Civil War in Syria

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

What was the symbolism to the removal of the third star and reversal of red and green?

The current Syrian flag is the flag the United Arab Republic had.  It took the stripes from the Egyptian flag and place two stars (for Egypt and Syria) in the remaining Pan-Arab color.  The three stars in the old 1932 flag represent three chunks of the French Mandate of Syria (Aleppo, Damascus and Deir es Zor) that were combined to form the autonomous Republic of Syria in 1930.  When two additional chunks of the Mandate (Jebal Duze and Latakia) were added to Syria, they didn't bother to add more stars.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I don't think Assad is dumb enough to think a revived État des Alaouites would be anything more than a short term solution.  Of course, he hay have come to the conclusion that he has no long term solution.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Is it me, or is the Syrian civil war starting to look as much like Bosnia as Libya?

I'm worried that it reminds me somewhat of Congo.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That article is way too rosy about the results of the sort of intervention it calls for.  I haven't anything that half-baked since Cheney and Company were sounding the war drums for us to kick Saddam out of Iraq.   The sad fact is that sometimes there is no good option, in which case, let's for once pick the least expensive, which means not arming the Syrian opposition ourselves.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The 'least expensive option' isn't the one that will prevent the most suffering.

I see no reason to believe that arming the Syrian opposition now will achieve that.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Syrian military at start of crisis numbered ~300,000 people.  Turkey is estimating that over the past year a full 30k of those have either defected or deserted.

Still leaves 270K plus any expansion Assad may have done.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Meet Manaf Tlass:

Looks like a dead ringer for Tony Curtis in this photo.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Meanwhile, Iran TV: 48 Iranians kidnapped in Syria

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I have to wonder if this is a false flag operation intended to justify sending in Iranian "security personnel".

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why does it show Kurds in Syria but not Turkey or Iraq?

In the case of Turkey, I don't think they keep official statistics on the "mountain Turks".  It's only recently that Turkish governments have even begin to admit that the Kurds might be something other than Turks using a local dialect.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

The main problem is, any attack on Assad's WMD's is likely to release them, not simply destroy them.  It's why it is essentially impossible for a pre-emptive strike to be done, since we would in effect be releasing chemical agents that would undoubtedly affect nearby civilian areas.  Indeed, if Assad is smart, he likely has chosen to mix those chemicals near civilian areas.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Curious what the Alawites of Iskenderun think about Turkey's involvement in the Syrian civil war.

Probably they are thankful they were hijacked by Turkey back in 1939 and thus out of most of this mess.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With nerve agents, deploying antidotes is risky.  If you give yourself the antidote because you think you've come in contact with one, but you haven't, then you can potentially kill yourself that way as well.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

UN Peacekeepers are useless.

Not really.  At times they make very effective hostages.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

With nerve agents, deploying antidotes is risky.  If you give yourself the antidote because you think you've come in contact with one, but you haven't, then you can potentially kill yourself that way as well.

Also, many of them kill too quickly for an antidote to be deployed.

Only in such high concentrations that you likely would have been killed by a conventional weapon hitting the same spot.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

So would anyone be opposed to providing the rebels with masks?

Not me, but if this was a nerve agent, masks wouldn't be an absolute boon.  Nerve agents can be absorbed through the skin, altho they are more effective if they contact the eyes, nose, and/or mouth.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

That's been clear ever since the Soviets Russians said last year that they weren't going to take him in if he decided to flee.  He has no other choice now.  If he stops fighting, he's dead.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

I don't see the problem here.  If the situation described, Assad either losing control over his CW or transferring them to Hezbollah, were to start to occur, it would make sense for Israel to act.  Thus it also makes sense to be making plans on what to do if it decides it must act.  War plans need not indicate a desire or intention to activate them.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Mrs. Assad is pregnant with their 4th child:
http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/28/16745634-report-syria-president-assad-announces-wife-asma-is-pregnant?lite&ocid=msnhp&pos=5

Why do I suspect she'll soon be traveling to a foreign medical clinic for her pre-natal care?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Why would Syria want Turkey in the war? Color me skeptical.

Pro-Assad bombers doesn't necessarily mean bombers taking orders from Assad.  They could just be members of some pro-Assad militia lashing out at Turkey for aiding the rebels, not really thinking through the geopolitical consequences.

Possible, but a false flag operation is also possible,

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/07/12/us-syria-crisis-idUSBRE96B08A20130712

FSA (moderate rebels) declare war on Islamist rebels.

Not too surprising.  An Islamist government wouldn't be much better for them than an Assad win and unless they expel the Islamists from their midst they have no hope of ever getting enough support to topple Assad.  Of course the question now is can they do it or will the what had been a two and a half way war that is now a three way war become a two way war between Assad and the Islamists?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

UN Security Council is getting reports that a nerve gas attack has killed over 1000 in Damascus suburbs.

That should be the trigger point then. There's gonna be too much pressure to act.

Not really.  As it done so on previous occasions, Russia is already saying this was a false flag operation by the rebels.  This certainly won't get the UN involved. Nor do I see the US eager to bear the costs of policing this mess.  Europe may want to, but does it have the capability?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Not really.  As it done so on previous occasions, Russia is already saying this was a false flag operation by the rebels.  This certainly won't get the UN involved. Nor do I see the US eager to bear the costs of policing this mess.  Europe may want to, but does it have the capability?

Of course it does; it's got carriers, it's got Tomahawks and its got a good deal of fighter jets.

And whatcha gonna do when your stocks run low?  Unless Uncle Sugar gets involved the ability of Europe to sustain an air war in Syria is limited. Europe was barely able to handle being the frontman on Libya and that was with a good deal of US logistical support.  Syria is tougher than Libya for a whole host of reasons.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Actually the French played the main role in wiping out Gaddafi's air force, and that part of the operation went incredibly easy.

Also, for all the stuff that occurred later, the actual invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq went off with very few hitches.

Wars don't end with the initial invasion tho.  Even if the west limits itself to being the Free Syrian Air Force, much as we did in Libya, Syria will be both costlier and longer than Libya, especially if we also get drawn into the fight against the Syrian Islamic Front.

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

There is no oil in Syria.

Perhaps not, but getting rid of the Assad regime would further isolate the mullahs of Iran and leave terrorist groups like Hezbollah hanging in the wind and vulnerable to Lebanon (now freed of Syrian domination) and Israel.  I am sure both states would be more than happy to put Hezbollah in its place. 

That is my interest in the matter -geopolitical. 

Personally I am terrified of the prospect of a bosnia-type situation emerging. Supporting any one side would likely just lead to ethnic conflict on an even wider scale. Also I am not so sure that toppling the Syrian gov. would be as easy as Libya (and that obviously took a good amount of time).

------------------------

Well, we avoided intervening for about two years now, and your fears have become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Would intervention two years have necessarily produced a better outcome?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

All this is assuming the Libyan-style intervention in question had been designed to aid the rebels in overthrowing the Assad regime, as opposed to merely making a damned statement of our displeasure like President Obama is urging...    

It also assumes that a Libyan-style intervention would have had a similar effect in Syria.  That is a rather large assumption to make.  You are making the same damn mistake that Rumsfeld and Cheney made about Iraq, that optimistic assumptions about how the aftermath of fighting will inevitably become the reality.  Yeah, we can smash Assad's military, just as we did Saddam's, but winning the war is the easy part.  Winning the peace is even more important and there is no reason to think Syria would fall into line as easily as you think it would.