Assad: I just need a tad longer to kill all my opponents.

[eynon81]

[JDHURF]

[Zeugma]

[PoS]

If you really want to help the Syrian rebs then do what Orwell did and head over there as part of an international brigade. Then you can write your own Homage to Damascus.

[Boris Johnson]

[Boris Johnson]

Also, what Zeugma said.

[Professor]

OK - Zeg, Boris and others who seem to support intervention of some sort in Syria. What do you wish to accomplish?

I'm not looking for a simplistic answer, like, "To end the civil war." That's simplistic because we cannot do that. We tried to end civil conflicts in Afghanistan, and it didn't work. We tried to support a friendly regime in Iran years ago, and it didn't work. We were able to get something done in Iraq, but at what cost, has it really worked, and was it even necessary? We've been intimately involved in the ME for 60+ years now, and what has really changed (other than Cold War alliances)? It has been a mess ever since the 50s. I mean, have you ever looked at the list? Since 1950, there have been at least 55 conflicts with mass civilian and military casualties in the ME!!

Should we get involved with all of them? I assume not. So, why is Syria more important than, say, the Jordan-Palestinian Civil War in 1970 where up to 25,000 died? Or the Kurdish-Turkish Conflict, where almost 100,000 have died?

In 5 years, if we intervene in Syria, what do you think we will see there? A peaceful, stable regime? History would suggest that there really is no such thing in the ME. Looking at this list (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mo ... iddle_East), I have a hard time finding a single ME country that is not involved in some conflict at least once per decade.

[eynon81]

[eynon81]

[Zeugma]