Solving Syria

[Matteo]

When it comes to ameliorating the problem in Syria, it seems like we've restricted ourselves to either a) supporting the rebels or b) supporting Assad. Unsurprisingly, both are as bad each other. Some of the Syrian opposition are extremists and nationalist fundamentalists that have been exposed in committing unparalleled acts of inhumanity, such as the beheading and murder of Christians and other foreigners. They are not fighting to dethrone Assad and restore the country's sovereignty - they're lunatics who are mindlessly killing the civilian population. Assad is a despotic dictator, whose family has ruled the state for well over 20 years, and has pretty committed the same atrocities the rebels have.

In terms of outside influence, Russia and the United States seem to be the most vocal here. Russia supports Assad and the US support the rebels. Russia see a strong Syrian alliance as a valuable political weapon in a very resourceful and strategic geographic region and the US are merely trying to overthrow Assad's regime and replace it with a more pro-Western government for reasons of resources and stability.

While hundreds of people get slaughtered in Syria everyday, we've got the US and Russia basically having aimless, empty diplomatic discussions that ultimately get nowhere. And it's staggering because the best way to solve Syria is simply for both countries to take it on the chin and admit they're aiding, funding, and supporting lunatics. It's that simple. Russia and the US need to agree that both sides are as bad as each other and they both need to work diplomatically (along with the other members on the UN Security Council) to install a new government. That means, overthrow Assad and exile the rebels. Of course such an implementation will be difficult and it will require a lot of time and effort, but it's better than the crap that is unfolding in Syria now. Currently, Syria is on the verge of becoming a failed state. There is no order and stability anymore. The stories you read, the videos you see - it is downright heartbreaking that this still going on. The problem is, both the US and Russia think they would be conceding to power and substanding themselves if one of the country's came out and said "it's time to work together". It's international relations 101, really. This tainted Cold War mentality both nations are still holding is blocking any rational and logical outcome to this international crisis.

That is my proposition, anyway. What are your two cents? How can we solve Syria? At this stage, it is all but too likely Assad will win the 2014 election (unconstitutionally, of course), and this will create even more instability in the nation, perhaps leading 2014 as being Syria's deadliest year yet.

[Buck]

A nuke is the quickest way.

Honestly, I'm just fed up with America being the policemen of the world. I think it's basically the main reason we're so hated. We can't even get our own house in order, but we expect to be able to police the world.

I'm sorry if that makes me a heartless prick. We should get our own shit together before trying to fix anyone else, because it makes us hypocrites.

Russia has their fair share of bullshit, too.

[AkydefGoldberg]

Compare the approaches from the West to Libya and Syria.

In the former, Gaddafi was an easy pantomime villian (and he did do bad things, no doubt) play-ground bully who the West could easily bully and help the rebels to oust Gaddafi. But look at Libya now, it still has that element of instability.

In Syria, there have been hundreds of thousands dead, hundreds of thousands displaced and yet the West, Russia all remain hesitant to take decisive action.

I wish noDQ, the world would follow your way but ain't happening. Too much pride, too much ego and too much money at stake for the Russians selling all that equipment to Assad.

The rebels fighting on the ground aren't the same ones who are using diplomacy (the anti-Assad coalition, the Syrian Revolutionary Council) to oust Assad.

Best way to change things is for the coalition to unite fully as at the moment, they seem fragmented with differences. Hope Russia can get Assad to step aside and leave Syria and avoid punishment for his crimes, and for the West to engage in dialogue from the anti Assad coalition.

I can't see peace forthcoming sadly.

[Matteo]

A nuke is the quickest way.

Honestly, I'm just fed up with America being the policemen of the world. I think it's basically the main reason we're so hated. We can't even get our own house in order, but we expect to be able to police the world.

I'm sorry if that makes me a heartless prick. We should get our own shit together before trying to fix anyone else, because it makes us hypocrites.

Russia has their fair share of bullshit, too.

I agree the world is sick of America attempting to be global police, but after the USSR collapsed in 1991, the international framework changed from bipolarity to unipolarity, which meant the US were giving much more of an intrinsic responsibility to actually be the 'leaders of the world'. During the Cold War, the US represented one half of the globe and the Soviet Union represented the other. This embedded stability in many international issues because any signs of aggressive foreign policy, either perpetuated by the US or the Soviet Union, was seen as an attempt of ideological expansion. And this was considered dangerous. It was the nuclear bomb that refrained both superpowers from stepping their boundaries. Everything was very "still" then. But when the USSR conceded defeat, the USA were put in a very difficult position, and I think their fuck-ups is reflective of the nations' struggle to cope as the sole superpower in a unipolar world. Oh, and, of course, the US government became hijacked by special interest groups and corporations, so that does not help.

Compare the approaches from the West to Libya and Syria.

In the former, Gaddafi was an easy pantomime villian (and he did do bad things, no doubt) play-ground bully who the West could easily bully and help the rebels to oust Gaddafi. But look at Libya now, it still has that element of instability.

In Syria, there have been hundreds of thousands dead, hundreds of thousands displaced and yet the West, Russia all remain hesitant to take decisive action.

I wish noDQ, the world would follow your way but ain't happening. Too much pride, too much ego and too much money at stake for the Russians selling all that equipment to Assad.

The rebels fighting on the ground aren't the same ones who are using diplomacy (the anti-Assad coalition, the Syrian Revolutionary Council) to oust Assad.

Best way to change things is for the coalition to unite fully as at the moment, they seem fragmented with differences. Hope Russia can get Assad to step aside and leave Syria and avoid punishment for his crimes, and for the West to engage in dialogue from the anti Assad coalition.

I can't see peace forthcoming sadly.

I think the reason why Russia and the US neglect to take decisive action is because of the polar opposite views both nations share. Whatever the US does, it is in complete support for the rebels and opposition. Whatever Russia does, it is complete support for Assad and the Syrian military. If either nation instigated an attack or 'plan', it would generate unparalleled international tension. Imagine if Putin agreed to send Russian troops to Syria to assist Assad in his conflict with the rebels - Obama would go batshit crazy and would retaliate instantly, technically putting Russia and America in armed combat. But yes, there is too much pride, egocentrism and profit. Neither of the nations will concede power for one slight second and actually admit Syria is a lose-lose situation, on the verge of becoming a failed state. 2014 is going to be Syria's darkest year yet, especially with the election.

[Chewy]

Fuck em, they were broken long before we rocked up. They will be broken a long time to come.