Syria

[Rhyfelwyr]

I still wouldn't go so far as to champion either side, but more and more news of rebel atrocities does seem to be coming through.

The latest is shooting a boy in the face for blaspheming God.

[Fisherking]

You know there is good reason to keep a hands off approach to this one.

I think both sides could easily be called the bad guys and there a’int no good guys playing in this one.

[Sir Moody]

as I have said before the entire war is one big example of "damned if you do, damned if you don't"

If we back the rebels we will be supporting the next Afghanistan, if we support the current regime we are effectively saying we are willing to back blood soaked dictators (I mean i know we do but actually outright saying it) and if we do nothing the 2 sides will brutally massacre each other until either one side wins or the entire region joins in...

I don't see a winning solution to this...

[rvg]

I don't see a winning solution to this...

Kill Everyone?

[Sarmatian]

I don't see a winning solution to this...

Stay out of it?

The moment you get involved, everything that goes wrong is your fault.

[Fisherking]

It is good advice but it still doesn’t work.

The west will get the blame, in or out. Of course it is best to stay out, it simply costs less in both blood and treasure, but escaping blame? Someone will blame you no matter what happens. Real or not.

[Sarmatian]

It is good advice but it still doesn’t work.

The west will get the blame, in or out. Of course it is best to stay out, it simply costs less in both blood and treasure, but escaping blame? Someone will blame you no matter what happens. Real or not.

Not even remotely similar. If the West doesn't get involved, some, usually the losing side will assign the blame, but in general, it will be relegated to intelectual discussions. If the West does get involved, the common people will be the ones who hold the grudge, regardless of the outcome.

[Sir Moody]

if we don't get involved we will be blamed for the bloodshed caused by the winning side or worse if this develops into region wide war we will be blamed for not stopping it earlier...

staying out is the best option for us you are right but we will get the blame whatever happens and the worse the outcome the more blame we will get... that of course is the problem we (the west) have created by behaving like the worlds policeman and meddling in so many affairs

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Not even remotely similar. If the West doesn't get involved, some, usually the losing side will assign the blame, but in general, it will be relegated to intelectual discussions. If the West does get involved, the common people will be the ones who hold the grudge, regardless of the outcome.

Disagree - Middle Eastern hatred of the US is based more on what the US has not done. Libyans love NATO - Syrians feel abandoned by the "Free" world.

The logic here is inescapable - if we kept backing democratic movements - other democratic movements will spring up, then we back those. However, we spent most of the cold war backing "stable" regimes, local strong men who would back our regional plays provided we gave them a means to oppress their own people.

As a result, we have alienated the democratic movements that aspire to the sort of society we enjoy.

If dictators knew that when they oppressed and brutalised their people B-52 bombers would drop incendiaries on their palaces, they would discover a sudden love of democracy. It's not a difficult concept - the monsters are craven, offer then the choice of death or abdication and they'll abdicate.