Syria Disintegrating: Part 2

[Razgovory]

You're wrong on the debt.  It wasn't higher in 2003.

My point is simply that things change.  I think one can easily look at a deficit of 2-3% with a national debt of 70% and a benign global economic situation and say that the cost of a war isn't so high that it should outweigh potential benefits.  The same person can equally easily look at a deficit of 8-9%, with a national debt over 100% and a very shaky global economic situation and decide the cost's too high. 

That's assuming the same Baathist dictatorship's involved.  I think that matters too, as does the context.

You're not making a point so much as just reading the worst into anyone's motives, which is what makes it so partisan.  The point itself is bullshit because you're saying if you're willing to ignore the deficit in a conflict when your party's in the White House then you have to be willing to ignore it forever regardless of the circumstances.  That is obvious nonsense.

It wasn't higher in 2003 then what?

[citizen k]

- unlike Libyans, I believe the Syrians have never asked for intervention as opposed to money and diplomatic backing. 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/world/meast/syria-defector-interview/index.html

[Syt]

- unlike Libyans, I believe the Syrians have never asked for intervention as opposed to money and diplomatic backing. 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/world/meast/syria-defector-interview/index.html

He said "Syrians" in the plural. That's just one Syrian.

[Viking]

- unlike Libyans, I believe the Syrians have never asked for intervention as opposed to money and diplomatic backing. 

http://www.cnn.com/2012/07/15/world/meast/syria-defector-interview/index.html

He said "Syrians" in the plural. That's just one Syrian.

I'm pretty sure the sentiment of "if tons of high explosive fell on Assad's house we wouldn't mind it too much..." is almost universal among the syrian opposition.

[Sheilbh]

Fair enough. But the Libyans needed assistance. In the current situation, I don't think the Syrians want or need a Western deus ex machina to steal their revolutionary success.

That could change of course.

[The Minsky Moment]

Believe me, I have no love for the Assad dynasty and on a certain level I am sorta cheering for the rebels. But whatever replaces the Assad regime is likely to be just as bad for us if not worse.  I'll be happy if I'm wrong on that.

The jury is still way out, but the preliminary signs from Libya are encouraging.  And Libya is also a decent model for intervention on the relative cheap.

IMO it would be very difficult to be worse than the Assad regime; the bar is set very high for execrableness

[derspiess]

You say this and earlier talked about the rebels hating you anyway.  I think this gets Syria wrong.

The problem with the Assad regime isn't that they hate Western powers, though they do; the problem with the Assad regime is their relationships with Iran, Hezbullah and, until recently, Hamas.  They projected Iranian influence far more widely in the Middle East.  They are a destabilising influence in the Levant.  In addition they provide a base for the Russians (rumours are that if Assad fails the Russians will offer the Greeks free money for a Med port).  The benefit from their fall isn't that an anti-American regime falls but that Iran's forward base in the Arab world, Hezbullah's hinterland and Russia's Med port closes down.

Given that Iran and Hezbullah have really lashed themselves to the regime it's almost impossible to see any rebels rebuilding those relationships.  So even if they hate you just as much it would almost certainly be better.  The worst case scenario (assuming Syria doesn't totally collapse) is an isolated nut like 90s Iraq or Libya.

Having said that the US would probably get far more popular support if they helped in the overthrow.  I think even the moral support so far will be noticed - unlike Libyans, I believe the Syrians have never asked for intervention as opposed to money and diplomatic backing.  Certainly in Libya the West's more popular because of intervention (similarly I saw an interview with the Tunisian PM who said he thought this was a new opportunity for US-Arab relations and that he'd never imagined the US would support Tunisia's revolution).  Even if the US doesn't intervene, if there's a Syrian state to negotiate with, I think the collapse of Assad presents a strategic opportunity that it would be mad to miss to influence and help Syria after the conflict.

Despite all of that, I agree with you that we shouldn't intervene.  I think it's too costly, too risky and quite possibly counter-productive.  In my view our goal should be to try and isolate the conflict as much as possible, to provide moral support (especially with the rebels on a roll) and to help in the aftermath.

Good points.  I will have to give this some thought.

[Malthus]

Believe me, I have no love for the Assad dynasty and on a certain level I am sorta cheering for the rebels. But whatever replaces the Assad regime is likely to be just as bad for us if not worse.  I'll be happy if I'm wrong on that.

The jury is still way out, but the preliminary signs from Libya are encouraging.  And Libya is also a decent model for intervention on the relative cheap.

IMO it would be very difficult to be worse than the Assad regime; the bar is set very high for execrableness

The new dictator's wife could easily be less hot than the current one. 

[The Minsky Moment]

I don't think the Syrians want or need a Western deus ex machina to steal their revolutionary success.

Oh I doubt very much doubt that the Syrians would mind getting a little help from whomever.  The Libyan resistance fighters didn't lose any face from the Western intervention; it was still Libyans fighting and taking the ground; the western help just helped even the playing field against a regime that controlled heavy armor/air/etc.

[derspiess]

The new dictator's wife could easily be less hot than the current one. 

I think that's a pretty safe bet.

[Barrister]

Fair enough. But the Libyans needed assistance. In the current situation, I don't think the Syrians want or need a Western deus ex machina to steal their revolutionary success.

That could change of course.

I think the Syrians could use assistance ju8st as much as the Libyans did.  Libya did not feel like there was a deus ex machina - they are still justifiably very proud of winning their own revolution.

And in any event, it certainly appears that the west is assisting in Syria whether or not air power is used.

[citizen k]

Haunting 8 minute Apocalypse Now in Homs walking tour:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LSiwZR9Tcc4

Any updates on how the Syrian rebels view Allah?

You'll love this one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PnQWc2-iXZI&feature=plcp

[DGuller]

He must think Allah is responsible for every breath he takes, and thus makes sure to praise him for that every time.

[Syt]

He must think Allah is responsible for every breath he takes, and thus makes sure to praise him for that every time.

Every breath you take, every move you make, Allah's watching you.

[derspiess]

He must think Allah is responsible for every breath he takes, and thus makes sure to praise him for that every time.

I think he caught wind of how much that annoys us here at Languish, and is doing it just to piss us off.  REAL MATURE, SYRIAN REBEL DUDE.