How can peace in Syria be achieved?

[HoverBoarder]

Doesn't need to when Friedman provides so much material up front, for free!

Friedman has a generally good analysis of this and other situations, while Taibbi is just giggling over himself.

Which is inline with the Rolling Stones in general. Fun and entertainment, and not so much serious analysis. Which is not at all bad, it's just their niche market.

 

[Praktik]

Friedman has a generally good analysis of this and other situations

If I ever want to find out what the Beltway view of a foreign policy issue is - I go to Friedman. He's like the Candy Crowley of American foreign policy.

If want to get closer to the reality of the situation, i go to other, less center-of-the-road establishment voices who aren't blinded by the shared assumptions of the foreign policy establishment.

I still don't know why Zakaria has him on his show so often!

 

[De_Bunk]

The only other solution is to send in USA/UK/NATO/UN troops and kick butt...

Ignore or kick ass..Diplomacy isn't going to work in this instance..as proven..

DB

 

[Praktik]

The only other solution is to send in USA/UK/NATO/UN troops and kick butt...

Ignore or kick ass..Diplomacy isn't going to work in this instance..as proven..

DB

Clearly, that is the ONLY other solution, and a proven one too! Given the success of western led military interventions in the middle east I can't see how it could go wrong!

 

[HoverBoarder]

If I ever want to find out what the Beltway view of a foreign policy issue is - I go to Friedman. He's like the Candy Crowley of American foreign policy.

If want to get closer to the reality of the situation, i go to other, less center-of-the-road establishment voices who aren't blinded by the shared assumptions of the foreign policy establishment.

I still don't know why Zakaria has him on his show so often!

Friedman is good, but not always right.

I would have him on my show if I had a show too.

 

[HoverBoarder]

The only other solution is to send in USA/UK/NATO/UN troops and kick butt...

Ignore or kick ass..Diplomacy isn't going to work in this instance..as proven..

DB

Military interventions are never simple, and whether there was intervention or not, diplomacy would be needed to help set up a new functional government of Syria.

Developments with the Syrian Opposition Coalition may be one of the biggest developments towards bringing peace to the region, and that certainly involves a lot of diplomacy.


Syria crisis: Gulf states recognise Syria opposition

Six Gulf states have recognised a new Syrian opposition coalition as the country's "legitimate representative".

The National Coalition for Syrian Revolutionary and Opposition Forces was unveiled in Doha on Sunday, aimed at uniting the various factions seeking to overthrow President Bashar al-Assad.

Western nations and Turkey welcomed the coalition's creation.

The 22-member Arab League later recognised the group as the "legitimate representative" of Syria's opposition.

 

[Praktik]

Ah interesting.. nice find and thanks for posting! That is promising.

Also its difficult to launch western interventions in places that are client states to powerful nations with nukes, like Syria is to the Russians. Unless you have a really tasty bone to throw them. Like REALLY tasty! (maybe give em back Alaska??)

 

[HoverBoarder]

Ah interesting.. nice find and thanks for posting! That is promising.

Also its difficult to launch western interventions in places that are client states to powerful nations with nukes, like Syria is to the Russians. Unless you have a really tasty bone to throw them. Like REALLY tasty! (maybe give em back Alaska??)

Thanks!

As for your second part, Russia knows that we don't want, and can't afford to intervene directly in Syria.

They are also looking for a way out of the quagmire.

 

[trustbutverify]

If things continue in the current direction, Putin is going to face a key decision shortly. Allow Assad and his Baathists to be overrun, or double down and make a major military commitment including large scale arms supply and who knows what else. At risk is the possibility of a major humiliation on the world stage, versus an unpleasant but spinable geopolitical defeat.

 

[MarkCorrigan]

Why bother posting such bigoted bunk, De_Bunk? Go back to sleep!

Good god, that may be the first time I've ever been in complete agreement with you in the politics sections here.

I think I need to sit down.

 

[Darth Rotor]

What's with all the 'did you go to school' attitude?

Especailly when you largely agree with my analysis.

