# Syria soon? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 27, 2011, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271 "2011-08-27T06:41:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2011, 10:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/41 "2011-08-31T22:45:44Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What does “anti-Nationalist” mean in this context? And does it mean trouble for the U.S. or Israel? It means they don’t see their primary identity as being “Arab” or “Syrian” but as Muslim. That’s why Muslim radicals aren’t as concerned with ethnic identity since from their standpoint all Muslims are brothers. That’s why the Arabs of Hezbollah swear their allegiance to the Iranian Supreme Leader. It’s also why Hamas leaders have insisted they fight for all Muslims and are part of the Ummah while Al Quaeda is a veritable hodge-podge of nationalities. As for what it means for Israel and the US both the Ba’athists and Islamic radicals have regularly made it clear they hate the Americans and Jews but contrary to the ignorant opinions of countless westernors, Islamic radicals when it’s in their interest have regularly collaborated with both the Jews and the Americans, though usually behind the scenes. For example during the 80s and early 90s the Iranian regime collaborated with both the US and Israel when in their interests. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/42 "2011-09-01T00:25:39Z")
[Amnesty International says at least 88 Syrians have died in state custody since March, many of them tortured.](http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/08/201183184455223979.html) That’s just the ones they can document, of course. ---
**Author:** ![Frank](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/3d9bf3/32.png) [@Frank](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Frank)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/43 "2011-09-01T00:34:36Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Amnesty International says at least 88 Syrians have died in state custody since March, many of them tortured.](http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/08/201183184455223979.html) That’s just the ones they can document, of course. Your point? Should any country that has had 88 people die in state custody in six months have its government overthrown? Or what? Look, **BrainGlutton** , you spent a lot of time in the Libyan thread just posting links, with an occasional brief description. You have not spent a lot of time explaining your views, for or against of the news contained in the links. Would you care to start, or would you prefer to continue your blog-like pattern? ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/44 "2011-09-01T16:42:08Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > You don’t know what you are talking about. > > The Ba’athists who’ve ruled Syria for generations were the inventors of Arab Nationalism. > > On the other hand, their domestic opponents, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist groups are fervently anti-Nationalist. The first Arab nationalist movement was the nahda current which pre-dated the baathists by about half a century. The Brothers in Egypt and similar groups are far more assertive of Egyptian influence in the region, especially in terms of the Israel situation, than Mubarak ever was and this is why the US and Israel don’t want any more countries becoming so assertive – call it Arab nationalist as a shorthand – in the region as Egypt has become since the fall of Mubarak. That’s the point I’m trying to make. Any government that manages to overthrow the Assad regime is going to be more assertive over the Palestinian problem, the Golan and any US/Israeli attempt at influence in Syria. The Assad regime is the devil we know. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 1, 2011, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/45 "2011-09-01T17:38:09Z")
> [@Frank](#): > > Your point? Should any country that has had 88 people die in state custody in six months have its government overthrown? Or what? It further illustrates the severity and brutality of the crackdown. How is it **not** relevant? > [@Frank](#): > > Look, **BrainGlutton** , you spent a lot of time in the Libyan thread just posting links, with an occasional brief description. You have not spent a lot of time explaining your views, for or against of the news contained in the links. Would you care to start, or would you prefer to continue your blog-like pattern? Of course the Libya thread got bloggy, I started it in February to debate whether anything was going to happen and it’s been tracking a civil war ever since and it’s not over yet. As for my views, I think it’s all a very good thing and the U.S. and NATO handled the Libyan situation just right: We didn’t start it, it couldn’t honestly be blamed on us in any way, we limited our involvement to the air support the rebels asked for, so there are no foreign occupiers to resent. So, after a civil war with very limited bloodshed considering its duration, the result might very well be a U.S-and-Western-friendly Arab democracy. My views on Syria are that it would be a very, very good thing if we could pull off something like that in Syria, but I don’t know if it’s possible, or too risky. The question is open for debate. If I find the question interesting enough to state, I am not required to take a side. Based on what I’ve read in this thread so far, I still think the worst danger is not an even-more-anti-Israeli-and-U.S. regime, but ethnic/religious factionalization and strife. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2011, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/46 "2011-09-02T16:08:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > we limited our involvement to the air support… > > the result might very well be a U.S-and-Western-friendly Arab democracy. If we hadn’t got imvolved then there’s zero chance other countries like britain and whoever would have tried to overthrow gaddafi themselves. And pretty much any Arab democracy is going to be less US-friendly than any Arab dictator. Dictators like Mubarak could be bought off with money, QED. Any Libyan government which actually represents the will of its people, and I don’t expect to see one emerge in Libya, would not be US-friendly. America’s standing in the Middle East has declined steadily over the decades, reaching what we thought was a nadir when Bush unilaterally invaded Iraq. But America’s reaction to the events of the Arab Spring have caused America’s standing amongst Arabs to fall even lower than it was under the Bush regime. What eventually emerges as a government in libya may indeed be US-friendly, at least compared with the Gadaffi regime, but that won’t represent the will of the Libyan people, especially as regards their natural resources and the new regime’s foreign policy in the region. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2011, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/47 "2011-09-02T16:12:11Z")
