What can we do to help stop the carnage in Syria

[Watanabe]

If both sides keep fighting there will be carnage. At this point it doesn't look like either side is going to stop because if they do, the other side will just take advantage of that.

Why are you derailing this thread. It's not about whether or not we are more civilized. It's about stopping the carnage in Syria.

Currently, the only feasible way to stop it is if one side one wins. So which side do you want to win?

I agree that I have to be very careful not to appear derailing this thread

I do not see any evidence that one side winning will stop the carnage.
Nor I see any evidence that a common solution has been proposed to stop the carnage

 

[Natan]

I think of sending them chopped liver and chianti. It might stop hunger related carnage.

 

[Watanabe]

Well, we know that Russia cares about Assad, they've been supporting him for years.

And the US cares about the Gulf States.

As Eddie Dane says, it depends what you mean by "help". It seems that there are number of factions in Syria with mutually incompatible goals and objectives and where those goals are so entrenched they cannot be satisfied by a single solution. If Syria remains a single country under some kind of government (dictatorship, democracy, theocracy..... whatever) there are enough internal actors (with external support) to ensure that civil war will re-erupt.

Then again, a fragmentation of Syria will result in smaller states who will no doubt result in a series of border conflicts and allow one or more of those states to become a base of operations for terrorists to attack Israel (certainly) and the West (probably).

Maybe the least worst alternative is to back Assad to the hilt and hope to support him sufficiently well that he is no longer reliant on Iranian funded terrorist support. Maybe a strong dictator is the only plausible solution at the moment but I cannot see the US and Israel being happy about Assad's links to Russia.

I still can not see why dialogue can not solve the problem

 

[Watanabe]

Define help.

IMHO the whole thing vindicates Machiavelli's The Prince.
Better the stability of an iron-fisted dictator than this this crap.

Is it your proposed solution limited to Syria or for all countries?

 

[Border Reiver]

I still can not see why dialogue can not solve the problem

In order for there to be dialogue ALL the parties need to recognize that the other parties have legitimate interests and that compromise may be required in order to achieve a reasonable solution.

When parties have resorted to violence to resolve their issues going to dialogue generally only happens when:

a. One party has all they reasonably want from the conflict;
b. One party has made the decision that further violence will not allow them to achieve their aims; and
c. Both parties recognize that the other side is strong enough to prevent them from achieving more and both parties feel they will be able to hold what they have "won" after the talks.
d. The parties are compelled to stop and start talking by stronger outside party(ies).

So, I ask you, do you actually believe that ANY of the parties involved feel that they can compromise and talk?

 

[Spindrift]

I agree that I have to be very careful not to appear derailing this thread

I do not see any evidence that one side winning will stop the carnage.
Nor I see any evidence that a common solution has been proposed to stop the carnage

Why wouldn't one side winning stop the carnage?

Perhaps there is no solution and Syria will remain in constant civil war.

BTW: You don't have to worry about appearing to derail, you just have to worry about derailing.

 

[LSSBB]

Maybe history can guide us:

What stopped the carnage in each of these cases?

Vietnam, North vs South
US, North vs South
Former Yugoslavia
Rwanda
Korea, North vs South
French Revolution
American Revolution

 

[Natan]

French Revolution

Finally running out of people to guillotine with Robespierre?

 

[LSSBB]

Finally running out of people to guillotine with Robespierre?

In that regard, there is somewhat of a parallel to Rwanda wrt France.

 

[Natan]

In that regard, there is somewhat of a parallel to Rwanda wrt France.

Somewhat. They killed vast amounts but the RPF would never have been able to hold on to the country if there was truly no one left.

 

[erwinl]

Sorry, what?

Saudi Arabia "doesn't really do" intervention?

Yes, they do.

GID in Afghanistan, for example, or intervention in the post-Iraq War in support of Salafists who mostly worked against US-coalition intervention. Or intervention against the protesters in Bahrain.

I expect that Saudi Arabia are doing a fair bit of intervention now, too.

That didn't come out the way I meant.
What I meant was that Saudi Arabia doesn't intervene in the boots on the ground, military advisers/soldiers variety. Not directly send by the state. At least not that I'm aware of.
This as opposed to Iran or Hezbollah (both of whom have military personnel in Syria at this moment).

If they do this kind of intervention. I would be interested to know.

 

[Childlike Empress]

That didn't come out the way I meant.
What I meant was that Saudi Arabia doesn't intervene in the boots on the ground, military advisers/soldiers variety. Not directly send by the state. At least not that I'm aware of.
This as opposed to Iran or Hezbollah (both of whom have military personnel in Syria at this moment).

If they do this kind of intervention. I would be interested to know.

