By Michael O'Hanlon - Special to CNN
With the continued willingness and ability of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria to brutally crush his country's opposition, the question about what options we might have to stop the slaughter grows increasingly haunting. I am not currently advocating military intervention, but it is worth surveying the tools at our disposal to contemplate what might come next - if not immediately, then perhaps down the road.
1. Invasion to carry out regime change
Let's start with the extreme option and then work down the list, so to speak. Invasion to carry out regime change, even if done with complete political correctness, a UN mandate, and strong Arab and other Muslim participation, is very unappealing. Syria is not dissimilar from Iraq in size, and as such one would have to think in terms of 100,000 to 150,000 troops for several years of post-invasion stabilization. Casualties to foreign forces alone could number well into the hundreds or low thousands, even if Assad did not use chemical weapons in response.
One can hope otherwise, but we have been down that unhappy road of optimistic invasions and so-called cakewalks before. There would be potential benefits to this kind of operation, to be sure, but America is simply too tired, its finances too broke and its Army and Marine Corps too overused of late for this to make sense unless things get far far worse. No other country is capable of spearheading the effort or providing most of the troops either.
2. No-fly and no-go zone
Assad should not, however, take complete solace in such analysis because the international community's options do not end there. If and when the Syrian opposition ever requested it, and key Arab states supported it, another option would be a form of a no-fly and no-go zone. It would be similar in ways to what the outside world did in Iraq in the 1990s to help protect the Kurds. One or two major parts of Syria might be protected in this way, at least reasonably well, by a combination of outside airpower and perhaps a limited number of boots on the ground.
Read: Michael O'Hanlon on why Libya vindicates Obama's multilateral leadership.
This option is not ripe at the moment, however. Syria's opposition is too fractured, and the Arab world, while far more critical of Assad than a couple of months ago, is hardly ready to go to this extreme. Neither, of course, is Russia. And it would hardly be easy; it could for example set the international community up for a multi-year operation that effectively partitioned Syria and required a couple of divisions of outside forces to police. Assad should know it is there, if things get a lot worse, but at the moment even Syrian dissidents do not appear to favor such an idea.
3. A maritime operation to enforce strong sanctions
A third option is a maritime operation to enforce strong sanctions on Syria. This approach would not close off all Syrian trade. But especially if Turkey - and perhaps even Iraq and Jordan - cooperated at their land crossings, we could not only impose prohibitions on certain kinds of trade with Assad's Syria, but enforce those prohibitions through a naval quarantine. As in Iraq in the 1990s, perhaps we would focus on the oil trade and various high-technology sectors with such sanctions. The naval assets required would be easily within the capacity of NATO's fleets, ideally operating in conjunction with Arab partners. This option would not of course guarantee that Assad would change course, but it could allow us to seize control of much of his economy - and again, floating the idea may serve as a partial deterrent, since he should be made to realize that we do in fact have ways to escalate well short of outright invasion.
4. An air campaign
Finally, an air campaign inspired by the Kosovo model could be used to punish the regime and its cronies. It could go after command and control assets and places like banks, electricity grids, and Baathist party facilities. It would not be able to protect civilians throughout the country, of course. That is why Kosovo is the better analogy rather than Libya, where the geography and demographics lent themselves to the protection of Benghazi-based rebels as well as their sympathetic populations with limited amounts of airpower. But a punitive air campaign, perhaps combined with the naval quarantine discussed just above, could magnify severalfold the consequences for the Assad regime and inner circle of their terrible repression of their own people. That in turn could increase the odds that the regime would relent, or that a dissident group would carry out a coup to remove the president.
There is no guarantee such options would work, and that is part of why I do not favor them now. But it may well be time to starting talking and thinking about them.
The views expressed in this article are solely those of Michael O'Hanlon.
© 2011 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Work for us | Help
OR , arm the sunni majority , they will do the job , i remember being in syria in the late 70s and early 80s when the sunnis took arms , the minority Alawis ran to the hills.
but when the weapons supplys dried up , Assad (the father) came back from the hills and finished it off (the up rising).
so ,, GIVE THE MSJORITY SUNNIS WEAPONS so NATO does not intervene.
and for all of you who asks the revolution to stay peacful ,,,,keep counting the dead Sunnis .
the Alawis are not going down without a fight .
You are a plain and complete terrorist. Tfu aleek w ala Islamak
kiss imak w ikhtakya CanadianSyrian. sha2fet ikhwanjy khayen. Arm the Sunni's you idiot? We are a secuar country that don't need terrorists like you!
