Syria? You want to intervene? Specifically what would you do?

[Are_grits_groceries]

What are the immediate steps you would take?
Where and with what components?
What groups are you helping? What happens when you leave?

I have no idea what to do in Syria? It is a mixed up hot mess.

Believe me.I want to stop the gas attacks and help. How?
It's brass tacks time. No general 'boots on the ground' shite or 'we must act to defend freedom'.
There has to be a specific plan with an endgame in mind or we are into one more bog of war.

The curve we should have been ahead of is waaaay behind us. Even at that point, getting ahead of that curve was problematic.

[Recursion]

1. +1000

What would an intervention mean to Lebanon? Turkey? Israel? Iraq? Jordan? What concrete military objectives could we achieve? How would they impact regional security?

[RKP5637]

2. Same questions I have. "It is a mixed up hot mess." n/t

[xchrom]

3. du rec.

[99Forever]

4. I'd ...

.. stay out of it. Not our fight, not our problem.

[KG]

5. how hard can this be: kill people to keep people from killing people.

easy peasy lemon squeezy.

[Benton D Struckcheon]

7. Let's lay out the options and the players

In order, from Apocalyptic to Just Plain Horrible:

1. Apocalyptic: On one side we have Hezbollah. On the other we have rebels, made up in large part of Salafists and Al Qaeda. We now know that a) Assad has this stuff, and b) it's in useable condition.
As a direct result of that attack, the rebels, who prior had been told NOT to go after the known CW sites Assad has, are now targeting them.
And, if Assad has them, Hezbollah will.
No one, not us, not Europe, not Israel, is going to tolerate a situation where every terrorist group in the region has this stuff in reach and has a very good chance of getting their hands on it. That's just a fact. That means inaction is not an option.

2. Just Plain Horrible: we (by "we" I don't mean just the US; NATO action is more likely, given that Turkey is right there on the border) go in to secure these sites and keep them out of the hands of Hezbollah and the Salafists/Al Qaeda. This is a lot easier said than done.

3. Just Plain Horrible II: diplomatic solution, where Russia gets Assad out in favor of some sort of coalition gov't of Sunnis and Alawites. The problem w/this is that Hezbollah and the Salafists/Al Qaeda won't disengage. Hezbollah will be looking at losing its regional patron, and the Salafists/Al Qaeda are of course going to want to get their hands on that CW regardless. Neither side will have much to lose. After a time, this gov't will lose credibility and its grip on the country, assuming it had one to begin with. The CW will still be there, under UN supervision I'm sure. But that will need to be backed by force to keep it out of the hands of all these wonderful people. Back to option 1 or 2.

So, inaction could easily lead to a situation no one will tolerate, but action is equally intolerable.
I'm just glad I'm not the President. No matter which way he turns he will be savagely criticized.

[Are_grits_groceries]

10. And Iran is in the mix.

I think they are backing Hezbollah, but at this point who knows what unholy alliances have been made.
We don't have and have never had the intel we need in the Middle East and South Asia. Even with good intel, it probably wouldn't help.

[freshwest]

14. Hezbollah is anti-Israeli. Will they get pulled in? This an End Timers' dream.

[JustAnotherGen]

8. Someone at the UN

Needs to say the word Genocide and a global effort with every single member that signed onto the Genocide Conventions needs to engage in a full court press.

Genocide over rides individual country/national interests and goes to Humanity's interests.

But that will never happen. It didn't happen Rwanda when we knew precisely what was going on - it won't happen now. Me - I'm waiting for a statement from Paul Kagame.

ETA- I understand Samantha Power missed an emergency meeting on Syria - but I still hold her in very high regard. However, she did say in her confirmation hearings that "we blew it in Rwanda".

[bahrbearian]

9. For the repugs its, Bomb bomb bomb, bomb Iran

[pampango]

11. If there were a way to help (in other world crises there have been),I would be for it. Unfortunately

in this case anything we do will make a horrible situation even worse.

We should always keep trying to understand what is going on in the world. We should keep trying to understand who is doing what to whom in Syria, but that does mean we can always do something to help.

[kenny blankenship]

12. Arm Al Qaeda to the teeth! It's the PRAGMATIC thing to do.

We've done it before, we can do it again!
I've been away - is Bush still Prezidentin'? I can't believe we're even talking about dumb shit like this.

The following been true for ALL MY LIFE: middling in the Meddle East has brought us nothing but tears.

And this (prospective) episode would likely make the recent Iraq Adventure look like a pleasant garden party in nice weather. Snap out of it, Democrats.

[TreasonousBastard]

13. Nobody has any idea what to do in Syria...

look at how Iraq and Egypt ended up-- and they were the "easy" ones.

A whole bunch of badasses in a temporary almost-a-truce to get Assad out so they can fight each other for control.

There are no good answers.

There may be no answers at all.

[freshwest]

15. If there no answers at all, we should stay out. It'd be worse than Afghanistan.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. Looks like Obama's trying to stay out, but there's a lot of...

pressure to "do something".

Sometimes it really sucks being a superpower. Damned if you do and damned if you don't-- it's not the best answer you're looking for but the least bad one.

After WWII, some British bigshot said to Truman something to the effect of, "It's all yours now. Thank God we don't have to run the world any more."