Patrick Cockburn:

[...] There is virtually no state in the region that hasn’t got some stake in the conflict. Jordan, though nervous of a jihadi victory in Syria, is allowing arms shipments from Saudi Arabia to reach rebels in southern Syria by road. Qatar has reportedly spent $3 billion on supporting the rebels over the last two years and has offered $50,000 to every Syrian army defector and his family. In co-ordination with the CIA it has sent seventy military flights to Turkey with arms and equipment for the insurgents. The Tunisian government says that eight hundred Tunisians are fighting on the rebel side but security sources are quoted as saying the real figure is closer to two thousand. [...]

I'm not aware of SA sending soldiers/military advisors, but they send death row inmates. There are auctions where fathers sell their sons to go to Syria as suicide bombers. Not to speak of their vast propaganda Empire with the countless hate preachers like the mad-hatter "Syrian Godfather" Adnan Al-Aroor broadcasting from SA inciting young people to take up arms and '"cut Alawites into pieces".

 

[LSSBB]

You don't have the "core states" properly specified. In last consequence this is what I like to call Empire ("Western" finance capitalism with NATO as its armed wing) against the proponents of a multipolar world. The direct aggressors, mainly Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey, are to different but high degrees (100-80%) puppets of the Empire.

CE, If you would like to continue to use the term "Empire", which already has a definition that seems to require the presence of an emperor or empress, please first identify that personage. In addition, please explain for me how NATO could be the military arm of a group such as "finance capitalism" that has no go governing body and thus no defined means to direct military dispositions.

 

[Childlike Empress]

CE, If you would like to continue to use the term "Empire", which already has a definition that seems to require the presence of an emperor or empress, please first identify that personage. In addition, please explain for me how NATO could be the military arm of a group such as "finance capitalism" that has no go governing body and thus no defined means to direct military dispositions.

I will continue to use that term independently of whether you like and understand it or not, thank you very much. There's a book of the same name that has been wildly popular in Europe and I suspect not so much in the US shortly before 9/11, which you can use as an orientation of what I mean, although I have some fundamental disagreements with it that don't matter for your basic understanding.

 

[Virus]

So how come you don't move to Iran to get away from the Empire? Do you enjoy its freedom, health, safety and wealth too much? That must cause you a lot of internal conflict.

 

[LSSBB]

I will continue to use that term independently of whether you like and understand it or not, thank you very much. There's a book of the same name that has been wildly popular in Europe and I suspect not so much in the US shortly before 9/11, which you can use as an orientation of what I mean, although I have some fundamental disagreements with it that don't matter for your basic understanding.

OK, so you reference a popular book in counter argument. Hopefully you include the popularity of the dictionary in your contest. Just because you find a term convenient to use to flavor your argument does not make it appropriate to properly convey meaning and facilitate mutual understanding.

 

[Childlike Empress]

OK, so you reference a popular book in counter argument. Hopefully you include the popularity of the dictionary in your contest. Just because you find a term convenient to use to flavor your argument does not make it appropriate to properly convey meaning and facilitate mutual understanding.

You made no argument. You nitpicked. The Emperor you miss is Money, which is Debt under the current system, and an abstract leader. Governing bodies on several levels are venues like the Bilderberg meeting. I could have simply written "US Empire and its satellites" but that really isn't appropriate and misses the point, at least more than "Empire" in the Hardt/Negri sense, as national systems are long overpowered by supra-national structures, even the US. But this is really not central to the core of the post I made for whose purpose I was clear enough.

 

[LSSBB]

You made no argument. You nitpicked. The Emperor you miss is Money, which is Debt under the current system, and an abstract leader. Governing bodies on several levels are venues like the Bilderberg meeting. I could have simply written "US Empire and its satellites" but that really isn't appropriate and misses the point, at least more than "Empire" in the Hardt/Negri sense, as national systems are long overpowered by supra-national structures, even the US. But this is really not central to the core of the post I made for whose purpose I was clear enough.

There you go, you named your emperor. Was that so hard? Now, if only it were an emperor consciously making decisions...

 

[Childlike Empress]

There you go, you named your empires. Was that so hard? Now, if only it were an emperor consciously making decisions...

If Obama would decide to admit defeat and put his power into implementing the steps I outlined - and there are signs of that happening -, it would do a great deal to end the tragedy, even if he isn't as I wrote "in last consequence" the leader of the structure I defined as "Empire". He certainly would have to watch his back.

 

[uke2se]

I'd say one thing we can do is influence our governments to allow any and all refugees to stay in our respective countries, and rebuild their lives. We can send humanitarian aid. We can keep diplomatic pressure up for a peaceful solution.