Absolutely, arm the Sunnis so that they can defend themselves against those hateful Nusairy criminals. The French in the 20's came and armed the Nusairies and gave them power against the Sunni majority. All of our problems stem from that event. Likewise, NATO and Arab countries should arm the Sunni majority to defend themselves from this rabid onslaught and take back their country from the cancer that afflicted them for over 50 years. Time to stop that maniacal, vengeful Nusairy campaign of chauvinism, fascism, murder, and looting of the country.
Not only to arm the Sunnis but train them too! Let them have an elite military training. I'm sure there are qualified ones around. Any change in Syria has to come from within, an implosion! It takes time, but it's worth the hard work!
Gee lets re-create the Technical Expertise we gave to AQ... if anyone does the research you will find that there is a former Special Forces NCO that was present in AQ's ranks. Also you still have the Muslim brotherhood to deal with and their agenda, just because Assad's father leveled a city due to their paramilitary activities in the 80's doesn't mean they are a foregone player in Syrian politics.
My suggestion is let the arab world act as it should ... NATO should enforce sanctions and possibly and No-Fly Zone that is it. SOF training insurgents will come back and bite us in the a$$
Didn't we do something similar in Afghanistan back in '79? And in Iran before that? neither of those ended up working so well.
Why are we even looking at the millitary option? Since when do we feel obligated to jump into war at a first sign of domestic unrest in a country accross the world? I'm not even mentioning the fact that our military action has been too expensive and has seen only limited success lately. Do you think our reputation as a world bully might be deserved? Why does the author even has motivation for the war actions?
The person you are replying to his comment is a Syrian islamist terrorists, the same like the Taliban in mentality and conduct and the western Powers are only vehicles to their middle-ages agenda .
Why are we even looking at the millitary option
============
We need to stop being the world's police! The only blame and hate us later...
And on a site note, I always thought military campaigns are planned by military strategists, not by amateur journalists. Calling himself Iraq project doesn't add credentials.
You are still living in the jahylia mentality and cannot see the syrians but in their religious affiliation. IN what way are you different from adnan alarour and the other terrorists. Tfuuuuuuu aleek
I agree with Saood SUfian: You are a terrorist, or, at the least, a radical Islamist. Why the Michael O’Hanlons of this world want us to make war in your behalf is a mystery to me. How brain-dead can we possibly be?!
We supported radical Islamists in Aghanistan in the 1980s. Osama bin Laden was one of the beneficiaries of our largesse.
We supported radical Islamists in Kosovo in 1999. We installed the KLA, a gang of narco-terrorists who openly sought to turn multi-ethnic Kosovo into a mono-ethnic province of "Greater Albania". Because of our "Humanitarian War", 200,000 Kosovars were forced to flee for their lives.
We supported radical Islamists in Iraq. The result was a million dead Iraqis and a vast new breeding ground for terror. The killing is still going on, eight years later!
And now you and Michael O’Hanlon want us to create a similar trillion-dollar holocaust in Syria. What planet do you guys live on?!
NonZionist
I agree with Saood SUfian: You are a terrorist, or, at the least, a radical Islamist
==========
And your screen name proves you are a bigot!
Why must we hurt or kill each other for settling our differences? Suggest national leaders regardless of political system should be selected or appointed basing on having mindsets of respecting their people and peoples of other nations without any reservation. I know it is only a dream because only God can do that.
Ask the dictators, they know better.
Enter Ron Paul. He actually has been saying this for a very long time. Unfortunately other politicians have their own agendas, and implementing our military around the world is the result. How about we focus on "nation building" right here in America? And then we won't have to worry so much about a term that so many do not understand: blowback.
IF THE WORLD DONT STAND WITH THE PROTESTERS THEY WILL BE KILLED FOR THE FUTUER . AND IRAN WILL BE STRONGER AND AMERICANS Existence WILL BE AT RISK.AND THE SYRIAN REGIME WILL FEEL STRONGER SO ISRAEL WILL BE ON IRANIAN LIST AND IT IS NOT SECRET THAT IRAN About to MAKE NUCLEAR BOMB. O AMERICA IT IS NOT ABOUT OIL IT IS ABOUT Existence
assad will not falls in easy way because assad clan fight as a religius duty they will not care for the Sanctions . and iran support him with billions of dollars . he has 120000 of alawit soliders just under his brother maher . Except for the security forces which are alawite 95% . so he will not fall if there are no Military strikes . also the Military strikes will Encourage the other soliders to Defecting the army .