You appear to not understand that the price we paid may be a common currency that most nations need to pay for freedom, or a semi/somewhat free political environment, such as we have developed over time.

No
Free
Lunch

 

[Darth Rotor]

Now, however, Iraq looks good compared to Syria.

That was a good line. Made me chuckle. It's sort of like me looking handsome, compared to Jabba the Hut.

Mark, what DeBunk posted wasn't bigoted. It was, however, dripping with sarcasm.

 

[HoverBoarder]

You appear to not understand that the price we paid may be a common currency that most nations need to pay for freedom, or a semi/somewhat free political environment, such as we have developed over time.

No
Free
Lunch

Yeah I got it the first time you said it.

Great point.

Tell the tens of thousands of people dying in Syria that life is hard.

 

[HoverBoarder]

If things continue in the current direction, Putin is going to face a key decision shortly. Allow Assad and his Baathists to be overrun, or double down and make a major military commitment including large scale arms supply and who knows what else. At risk is the possibility of a major humiliation on the world stage, versus an unpleasant but spinable geopolitical defeat.

I don't think Russia really has that much to lose now that the economy in Syria has been severely damaged.

It's mostly now about saving face.

Which they have shown is a lot more important to them than the lives of the Syrian people.

 

[trustbutverify]

Being perceived to to have lost a political skirmish with the West is one thing. Losing a proxy war is a whole different ballgame.

 

[McHrozni]

Sure, that would work great, I like the ideas. Although if something were to be used now, it would have to be a pretty immediate design change.

Good ideas though.

Certainly. Degradable propellants would be a significant change, the ones we use today are pretty stable.

How about manpads with timers on detonators and homing system that make them both inert and useless after, say, 30 days? That's a rather minor change, amd the system cam be easily designed as a failsafe. Use a battery that will use charge in specified time, once that happens the detonator and homing system become useless and can't be repaired (in some way).

McHrozni

 

[HoverBoarder]

Being perceived to to have lost a political skirmish with the West is one thing. Losing a proxy war is a whole different ballgame.

Good point, they are pretty worried about a new Syrian government being more Western friendly.

 

[HoverBoarder]

Certainly. Degradable propellants would be a significant change, the ones we use today are pretty stable.

How about manpads with timers on detonators and homing system that make them both inert and useless after, say, 30 days? That's a rather minor change, amd the system cam be easily designed as a failsafe. Use a battery that will use charge in specified time, once that happens the detonator and homing system become useless and can't be repaired (in some way).

McHrozni

Very interesting, I at first thought that it would have to be something inherent in the weapon itself, so they couldn't just get more ammo elsewhere, but anti-air homing missiles would be rather hard to come by, and so that might be a very good way to go about it.

Manpads with satellite communication that required authorization before firing could be another way to maintain control of the weapons. That way, instead of just a timeframe, we would know if it was attempting to be used outside of the country before it was allowed to be fired.

 

[trustbutverify]

If necessary, losing this particular client would be a bitter pill to swallow for Putin's regime, especially from a status perspective. However, it will be way, way worse losing Assad after having commited Russian military prestige to his survival (I'm not refering to direct Russian intervention here). Looking at how the USG handled losing its client in Egypt, the intelligent move is to start to consider folding rather than chasing a lost pot.

 

[McHrozni]

Very interesting, I at first thought that it would have to be something inherent in the weapon itself, so they couldn't just get more ammo elsewhere, but anti-air homing missiles would be rather hard to come by, and so that might be a very good way to go about it.

Manpads with satellite communication that required authorization before firing could be another way to maintain control of the weapons. That way, instead of just a timeframe, we would know if it was attempting to be used outside of the country before it was allowed to be fired.

Not bad, but it would limit their effectiveness if the communication was compromised in some way, such as firing from within a building.

There are many things that could be done to help the rebels significantly. Now that Syrian opposition is united and getting recognition, giving them aid requires no authorisation whatsoever. I imagine that a few manpads alone - say a dozen - would already change the dynamics significantly.

McHrozni