Political Crossfire Forums

Syria holds the coast, the opposition is fragmented and highly theocratic, all that stands between ISIS and Turkey is the Kurds (and Turkey is stupidly trying to straddle the fence). Russia and Iran are making huge regional gains here, while the West seems oblivious to the fact that there are no good guys here.

It seems obvious to me that, for the sake of millions of refugees, and regional stability, the West needs to get behind Assad.

Meanwhile, all the major Presidential candidates are coming out against Assad, and their respective parties continue to pursue more and more punitive measures against Assad. Why? Is there anyone here but Comrade willing to back this obvious insanity?

It would be really awesome to have a Middle East where the people can rise up and create functional, stable, tolerable societies.

Back in reality, the Strong-Man model is the only one that has worked in the actual middle east. I fear we may have already wrecked that model beyond repair too.

It was time to back Assad back in when the war started. Like i told all you freaks. Where the f**k is that idiot franz?

turkey (and iraq) won't like it but a kurdish state would help, throwing our weight behind it to combat IS. but i agree, putin is backing the right guy. what we should do is just let russia handle it

There's no point in supporting Assad now. Even if he's successful, we will not get any benefit from it. But we will face retaliation from those who thought we were on their team against Assad.

However, just like Saz, I've been supportive of the official Syrian government under Assad over the rebels since the rebellion started. Which is why Assad must die. The US cannot come out in support of Assad now after all the sh!t it's been saying, even if it means a better result strategically and a better situation for the refugees. But the US can reengage the Russians and members of Assad's regime for diplomatic talks provided that Assad is dead. That way you're not negotiating with Assad, but rather one of his successors who can be presented as 'more reasonable.'

There's a Third option, how about breaking Syria up into respective ethnic/religious enclaves, seems to have worked after 1945 in Europe, democratic reform becomes easier if there isn't the ethnic division around to use as a scapegoat for further repression to ensure 'Stability' which is why we don't support Assad, long term, this problem just gets kicked down the road, better short term bloodshed (No matter how horrific) for a permanent solution which won't require a dictator.

I see what you did there. You have a better solution other than Genocide, provide it.