Russia Gets Syria to Eliminate Chemical Weapons

[frosty]

I wonder what would happen if someone assassinated Assad. Maybe a close aide puts a bullet through his head. It seems like Assad is one of the most fiery officials in the government; maybe if he is gone other officials underneath him who are left to pick up the pieces will tread wisely so they can save their own asses? Assad was literally gifted the title of 'President' to him by his dead father. He ran unopposed in single party election and received 97 percent of the vote by referendum. 'Parliament' lowered the voting age just so Assad could win... after all, his dad and brother had received untimely deaths and Assad was left to pick up the pieces.

Call it extreme if you want but I am not the only person to have thought of this. I noticed Assad's forces claim time and time again they are fighting personally for him. Maybe if Assad is killed people can reshuffle things to the benefit of Syrians. He does not want to step down and he does not want to agree to a transitional caretaker government in Damascus, and that's because despite the character of the rebels, Assad's first priority above everything else is to ensure that his minority family regime stays in power at absolutely any cost. I remember someone defected from the regime that claimed that Assad literally believes he owns Syria and he is entitled to rule the country.

There are many ways to hypothetically solve this brutal war but I've come to the conclusion that A) mass protests will not do it and B) foreign intervention doesn't seem willing to do regime change.

[Shiranu]

If al-Asad dies, the radicals will be the one who come into power; do you think al-Qaeda and the other radical groups are just going to stand by while the power they are murdering for is given to the people?

Syria is, unfortunately, better off with Bashar al-Asad at the top than the rebels. More predictable and has less foreign enemies.

[Smartmarzipan]

If al-Asad dies, the radicals will be the one who come into power; do you think al-Qaeda and the other radical groups are just going to stand by while the power they are murdering for is given to the people?

Syria is, unfortunately, better off with Bashar al-Asad at the top than the rebels. More predictable and has less foreign enemies.

As fucked up as that is, I tend to agree. He's really a lesser of two evils with no other options in sight. A stabilized, unjust government, or a group of radical rebels full of Muslim extremists? I mean, the Muslim Brotherhood isn't working out so well for Egypt right now...

[frosty]

Well, one idea I was trying to salvage in my post is like I said a transitional caretaker government agreed on by Syrians and by the backers of both sides that would do it's best to prevent the scenario that Shiranu predicted would happen in the event Assad dies.

Nobody wants to repeat the mistakes of Iraq when institutions were dissolved and everything turned into chaos. I have seen signs that some people serving in the current regime want to save their country and ditch Assad, but they are not brave enough to do it.

Although, the way this war has been going, my idea will probably never happen. Assad will not be removed except by force, and Putin seems so spiteful in this conflict that he will let Assad stay for another decade if he will get a 'win' over the U.S.

[IMMadAsHell]

Other than humanitarian reasons etc., why do we (US citizens) care?  How will what happens in Syria, or for that matter, any country in the middle east effect the defense of our country?  The perpetual question being, why should we be the policemen for the world?  The answer that because we are the largest military power is, for me, unsatisfactory.

Peace is Patriotic and I am already opposed to the next war.

[antediluvian]

Other than humanitarian reasons etc., why do we (US citizens) care?  How will what happens in Syria, or for that matter, any country in the middle east effect the defense of our country?  The perpetual question being, why should we be the policemen for the world?  The answer that because we are the largest military power is, for me, unsatisfactory.

Peace is Patriotic and I am already opposed to the next war.

Oh, we are just fearful that Syria may have better computer-hackers than we do and will take down the New York Times again, or maybe a couple banks.

[Colanth]

Other than humanitarian reasons etc., why do we (US citizens) care?  How will what happens in Syria, or for that matter, any country in the middle east effect the defense of our country?  The perpetual question being, why should we be the policemen for the world?  The answer that because we are the largest military power is, for me, unsatisfactory.

What happens in Syria won't directly affect us very much, but what happens in other Middle East countries will.  If our oil flow is shut off, we won't last very long - as a society or as a military force.

[josephpalazzo]

His quick decision in agreeing to hand over the weapons is a tacit admission that he did use them.

I do not agree with you on this. At all. One good reason to hand over weapons would be because you don't want the shit bombed out of you to the point where you're weakened enough to have the people you're fighting defeat you, whether or not you're guilty of using chemical weapons.

Yes, but it doesn't address the issue: there is more evidence pointing in the direction of Assad than the rebels.

Secondly, it is not to the benefit of the US to see Assad fall, unless there were a credible successor, which there isn't at the moment, and why there is no compelling reason for Obama to put ground troops.

It does benefit the US and it's allies (mostly it's allies) to have Assad fall concerning the oil/gas pipeline to be built through Syria that would bypass the Israeli pipeline. We're talking billions of dollars to be made in that industry. And the Golan Heights (hotly contested by both Syria and Israel) are wanted badly by Israel for their gas deposits. I doubt Obama will put troops on the ground any time soon (if at all), but getting rid of Assad and a Russian/Iranian ally in the region is a good thing for the right people. Destabilizing Assad's government makes Syria weak, and in turn, its "enemies" stronger.

Well, the whole issue of the gas pipeline concerns the countries in that region, namely: Syria, Russia, Iran, Israel, Qatar, and Saudi Arabia. It has very little concern with US interests per se. And secondly, removing Assad does not mean US interests will best be served. As I have pointed out before, there is no credible successor to Assad that could serve best Western interests. If Assad falls, whoever takes power might be worse, why the US has no interest in putting boots on the ground.

[frosty]

I hate to repeat myself here but since humans are stubborn creatures that do not want to give up, even in war, I cannot see a political transition in reality playing out here. There is too much pride and hatred for there to be any solutions in this war.

This war will either end with Assad winning on a technicality, or the rebels getting enough weapons from their suppliers that eventually they take Damascus, the entire country is destroyed, and it is a very bloody and gruesome ending for everybody, especially the regime supporters. The rebels once got 20 (yes, twenty) anti-tank missiles from a supplier and they almost completely took over the last airbase and city Assad has control over in eastern Syria. Almost all of eastern Syria is controlled by the rebels. But it seems like even the foreign backers of the rebels do not want a decisive rebel victory... that should say something.

And the guy above me is right. The U.N. report apparently stated that circumstantial evidence pointed towards the direction of the Assad regime - that they and only they have the firepower and operational capacity to carry out such a large scale and effective chemical attack.

[josephpalazzo]

But it seems like even the foreign backers of the rebels do not want a decisive rebel victory... that should say something.

That's because there are several factions within the rebel side, each faction backed by different foreign countries. Some prominent ones:

- Free Syrian Army  with 50,000 men
- Syrian Liberation Front, numbering 37,000 fighters
- Jabhat al-Nusra, numbering only 5,000 fighters, but they are increasing with the inflow of Alqaeda from different parts of the globe.


Then you have different coalitions of political parties with a military resistance unit of their own, of which the National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces  is the largest, and was named "representative of aspirations of Syrian people" by the Arab League.