Anyone who advocates American armed intervention into Syria needs the have their head examined. The only decent option here is just to let things take their course in over there. Knowing how the right-wing thugs in Washington operate, I'm scared to death that both the U.S. and NATO will sooner or later send in troops which will culminate into another Middle Eastern tragedy.
The 'decent' thing to do is to sit by on our hands and watch a ruthless dictator use his military to slaughter his people? Really?
50000,people were killed in Libya in six months, since the crisis began,news agencies reports,at the time of kaddafi 12000 people were killed,in Libya,in 30 years,just compare it.In Iraq for Saddam time 3000000 people were killed in 30 years,since the invasion of iraq in 2003,1,300,000 people were killed in Iraq,and 3 million refugies arround the world,this is the real Deomcracy you want.
sorry in Iraq 300,000
What about Bahrain democracy, and the Gulf troops there. What about Lebanon democracy with their semi-state and 17 years of civil war, President Assad does not represent his family, nor does he represent the Alawite population. He represents a political stand to which millions of Syrians adhere. The Alawites are the most tolerent Islamic sect, historically oppressed by the fundamintalist islamic groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and they found their protection in the secular regime which is the prevelant form of political thinking in the west. They are more linked to the idea of moderation than to the persona of the president. So stop inciting against the Alawites.
Actually the latest protest supporting force, and democracy and change and what else advocate in the White House is rather left wing. But that does change things – whether we support the revolution or just want to overturn a dictator, we'd better stay away from the temptation and mind our own business.
You are right. The author of this article does not know what he is talking about. Iraq and Libya were poor countries with poorly equipped armies. Syria is not poor and has the best military in the region except for Israel. Any of the options cited would result in substantial US casualties. (Does anyone remember how we lost a billion-dollar stealth bomber and multi-million dollar Apache helicopters in Serbia?) Does anyone in their right mind consider "Kosovo", "Iraq", or "Afghanistan" to be success stories? We still have troops in all three and it has been more than 10 years!!! Please, for the love of God, no more trying to solve the world's problems with the military.
Hey, I'm conservative and don't think we should be involved. Syria is a sloppy mess that we need to stay out of, for many reasons, cost included. It does rub me the wrong way when people are being suppressed, but, we put our necks out there for Egypt and it's coming back to haunt us. Is it in any interest of ours? If they are looking for freedom, they need to stand and fight for it. It's not our fight. Where are the righteous freedom fighters of the Middle East to help spread liberty and freedom for all? There isn't any. They don't want what we have. One tyrant replaces another. Not our fight.
I wonder of Mr. O’Hanlon has ever been shot at? Is his expertise in national security issues strictly academic? Why didn't he suggest arming the opposition. That is the way the Soviets did thing in the 60's 70's and 80's for the most part and it worked often and only cost arms and money. In the end, let the Arab League provide security forces. It is their area of the world that needs peacekeepers.
I think the author is assuming anyone in the US cares enough about what is going on in Syria to go to war with them and risk their own children's lives... Which they don't. Perhaps liberals made more sense when they were pacifists. I mean, you know all the peace rallies liberals had under Bush against the wars Obama is still running (plus a few of his own military actions)... At least you all stood for something. I mean, sure, military options should not be taken off the table in any area of the world, but its hard to listen to a group say that when all they want to do is call other people vile names and protest when they do the same thing. Democrats are so much more likable when they're not trying so hard to be hypocrites.
The latest bombing campaign in Libya was initiated by Liberal in Chief, albeit from behind. And interestingly, most people cared less about Libya than they do about Syria, which makes it even scarier. Hopefully just the fact that Syria is militarly stronger will prevent us from starting another campaign.
Why did Obama win the Nobel Peace Prize? What peace promoting thing has he ever done? Why doesn't the press hammer him about that? Where are the peace protesters?
All are dumb conventional options. Have you all forgotten how we got Bin Laden ? Send a commando group to take out the leadership, once the head is gone, the rest of the body goes into chaos and fractions will form. Side with the fraction that wants democracy. Cut the head !! if we don't succeed the first time make repeated attempts, this is cheaper and quicker. As for the author of this article, get imaginative, if you don't have a bright idea, just shut up!!
How about the West minds its own business for once. What a novel concept.
Well, I think on reason we don't, is because we have one group of people slaughtering another group of people (sound familiar...think back to Germany right before WW2). The western European nations didnt do anything until Germany started marching across the continent, and by then, the damage had already been done, and was getting worse.