> [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > If we hadn’t got imvolved then there’s zero chance other countries like britain and whoever would have tried to overthrow gaddafi themselves. What makes you think that? France was pretty eager. > [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > Any Libyan government which actually represents the will of its people, and I don’t expect to see one emerge in Libya . . . Why not? > [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > . . . would not be US-friendly. Why not? > [@Dick\_Dastardly](#): > > America’s standing in the Middle East has declined steadily over the decades, reaching what we thought was a nadir when Bush unilaterally invaded Iraq. But America’s reaction to the events of the Arab Spring have caused America’s standing amongst Arabs to fall even lower than it was under the Bush regime. What makes you think **that?!** ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2011, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/48 "2011-09-02T16:21:35Z")
Oh yeah, this is Syria not libya we’re talking about in this thread. :smack: I’ve been out of the office enjoying a mainly liquid lunch until now so that’s my excuse anyway. 🙂 OK, Syria. You’ve got a lot of competing ethnic groups in Syria and the groups they represent aren’t exactly US-friendly. If there’s any kind of unifying national issue, it’s the golan heights which Israel seized in 1967. Obviously the US slavishly backs Israel and israel don’t want to give them up, so Syrians aren’t going to be pro-American over this issue. There isn’t exactly going to be a seamless transition from the Assad regime to anything else. The current power structure isn’t going to go down without a fight and will be backed by its ally Iran and also Iraq, who are currently supporting the Assad regime. The Saudis and us would probably support the Sunnis, most of whom would be people we were calling terrorists when theey were fighting against us in Iraq. If we did support one particular group to overthrow the Assad regime we’d probably end up with another lebanon. The Assad regime have been concerned with nothing else but their own survival for at least thirty years. It’s likely that any new regime that emerged from a civil war would be in exactly the same situation sooner rather than later. ---
**Author:** ![Dick\_Dastardly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c4cdca/32.png) [@Dick\_Dastardly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dick_Dastardly)\ **Post date:** [September 2, 2011, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/49 "2011-09-02T16:36:56Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What makes you think that? France was pretty eager. > > Why not? > > Why not? > > What makes you think **that?!** They may have been eager but they don’t have any military capability. Britain and france ran out of bombs and missiles after about two weeks of the war. Without US involvement the overthrow would never have happened : > **[NATO running low on bombs in Libya - UPI.com](https://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/04/16/NATO-running-low-on-bombs-in-Libya/UPI-82171302932477/)** > > NATO planes flying combat missions over Libya are starting to run out of bombs, officials said Friday. Democracies don’t just appear because a regime gets overthrown, especially in countries with lots of oil. Just because you hold an election in a country doesn’t make it a democracy. Look at Egypt for instance. We’ve committed two billion on top of the two billion a year we already give them to back our favoured candidates in the forthcoming elections. that’s because we want a pro-US government in power there. We want the same in Libya, Syria, everywhere else in the region. The US wants shall we say preferred access to Middle Eastern energy and compliant governments and ME governments to recognise and make peace with Israel. This conflicts diametrically with the will of the Middle Eastern people. See Egypt for example. Here’s an actual poll which has been carried out for decades that shows the changing US sentiment in the region : [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/arab-worlds-views-of-us-president-obama-increasingly-negative-new-poll-finds/2011/07/12/gIQASzHVBI\_blog.html](http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/checkpoint-washington/post/arab-worlds-views-of-us-president-obama-increasingly-negative-new-poll-finds/2011/07/12/gIQASzHVBI_blog.html) The US has been interfering in the region, overthrowing governments they don’t like and replacing them with dictators and propping up dictators they do like who keep tens of millions of Arabs living under hrrible repressive regimes. The events of the Arab Spring have confirmed to Arabs that the US prefers pro-US/Israel dictators to the will of the Arab people, so exactly why should the US be popular in the region? If you’d lived under a horrible repressive dictatoeship all your life that had been propped up by the US, why would you be pro-US? Why would you see the US as somehow representing freedom? Can’t you see why the vast majority of Arab people might not see America as representing freedom? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2011, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/50 "2011-10-04T14:36:54Z")
[Now Syrian government troops are clashing with army “defectors.”](http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/10/2011104111554159586.html) (As distinct from deserters.) That’s how it started in Libya. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/51 "2011-11-14T18:01:12Z")
[The Arab League threatens to suspend Syria’s membership, effective 11/16/11, if the crackdown doesn’t stop.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/11/2011111492236108262.html) Apparently this is a big deal economically. Meanwhile, the EU prepares to tighten sanctions. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/52 "2011-11-27T19:45:20Z")
