What if the NATO invaded Syria?

General Questions
#1

Let’s say that in an alternate reality, NATO countries have a spine (and they cared about more than their own interests) and give Russia and China the finger when they try to protect tyrants, and a coalition of the US, European countries and Turkey invade Syria and hand the country to the rebels, after being given a casus belli by destroying a Turkish airplane (which happened), bypassing the UN Security Council.

What could be the repercussions of such an action? Any type of significant repercussion in general, but I am curious about what you guys think Russia and China would do.

Also, aside from just being a bunch of assholes, what do Russia and China really have to gain from protecting the oppressors in Syria? Or is it just about projecting their power?

#2

Russia and China are both very sensitive to the tendency of the U.S. and Europe to go where they aren’t welcome and interfere in the sovereignty of countries they don’t approve of, and want to prevent any precedent for such actions gaining UN approval. I don’t believe for an instant that either country would actually fight for Assad, but they can raise holy hell in other ways – pressuring other countries in the region to deny NATO forces overfly permission, for instance.

Other repercussions? Given that the U.S. supports other tyrants in the region, I’d guess we’d have some pretty sharp exchanges with our own allies, as well.

#3

Given the experience with Libya and Iraq it is highly unlikely that any European member of NATO would be happy bombing a government that is trying to cope with an armed rebellion mainly consisting of religion(s)/tribes who would like nothing better than cutting the throats of the government and its supporters - before turning on the rebellion’s ‘pro democracy’ elements.

Despite errors dealing with Iraq, Ba’athists are not the worst elements in the region.

Also Turkey is a bit dodgy - Erdogan is a supposedly reformed Muslim Brotherhood Islamist so certain members of Europe would very likely prefer bombing Turkey rather than Syria.

It has probably dawned on a lot of people that in 1979 it would have been sensible backing Russia in Afghanistan rather than arming the Afghanis (and friends) with Stinger missiles.

This should be in Great Debates

#4

If any moderator sees this, maybe they can move it to the GB forum if appropriate. I’m fine with that.

Can you elaborate a bit on “Also Turkey is a bit dodgy - Erdogan is a supposedly reformed Muslim Brotherhood Islamist so certain members of Europe would very likely prefer bombing Turkey rather than Syria.”

Why is Turkey/Erdogan dodgy? What European countries do you think would “rather bomb Turkey”?
Anyway, you are probably right, maybe it is a bad idea to interfere as even worse tyrants could simply take over.