As far as the US being involved, I do agree with you, if we took all that money we spent on the 2 wars, we might have a better infrastructure, better education system, not be broke. We need to take care of ourselves first (New Orleans is still recovering after Katrina – 6y later). We cant afford a 3rd front (not militarily, certainly not economically, not politically)
If the Arab leaders are concerned, let them do something about it, and Russia can help, heck get China and India to toss in a few divisions. Let someone else deal with this for once
Sorry, no military intervention. DID YOU NOT HEAR? FEMA HAS RUN OUT OF MONEY.
I AM NOT PAYING FOR ONE MORE CENT OF WAR UNTIL THEY REPAIR MY TOWN !!!
the author discusses the military options which could taken by USA against Syrian army but he missed the whole picture of middle east . syria would not fight alone they have more than 15 militray organisations which work with which could attack american soldiers easly in middle east. and don t forget Israel as in last meeting with turkish forgien minister when the Syrians assured that in the first second of war they prepare to launch at least 100000 missile as a gift to isreal
For all those advocating a military solution; and to the author who barely mentions it; Assad – unlike Saddam Hussein – does have stockpiles of WMD and missile warheads to deliver them. If pushed to the wall by outside forces – and maybe just out of sheer desperation anyway – I would expect both Assad, and Iran's proxy Hezbollah in Lebanon, to attack Israel hoping to thereby galvanize Arab support and rally both nations against the age old enemy. This time Israel will not stand by as hundreds of large missiles, some with chemical and biological warheads, hit her cities. Then the whole region goes up in flames.
Here is the fifth option: NATO goes after the the WMD and missile sites in Syria first with a massive missile and bomber attack. After – and only after – you remove the option of a Syrian WMD attack can you do a more conventional campaign. Syria's WMD can cause more Israeli deaths then in all the previous Arab-Israeli wars combined. The WMD is the wild card, the Joker, which must be removed from the playing deck or the results could be civilian casualties on scale not seen since WW2. You can't ignore the 900 pound gorilla or it will kill you!
Great point.
I;ve never seen such dumb comments by some of the posters advocating a military response for Syria or any other country! Let's take care of ourselves first!
Why not just send US Navy SEAL Team Six into Syria and let them take care of Bashar al-Assad in the same manner they took out Osama bin Laden. Then, once they complete that, we need this elite special forces unit to go into Iran and do the same to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The US Navy SEAL Team Six is THE ABSOLUTE BEST THERE IS!!
because it's a violation of the Geneva convention to asasinate or to kidnap a foreign head of state , i agree with you but that why we don't
Alright Fred, what part of the Geneva Conventions apply to international terrorists?
Yeah, and let's raise everyones taxes to pay for all these excursions too! Talk is cheap, pay up or shut up!
Number 3 – collective punishment is illegal according to International Law. Certainly, NATO ignores this crap, as Kosovo model (number 4) showed. NATO committed crimes against Serbs killing them and creating illegal muslim state to criminal, murderers, organ traffickers on Serbian land.
Four military options in Syria... Option one: president Obama if you interve with military action single handledly in Syria, we the GOP will call for your impeachment. Option two: president Obama if you intervene with military action in Syria with NATO, we the GOP will call for your impeachment. Option three: president Obama if you intervene with military action in Syria with NATO and the Arab League, we the GOP will call for your impeachment. Option four: president Obama if you intervene with military action in Syria along with NATO, the Arab League and the European Union, we the GOP will call for your impeachment. O' wait, there's a fifth option... president Obama if you don't intervene with military action in Syria, we the GOP will accuse you of being weak and we will accuse you of dragging your feet and not doing anything to resolve the conflict in Syria. See, we the GOP are the world leading flip floppers on the issues and we don't care cause no matter how many games we play in Washington, there are still enough dumb Americans out there who will still give us the House of Representatives by a landslide even on our broken record and eight years of failure. What a fuc–ng screwed up country.
Pffft.. moron!!!
This guy is obviously a bleeding heart liberal that is mocking the Republican party..... All I can tell you is, Obama will become a one term president and he will go down in history as the most under-qualified Executive we have had in a very long time....
The Turks can close a few faucets in the Ataturk Baraji near Kuyulu to dry up the Euphrates
Why dont let the Saudi worry about it? After all, it is their backyard problem and they have the money to do it.
O'Hanlon discounts Syria's military. Syria has a relatively well trained and large military. Any foreign military intervention would probably cause thousands of casualties, considerably more than in Iraq. Neither America nor its NATO allies would be willing to countenance this cost. Moreover, I doubt that any Arab countries in the region would give their active or passive support to Western military intervention in Syria, a country which is considered the center of Arab civilization.