Aaand [the Arab League finally votes sanctions on Libya.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/11/20111127143750187116.html) Turkey promises to back up whatever the League does here. This is a big deal – the Arab League applying political pressure to a member to clean up its human-rights record. Or, put another way, putting itself on one side, at the beginning, of an inevitable civil war. But, either way, trying to solve this as a matter of regional interest without involving the Western powers directly. Is that a new development? Has it ever been done before? ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/53 "2011-11-27T19:48:27Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Aaand [the Arab League finally votes sanctions on Libya.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/11/20111127143750187116.html) You mean they voted for sanctions on Syria. Confused me there for a little. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 8:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/54 "2011-11-27T20:03:13Z")
> [@Der\_Trihs](#): > > You mean they voted for sanctions on Syria. Confused me there for a little. Thank you. :o ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2011, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/55 "2011-11-27T20:33:16Z")
In answer to the o.p. I hope not, but if they insist on doing it ,why don’t we let them get on with it on their own. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 28, 2011, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/56 "2011-11-28T16:08:58Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > In answer to the o.p. I hope not, but if they insist on doing it ,why don’t we let them get on with it on their own. What if the Free Syrian Army asks for U.S./NATO air support, like the Libyan rebels did? Should we still “let them get on with it on their own”? Another possible – not sure how possible – scenario is where the U.S. and NATO stay out of it, but the Arab League states (that is, such of them as have good air forces – Egypt, maybe) give the Syrian rebels all the air support they want. That would be unprecedented, but so are the League’s recent decisions to suspend and sanction Syria. Any reason the West should have a problem with **that?** It might be the first step to the AL becoming a power in its own right, like the EU. ---
**Author:** ![raskolnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e47c2d/32.png) [@raskolnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raskolnik)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 11:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/57 "2011-11-29T11:39:02Z")
Syria’s Air Force is NOT launching air attacks on civilian or military targets. They are using snipes, and ground based cannon. This is not the same as a no fly zone. Syria has over invested in armor, as benefits it status as a soviet client in the 1980’s. Many Syrian tanks are at least 30 years old. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/58 "2011-11-29T17:54:37Z")
[Turkish Foreign Minister says Turkey is ready for “any scenario.”](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/11/20111129134450458118.html) > [@](#): > > The Turkish foreign minister has said that Ankara is ready for any scenario if Syria continues its crackdown on protests against President Bashar al-Assad, but that his country is opposed to a military option against its neighbour. > > Ahmet Davutoglu, in an interview with television broadcaster Kanal 24 on Tuesday, said: "We hope that a military intervention will never be necessary. > > “However, the Syrian regime has to find a way of making peace with its own people to eliminate this option. If the oppression continues, Turkey is ready for any scenario.” > > Davutoglu also said the international community may decide a buffer zone is needed in Syria if increasing numbers of people try to flee the violence there. > > “If tens, hundreds of thousands of people start advancing towards the Iraq, Lebanon, Turkey borders, not only Turkey but the international community may be required to take some steps such as a buffer zone,” he said. Oh, and this is interesting: > [@](#): > > Meanwhile, Sergey Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister dismissed calls for an arms embargo on Syria and warned against imposing ultimatums on Assad’s government. > > Speaking in Moscow on Tuesday after a meeting with the Icelandic foreign minister, Lavrov said that calls for an arms embargo on Syria were “unfair”, adding that armed groups opposing the government had been supplied from the outside. > > He drew parallels to the fighting in Libya, where he said the West armed the opposition forces despite a UN arms embargo. :rolleyes: Dude, if it’s not unfair for third parties to pick a side in a conflict, then it’s not unfair for them to support that side to, like, the exclusion of the other. Conceivable scenario: There’s a civil war in Syria. As in Libya, the rebels win with outside support – but that of Turkey and the Arab League, not of the U.S. or NATO. Possible? And, if Turkey were to attack Syria from the rear, would Greece help? ---
**Author:** ![Alessan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alessan/32/465_2.png) [@Alessan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Alessan)\ **Post date:** [November 29, 2011, 6:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/59 "2011-11-29T18:05:53Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And, if Turkey were to attack Syria from the rear, would Greece help? Snicker. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [November 30, 2011, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271/60 "2011-11-30T20:21:33Z")
[Turkey also sanctions Syria.](http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/11/2011113083714894547.html) > [@](#): > > Turkey has said it will suspend all financial dealings with Syria and freeze the assets of Bashar al-Assad’s government as part of sanctions against its former ally. > > Announcing the measures apparently aimed at persuading the Syrian president to end his crackdown against pro-democracy protesters, Ahmet Davutoglu, the Turkish foreign minister, said in Ankara on Wednesday that Assad’s government had come “to the end of the road”. > > He said Turkey will block the delivery of all weapons and military equipment to Syria. Seems Assad has no friends left but Iran and maybe Russia. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/syria-soon/594271.md?page=4)