1. Rational =/= Morally superior. Bashar's regime is responsible for most deaths in Syria, and has indulged in torture and oppression that wouldn't shame ISIS.
2. There is really no debate about what happened with the chemical bombings. I've had many debates about this with posters on this forum at the time, so it's impossible for me to repeat the same points again. Western intelligence has rock-solid evidence that it was the regime, and even Russia tacitly acknowledged it when it pressured Assad to surrender all of his chemical arsenal. Aside from the extensive evidence gathered from eye witnesses, international organizations and intelligence, there is also the fact that the conspiracy theory just doesn't make any sense. If the rebels somehow got their hands on chemical weapons, a delivery mechanism and the necessary expertise to operate this, why would they proceed to use it on an elaborate, risky and ultimately pointless false flag attack? If the rebels could stage a chemical attack on Damascus, how about gassing the Presidential Palace and ending it right there?
3. The rebels are comprised of many different groups, the most dominant of which are Islamist groups that are obviously cruel and barbaric. But that has no bearing on the fact that the Assad regime has zero legitimacy to continue ruling Syria.
2. Excuse me for not having enough credence in western intelligence with matters specifically regarding weapons of mass destruction and Middle Eastern dictators, lol. They'll have to earn their credibility back.
I also don't see how Assad surrendering his stockpile means Russia tacitly acknowledged anything. Back then the drums of war were being heard throughout the world for another American invasion, and it could be a move just to soothe those drums. They still say Assad did not use them. Fair points about how they would get the equipment and knowledge to use them, but keep in mind these groups get backing from donors in powerful states, with some western trained militia as well. I don't know why they didn't just gas Assad, but its not enough suspicion to confirm blame and guilt - not even close. I still maintain my point about the flipside on why a dictator would risk using it knowing it will incur the wrath of the west on his soil.
Bashar's culpability doesn't start at the protests, it starts at the decade before that when he could have started to modernize and liberalize his country and didn't. Syria is a mafia state - it was literally ruled by decades by a family of criminals and their cronies. It doesn't take a genius to understand that this is not a sustainable model. I don't know if Assad is just weak and couldn't resist the survival instincts of people in his regime, or if he's just a power hungry asshole, but in either case he has the most responsibility for the dire situation in his country.
You are not acknowledging that despite ruling with hard right hand, he was also the most stabilizing force who took active part in international politics and diplomacy. Ever since he came to power he was slapped by sanctions by the Bush administration and severe opposition efforts from Saudi Arabia (Bush and Cheney justified sanctions via Syria's support for Tehran, Hezbollah and Hamas). Yet he managed to navigate Syria through economic development:
Under his rule, Syria has opened its doors to foreign investment and private ownership. Cellphones, Internet service and satellite TV have proliferated. The capital, Damascus, has been transformed from a sleepy socialist backwater into the beginnings of a thriving modern capital, with shiny glass offices, European fashion outlets and trendy cafes serving flavored lattes to a hip new elite.
for Bernie, Trump and other anti-Hillary supporters: An example of more flip flopping Hillary - regarding Syria and Assad, further down that article, lel
Despite heavy support for Iran and anti-Israeli elements in Syria, he tried to balance the act and he was hated for it when his top aide was assassinated in the middle of peace talks he tried to negotiate with Israel :
Suleiman's murder comes at a critical time for Syria, which is presently engaged in a delicate balancing act of pursuing indirect peace talks with Israel and improved ties to the West, at the same time as maintaining its relations with Hizballah and Iran. In exchange for the return of the Golan Heights, captured by Israel in 1967, the Israeli government demands that Syria curtails its strategic alliance with Iran and its backing for Hizballah and for Palestinian militant groups. Still, since Syria and Israel revealed in May that they are negotiating via Turkish mediation, Damascus has paradoxically strengthened its military and economic alliance with Tehran.
Some Syria watchers believe that while Assad has a firm grip on power, the pressure of juggling relations with Israel and Iran is causing stresses within the regime.
"There is talk now about moving to direct peace negotiations between the Syrians and Israelis, but it's hard to reconcile those talks when Syria's military and security apparatus is so heavily supported by Iran," said Andrew Tabler, a Damascus-based Syria analyst. "I can't imagine how they are going to square all that."
A simple search of foreign relations archive of Syria between 2002-2009 reveal Assad persistently inviting EU and US to improve relations and lift sanctions. US outlets kept slamming him for not doing enough to cull relations with Iran and anti-Israeli support via Hammas and Hezbollah. However, EU lauded some of his efforts to bring elements of moderate Islam, and development albeit via heavy handed means:
But anyone who sees Assad as a political lightweight, as someone easily manipulated by his advisors and a marginal figure ridiculed or at best ignored by the major players on the world stage is making a mistake. Syria is in the process of becoming a decisive force in the Middle East once again.
Karim Aga Khan IV, the spiritual leader of roughly 20 million Ismailites worldwide, is visiting the Syrian capital Damascus. The Ismailites, who live primarily in the Middle East, East Africa, Central Asia and on the Indian subcontinent, often constitute the social avant-garde. The Shiite community is also an influential minority in Syria. The Aga Khan Development Network is the world's largest private aid organization, and the man who founded it, 71-year-old Aga Khan, is considered a leading representative of moderate Islam. Its his personal relationships with political and business leaders in the West and the East as much as his billions that make him a much sought-after advisor. The visit to Damascus is the imam's fourth meeting with Assad in recent years.