Sorry, your arguments are not correct. The syrian army is not well trained and can fracture very easily. Also, the situation in Syria is different from Iraq. The majority of the syrian people will welcome any help to remove this brutal regime that is terrorizing them for a long time. Also, most arab states will support US and NATO help. In fact, many arab states are against the syrian regime and they have already started asking the help of the US and NATO.
You are free to disagree with my post. However, many, perhaps most, military and political analysts and experts on Syria hold the view that 1. its military is well trained; and 2. that its military political superstructure is remarkably united during this time of tension.
I can't wait in a few years, to read a similar news article from a website in China or some other country: "Four military options in the USA"
Dream on there Stevie boy , any military option against the American home land would be futile for any country ,first of all there is no country on the planet with the capability to land troops on American soil sucessfully , second if they tried it would mean the end of their country as they know it , third , our right to bear arms makes all this possible because unlike you most Americans would defend their great country . and forth, I am proud to be American if you (sadly) are not please feel free to check your citizenship at the door!!
Despite what all the hawks think Syria or any other country who first uses nuclear weapons against their neighbors aren't that stupid. They are all smart enough to know that it would be the end of their country in retribution. Would you want to be the first and take that chance and then be annihilated by the western powers? It ain't gonna happen!
Yeah Steve, be afraid of that damn China, be very afraid. They will be our future enemy someday.
Given how many people are screaming imperialism with Libya it would be best to just say out of it. After all if you're going to be condemned no matter what you do might as well take the cheap option. Besides based on what some Syrians have said on other boards many would likely join the government so they could fight off any kind of intervention.
The syrian regime is committing crimes against humanity by killing and terrorizing peacefull demonstrators asking for freedom and democracy. Syrian people need international protection urgently. So, an air campaign needs to start now followed by other options. Turkey can play a major role in conjunction with this, such that the US/NATO does not need to have ground forces there. Timing is very important. The syrian regime is a terrorist regime and very dangerous to the Middle East and the world.
Who even told you that Turkey is willing to put its soldiers or any other millitary asset on their neigbor's sole? Get realistic. While Turkey wants Syria to be stable, starting the war there will be counter productive for Turkey.
Yeah, just what we need another involvement and more military intervention! Isn't there anyone anymore with any common sense?
And for all you hawks send your children and grand children off to start more wars. They are dispensable, aren't they?
I've got bored with this kind of articles because the US sanctions issued for Syria so far indicate that she is actually NOT serious about toppling the Syrian regime. US sanctions are just fake!!
We also see that the quality of Turkish intelligence is very low. They depend on Muslim brotherhood ONLY, while the composition of Syrian population is much more complicated. They don't have reliable access to minorities. I remembered Israeli intelligence failure in 1982 in Lebanon. They relied on the Maronites ONLY and failed.
Turkey is apparently AGAINST imposing meaningful sanctions and operations in Syria. So if the US really wants to carry out a military campaign, she must do it alone, or with NATO.
You do realize that Turkey is a part of NATO...?
Of course, I do. But as far as the Syrian crisis is concerned, Turkey has made it clear that they will not cooperate in the military campaign and/or the economic sanctions. So the US and the EU cannot rely on Turkey anymore.
Turkish role has ended. Saudi Arabia even expressed big disappointment at Turkey's inability to carry out their promise with them.
The Syrian authority has announced their confidence in maintaining security. Daily announcement of protests and casualties released by the opposition are exaggerated. Most of news of army defections are baseless. A very large part of news we see everyday is just a CHEAP information war, not a reality.
Immediately after the formation of Transitional National Council, an alternative to the Damascus regime, was announced in Ankara on Tuesday, many leading opposition figures issued a statement complaining that their names were quoted without their approval. The council MISERABLY broke apart in the air on Day One.
All of these is a proof of LOW QUALITY of Middle Eastern Studies and intelligence of the United States, the EU, Israel, Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
The one who is at a crossroad may be the United States, not Syria.
O'Hanlon's approach does not have enough imagination, as there is in fact a fifth option: Invasion of Syria by third parties. Turkey is on Syria's norther border and has an army of Sunni Muslims that's 400,000 strong, and that is easily the match for Syria in terms of quality. Oh, and they were in NATO last time I checked.
