If he is a resourceful leader commanding a strong army why does he need foreign proxies to prop him up?
He is preferred by all minorities which is a fact. having seen his interviews, he seems like a rational person and a secular person.
Strong backing from Russia and Iran is one of the reasons why he is resourceful plus he has a professional and a strong army.
If he didn’t have the moral strength , his men or his allies would also not support himhim for so long. Minority have no future in Syria in a non-assad govt for the time being.
This is a government where neither father nor son gave the majority much of a future. 1982: Syria's President Hafez al-Assad crushes rebellion in Hama | Syria | The Guardian
His moral strength is right up there with Stalin, Hitler and Mao.
He machine-gunned his own citizens for protesting, starting the civil war that continues to this day. How is that America’s fault?
I think the idea is that they’re “moderate” in comparison to ISIS. Most of them are allied with al-Qaida, altho some may be more discreet about it than others.
But really, we have to choose between evil fuckers who want to chop our heads off & rape our children before chopping their heads off (ISIS); evil fuckers who’ll pretend to like us until they’re in charge, then stab us in the back (the “moderate” rebels), or evil fuckers who are at least willing to leave us alone (Assad & company). From a Western POV, it’s a total no-brainer whose side we should be on.
Really, this is the final stage of the disintegration of the Versailles Treaty ME. All those artificial nations, based on borders drawn by the old men at Versailles are finally falling apart. what will emerge from this is anyone’s guess, but we should STAY OUT of it. We’ve lost enough blood and money.
Nitpick, but the Treaty of Versailles was signed by Germany. Austria signed the Treaty of St Germain, Bulgaria signed the Treaty of Neuilly, Hungary signed the Treaty of Trianon, and the Ottoman Empire signed the Treaty of Sevres.
Sometimes that happens in democracies too like in SriLanka against the Tamils. You have to try to stop it by talks not by funding, training, arming rebels. Needless to say, American media like CNN is the most influential media for opinion making in the world. They supported the rebels against Assad as well. That also has a big impact.
I associate Hezbollah with what they did in South Lebanon. The rocket attacks against Israel. They’ve been quite a threat in the region.
But it appears they’ve paid quite a heavy price for supporting Assad.
http://news.yahoo.com/syrias-long-war-wearing-down-key-assad-backer-120003056.html
Yah well it definitely happened in Syria, and it wasn’t pretty.
Well the war was already underway and talks a futile option by the time the Obama Administration considered arming rebels. The Assad regime was obviously the villainous party.
Again, Assad machine-gunned his own people, starting the civil war. I think that has more impact than anything CNN has to say, true or false.
and USA exacerbated it such that it is still continuing after so many years resulting in 300K+ (and counting) Syrians dead and enormous human suffering.
Thankfully Russia has the balls to go on the right path i.e. to finish off FSA, ISIS etc.
(I don’t know how America claims to differentiate between FSA and ISIS, how do they make sure that weapons and money meant for FSA does not ended up with ISIS. does the US care to figure out whether FSA is liberal and secular? )
There’s not always an area of agreement for a negotiated solution. Sri Lanka is a great example of talks not leading to a resolution to the underlying disagreement. They tried multiple rounds of peace talks and India deployed a large peacekeeping force for a while. Finally in December 2001 after almost 20 years of fighting they worked out a cease fire with international help. Yayyyy. After licking their wounds they went back at it in 2005.
India armed LTTE. There are Tamils in India as well as Sri Lanka. It was a great mistake.
Instead of arming/creating LTTE, India should have talked to Sri Lankan Govt. about giving rights to Sri Lankan Tamils as SriLankan Tamils felt injustice was being done to them.
So… Syrians should unite to wipe out Hezbollah for what Hezbollah did to Israel, but Syrians should not unite to take out Assad for what Assad did to Syria? Is that your view of the situation?
'Cause you mentioned “ISIS and Hezbollah,” but never Assad, which strikes me as incredibly odd.
The Americans are now throwing their weight behind something called “the Syrian Arab Coalition,” a force of some “3,000 to 5,000 Arab fighters.”
The idea, apparently, is that those fellas will team up with a 20,000+ strong Kurdish force “in an offensive backed by dozens of coalition warplanes to pressure Raqqa, the Islamic State’s main stronghold in Syria.”
That’s because I see Putin’s point that for now Assad may be the best option. At least for the short term. He’s a secular ruler. Yes a despot and a war criminal. But I suspect the guy that replaces him will be ten times worse. Probably a religious fanatic. I much rather see Assad in power under the condition that he agrees to begin reforming his government. Eventually he steps down and a moderate replaces him.
I wish there was an alternative. I don’t see one in the current situation. Any leader that tries to rule rule Syria will have to be ruthless. At least for now. Theres too many extremist factions that will never willingly support one ruler.
I hoped in the beginning that maybe the army would arrest Assad and take power. Like the Army did in Egypt after Mubarak stepped down. But apparently thats not going to happen in Syria. The army is supporting Assad.
So you want people to defend Assad but attack a pro-Assad force (Hezbollah)?
One would think that rallying around Assad would include supporting the pro-Assad forces, no?
I’m not sure what to do about Hezbollah. I certainly wouldn’t support giving them any aid. We don’t have to attack them either. Theres just no easy answers in Syria. Any choice is terrible and the outcome unpredictable.
Ideally it would be better for everybody to just stay out of it. Let the civil war run its course and decide who takes power in Syria. ISIS changed everything. It forces all the world’s nations to act. We can’t allow ISIS to grow even bigger.
I think of the US civil war. How lucky we were that some other nation didn’t interfere or even invade. We were allowed to settle our internal issues ourselves.
This is where we agree.
Again, the Assad government has been directly involved in attacks against the West. Speaking from a purely self-interested perspective, there is no reason the US should support Assad.