Syria going to get S-300