On declining torture rates and efforts to bring Sunni's in administration:
Spiegal Online said:
"It is true that there is less torture under Bashar than under his father," says Salih. But he also fails to recognize any signs of political liberalization, pointing out the government's recent treatment of regime critics, like the arrest of former businessman Riad Seif, 62, who was awarded the Human Rights Award of the German city of Weimar in 2003. Since January Seif, who has cancer, has been in prison with other members of an opposition group that had dared to publish a pro-democratic manifesto.
For Hassoun, the notion of a theocracy on earth is deeply suspect. He believes in a country where government and religion are separate, "in a social order based on justice and in which Muslims, Christians and Jews live in peace with one another." But to avoid sounding too much like a pacifist, the Grand Mufti makes it clear that, in his view, Israel's occupation policy and the outrageous injustices against the Palestinians are the root of all evil in the Middle East. "Suicide attacks are a regrettable reaction to this."
Hassoun was a member of the powerless Syrian parliament for eight years. Although his fellow Sunnis proposed him for the position of Grand Mufti, he was appointed by the president. Does he believe that this makes him Assad's mouthpiece? "Absolutely not," he says. Although he is generally in agreement with the president, says Hassoun, he repeatedly has grounds for criticism.
Hassoun and Assad get together several times a year for scheduled one-on-one meetings, and they meet more frequently when special problems arise. The Grand Mufti says that the complaints he hears from citizens often relate to rising inflation, corruption and unemployment. Hassoun, who sees himself as a modernizer, wants his country to open up and investors to come to Syria. "But it must happen gently," says the religious leader.
In early August, Syrian Brigadier General Mohammed Suleiman was shot on the beach near Tartus. The attackers had arrived by sea and used silencers with their weapons. Suleiman was believed to be the head of the secret Syrian weapons of mass destruction program and a close confidant of Assad. He was preparing for a trip to Tehran when he was killed. Mohammed S., the investigative reporter, is firmly convinced that the Israelis were involved. But he also believes that he can prove that precise information about the locations of the two prominent murder victims stemmed from someone close to Assad.
But isn't this an overly bold theory, the notion that Assad cooperated with the Israelis? What could have possessed him to do this?
"The trail will not lead all the way to the presidential palace," says Mohammed. "But the interests are clear. Assad is seeking to distance himself from the most radical members of his environment. In addition to the two men, he has also neutralized the provocative intelligence chief, his brother-in-law Assaf Shaukat, in a less irrevocable way, by having him placed under house arrest. And in recent days he has told his close advisors that he plans to deport Khalid Mashaal, the head of Hamas for many years. He is expected to move his base from Damascus to Khartoum in Sudan."
Women also enjoyed more rights and freedom for an Islamic majorty authoritarian country.
Granted - he did it with a brutal rule, who jailed and tortured opposition. But this is the Middle East where some Islamic countries are suppressing deep sectarian resentments which these dictators sometimes keep a lid on. Opposition does not always mean it is for the better if it will only lead to more swollen tension among the sects.
Look at all Arab spring countries today. Yemen is in a brutal war. Egypt is under the military now repeatedly committing human rights violations. We "liberated" Iraq and Libya to allow democracy to take it - and blood is being spilled everywhere to form those democracies in the vacuum. On that point - some of us say Assad cannot stay because he runs torture chambers for those who are politically against him. Yet we look after Saudi Arabia's interests in the region. The country which imprisons any opposition or voice of dissent against the monarchy. Which publicly beheads or crucifies those people.
Yet, we'll selectively ignore that for now - for the greater good - to take Assad out - for running his government the same way?
Cromat said:
Honestly with Russia in the picture I don't know how feasible this is at the moment, but I have read proposals that included the following elements:
1. Create an international coalition to invade Syria from the north.
Good solution there, but pretty radical. Vote for Trump because he's the only one with such a plan. He might also put an end to U.S.'s hypocritical alliance by stopping missions we carry out in behalf of the Gulf states, perhaps we could look at Middle East and deal with some of his bigoted domestic policies. Or maybe pressure Hillary when she'll be elected by heavy majority, which she'll just laugh off and continue Bush'esqe friendships with the Gulf.
You really aren't going to get "proof" in cases like that, but you can make some draw some conclusions based on what we know.
It's pretty clear that ISIS and Assad mostly ignored each other in favor of killing the other groups ( now that's changing somewhat since most other groups are weak or dead)
Data from 2014.
Around 64 percent of verifiable ISIS attacks in Syria this year targeted other non-state groups, an analysis of the IHS Jane's Terrorism and Insurgency Center's (JTIC) database showed. Just 13 percent of the militants' attacks during the same period — the year through Nov. 21 — targeted Syrian security forces. That's a stark contrast to the Sunni extremist group's operations in Iraq, where more than half of ISIS attacks (54 percent) were aimed at security forces.
However, JTIC's data shows that his counterterrorism operations — more than two-thirds of which were airstrikes — skew heavily towards groups whose names aren't ISIS. Of 982 counterterrorism operations for the year up through Nov. 21, just 6 percent directly targeted ISIS.
You really aren't going to get "proof" in cases like that, but you can make some draw some conclusions based on what we know.
It's pretty clear that ISIS and Assad mostly ignored each other in favor of killing the other groups ( now that's changing somewhat since most other groups are weak or dead)
I wonder why ISIS is not targeting Assad forces. Or are they? It's probably just a consequence of them being in the North.
Seems pretty logical for Assad to concentrate on the North-West.
