This September 5, 2013 New York Times article discusses how brutal many of those trying to overthrow Assad are:
The prisoners, seven in all, were captured Syrian soldiers. Five were trussed, their backs marked with red welts. They kept their faces pressed to the dirt as the rebels’ commander recited a bitter revolutionary verse.
“For fifty years, they are companions to corruption,” he said. “We swear to the Lord of the Throne, that this is our oath: We will take revenge.”
The moment the poem ended, the commander, known as “the Uncle,” fired a bullet into the back of the first prisoner’s head. His gunmen followed suit, promptly killing all the men at their feet.
This scene, documented in a video smuggled out of Syria a few days ago by a former rebel who grew disgusted by the killings, offers a dark insight into how many rebels have adopted some of the same brutal and ruthless tactics as the regime they are trying to overthrow.The article goes on to discuss the question of how many of the rebels are connected to al-Qaeda, and how many are "moderates." But even secular forces, such as this charming bunch, seem to be pretty brutal.
One of the comments on the article pointed out that Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt have all been at least in part the result of U.S. intervention to promote Arab democracy in the last couple of years. The results of this supposed "smart diplomacy" argue for leaving well enough alone.
There are those who argue that "Muslim democracy" is pretty much a hopeless task. I am not convinced that it is impossible, but Obama's crowd is making Bush's efforts in Iraq look pretty sad.
The only intervention that makes sense is one that seeks to defeat Assad and all the current insurgent factions, which requires an outside power running the interim government. But that's more intervention than anyone could stomach.
ReplyDeleteHeck, right about now I'd favor deposing Assad and installing Alec Baldwin.
The United States will be blamed no matter what we do in Syria - intervene, don't intervene, limited intervention, major intervention. There is no upside for us. After all, if France is the only person on our side, we are ON THE WRONG SIDE.
ReplyDeleteSo, lets get blamed for not doing anything at all. Lets not get any US service members killed. Lets not spend any borrowed money. Lets not become Al Qaida's air force.
The time to intervene was in 1990, when Iraq moved their WMD's to the Bekka valley in Lebanon (controlled by Syria). Too bad we blew it then, but now is not the time. The rest of the world expects us to fix their problems, but without any bloodshed, without any muss, without any fuss.
Sorry, but no can do.
Damascus Delenda Est! And Pax Americana is an idea whose time may have come - but not with the current clown in chief in the Presidency.