USA to arm Syrian rebels

I don't agree with arming the rebels but how is this argument different than going against Sadam?

 

gazprom faints

 

I am very uneasy about this but there really are no good solutions that I can see for Syria. Maybe putting in a no fly zone and setting up safe areas for refugees might work better but that would require putting US lives at risk and it's doubtful Congress would go along with that.

I am wondering if it would be possible to hammer out some sort of diplomatic solution with Russia and Turkey to put enough pressure on Assad and the rebels to try to reach a negotiated settlement. Of course there is no unified rebel command structure that could enforce such a settlement.

 

Why don't you ask the Iraqi people if they were better off before we "liberated" them

By that I mean that life isn't good living under a brutal dictator but it can be a helluva lot worse if someone helps get rid of that regime and there is zero plan afterwards...

Plus aren't a lot of the rebels affiliated with AQ? Do we formally want to support our real enemy?

This sounds eerily similar to Bush/Cheney era tactics in Iraq

 

No benefit. No ally involved no matter the outcome. We should not be involved. Use the money it costs elsewher

 

a nice distraction from all the hourly scandals.

 

I don't care what anyone says...there are no good Muslim rebels. The only good is that they destroy each other. To say Syria is going to be better off when Assad is out and good rebels followed by Al Qaeda move in is total bs. That country will go into limbo like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya with no real security and militant groups doing their thing. And, it is not going to provide Israel any better security. Dictators running the show over there are necessary because it is the lesser of the two evils. All that is left when the dictators are gone is violence from is widespread sectarianism creating power vacuums and more violence. Our mistake is wasting millions of dollars thinking we can somehow control outcomes and democracy will reign supreme. Islam will never be western democracy. Inevitably, calls for religious or Sharia law are incompatible with democratic ideals. I believe a wider regional war is underway and will go on for a long time. These people are just bred to not get along with anyone over there. Hence the term militancy.

 

I think this is very short-term thinking. Let's not forget - the whole rise of Islamic militancy has occurred in large part because of these dictators. We have a long history of short-term decision making - and really, it's fairly understandable because the long-term is extremely unpredictable.

But let's not use Libya or Egypt or even Iraq as examples of failed change in the region. Revolutions are ugly, complicated things that take a long time to settle. We act like there should be a revolution and everything should be great soon after - that's just not how it works, even in the success stories all around the world. These revolutions won't show their impact now - we'll only see the real results 20 or 30 or 50 years from now.

The reality is that we have no idea what those impacts will be. But I think people are slowly coming to the conclusion that the prop-up-the-evil-dictator route has proven to be less than satisfactory. While the state itself may not engage in terrorism, they still create a breeding ground for the industry. And at the end of the day, the state will never be a truly reliable partner because they are more concerned about the terrorists within (see Saudi). So the world is rolling the dice, and hoping that taking a moral stand that pushing the idea of self-determination hopefully changes the appeal and effectiveness of militant Islam in the long-term. Whether that will work or not is unclear, but trying to divine results over the course of a few years misses the larger picture.

 

So basically you have no idea but wanted to drop your two cents as well. Thanks.

 

I think anyone who says they are certain of what's going to come of this whole Arab Spring, or Syria in particular, is misguided or simply wrong. The world is not black and white, and attempts to frame it that way are silly.

 

Major, you may be right but long term in this train of thought is a long way away, also. Also, by no means do I believe this is black and white. This is anything but.The Shia-Sunni divide is going to have to work itself out before a resolution happens imo...as these side are at war with each other while they are also at war with the West. And, once these militants get their hands on ever evolving weapons technology being either chemical or nuclear...and start to use them...this is when all hell breaks loose. Lets hope it doesn't come to that.

Turkey has a model that seems like it could work for Islam but now the protests have started there. Who knows where that country's stability is headed? In the end, the West has to have someone in charge of these Islamic countries they can have diplomatic relations with that doesn't involve us propping them up with money and security. We are a long way away from any kind of regional stability in that sense. For lack of a better word, it's a cluster****.

 

I agree with that, but your conclusion is to arm one side in the conflict?

 

This is a tough call. Assad is a murderous dictator who's massacred his own people and used chemical weapons on his own people.

The rebels are incredibly brutal and cruel. The one rebel leader was filmed eating the lungs of a soldier he killed. I'm not sure those are the kind of people we want to be arming and helping.

However, if we are going to help the rebels there are a few things I think that should be done.

1. Make most of the help humanitarian. Make sure that it's publicized what we are we are doing to help the people of Syria. Make that part of the condition for the rebels to receive the aid.

2. Make sure that aid and those conditions are long term. Continue to help feed, provide healthcare, and educate the Syrians after the horrible murderous dictator Assad is gone.

3. In order for the rebels to receive arms and training make sure that there are conditions on it in order to prevent oppressive conditions for Syrians after the fall of Assad. No laws that treat women as second class citizens etc.

Hopefully that could lead to a change in the way we aid other nations. I know that the leaders often want military technology and aid, but I believe that most of the aid we should give, should be educational, medical, food etc. That should be the largest way we help all of our allies.

 

I would say the protests in Turkey are a sign of good things. Those protests are against a leader who is trying to stick more religion into a secular govt. The fact that it's bringing about protests is a good thing.

 

Agree with all of this - but I think the Bush and Obama admins, through different approaches both by administration and with different countries, have demonstrated that no one has any short-term solution. Nothing anyone has done has shifted the nature of Islam in any of these countries short-term. So long-term might be the only option we can focus on. All of these countries have a more modernized youth that have a wider world perspective thanks to technology - I think the hope is that by supporting the needs of these people, the future political situation in these countries - which will be dictated by the current youth in the future - changes directions.

 

It's not my solution - it seems to be the western solution. The rationale appears to be that supporting the dictator doesn't seem to work very well, so maybe letting them start over with self-determination will instigate a long-term change.

It's a choice between taking the definitive bad option, or rolling the dice with something potentially good or potentially even worse.

Personally, I would focus on reducing the armaments involved and seeing what happens: basically, using a no-fly zone to take out the Syrian army's capabilities. It's the same net effect as arming the rebels in terms of balancing the scales, but doesn't add to the level of carnage that each side is capable of.

 

How exactly do you want to ensure that?

 

This seems to exemplify the problems of trying to incorporate democracy and Islam together. Inevitably, the extreme elements are voted in to become a majority and want to transform the country into a true Islamic state under Sharia law which squashes out democracy along the way. What you end up with is a civilian population who is at the mercy of the religious zealots in charge and who yearn for freedoms that are unattainable under such a state. Conform or be cast out.