There's also the fact that Iraq is not on really good terms with Baathist Syria, considering that they provide sanctuary to the remnant's of Hussein's regime and quite possibly are hiding the WMDs that Hussein was supposed to have had. While they may not have the troops for an invasion, they probably won't mind sparing a division or two in any NATO-led operation, especially if this gives them opportunity to clean out the areas near the Iraqi border.
What's needed here is some serious diplomatic deal-making, if we're really serious about pushing Assad to fall. Hoping for an armed opposition to materialize like Libya is not going to work, as the Assads simply have too much overwhelming force and a large and aggressive internal security force in addition to the army loyalists. Perhaps we can make a deal with Turkey? It's a better option than sending 100,000 of our own troops that we don't have.
What's needed here is some serious smart thinking. What makes you think other third party countries want to get involved in a war? They are not as dumb as we are. Don't you see that we are in perpetual conflict and we can't afford any more?
I hope all these Arab spring uprising, back fire back to US, UK and Israel. And the whole middle east will be chaotic and some body like MR.ADOLF HITLER WILL RISE.
Abba Natan made a great point. Syria and Lebanon will attack Israel if Nato attacks Syria. Israel won't sit on its hands and then what? Do we try to protect Syria and Israel from each other? It must be an All Arab force to remove Asad.
Be careful what you wish for. A militant government in the new Syria might just start a war with Israel in order to solidify their hold on their own country.
Hard to solidify your new hold on a country when your first action gets you annihilated...
Israel will do the job. They are already preparing for it. Assad needs to go. All dicktators will eventually go down.
Nothing will happen, Assad will just murder his country while the rest of the pathetic world sits back and wonders what to do.
i'll go with my option , nothing will happen.
The second leg of the Axis of Evil appears to be in jeopard.......Kim J NEXT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
People that have experienced war would never advocate it because there is nothing worse!
What's worse than war? The wholesale slaughter of civilians, and especially one tribe driving the other to extinction; also known as genocide.
Go to /the truth about Syria/on facebook to see some of the truth in Syria,there were a very small amount of peacefull demonstrations,and those demonstrations finished without anyone killed.
Most of the ones who died were militants and used weapons against the police to provocate them,i was a witness of one of these actions.Muslim brotherhood a very radical islamic bloody organisation supported by turkey and Saudi Arabia,wants to get power in Syria and unfortunately the west is helping them,in the name of democracy.
To go to Iraq Americans said there is chemical weapons in Iraq,but they did not found anything uptill now.
Democracy,democracy and democracy.Why Saudis are good friends???
There is a 5th and ultimate option....send in SEAL Team 6 baby!
yes dont arm any extremist groups!!!remember afghanistan?
This guy should be sent for psychiatric treatment.
You are right!
You are so right!
Jump in the 82d Airborne. It will all be over in about 2 hours. Then leave.
Better yet, ask the GOP what are the four military options in Syria. And while you're at it, don't forget to ask them what the mission and the end game are. After all, that is what they asked president Obama when we intervened in Libya. And I believe it's worth pointing out that while the mission to end the civilian bloodshed in Libya is being realized and the end game is rapidly approaching, ten years later the mission and the end game in Afghanistan are yet to be stated by the GOP. And eight years later, the same could be said about Iraq. Yea, the problem with we liberals is we point straight to the hard facts while the rightwing repubteabag flipflop on the issues and lie to the American people. Obama/Biden 2012.
I vote for an air campaign to destroy all military targets, starting from the palace. Can. First recall the Syrian regime in the USA? One so called Syrian diplomat sits on the board of a Los Angeles hospital. How ironic.
I thought the guy was smarter than the others, he proved me wrong; hello, you there, Mr. Michael, yes you.. This is Syria not Somalia, just a wake up call..
Shoots, that didn't work, well how about: hello, you don't have money to finance anything.. Guess that's not working either..
Hmm.. Yes: by the way, who appointed USA as the world's sherif? Can't seem to remember..!
Nah, this guy is a neoconservative, such things he doesn't care for.. How about USA never won a war since WWII? might win a battle, costly though, but will never win a war.
I guess he's deaf by now, ok, to readers: Syria has the most powerful, well trained, very well equipped army that didn't see a single defection over 6 months, that only means that the army supports Assad ad a start. Rockets, yes, some call it missiles, not in thousands but much more, do you know what that means? Who dares contribute will be retaliated at, a single foreign trooper sets foot in Syria, it's Samson plan for everybody. Nobody dares, bottom line.
How about sanctions? Why all these sanctions aren't effective? Just a reminder, Syria is already under sanctions for over 3 decades and it's by far of no use, Syria's Lira isn't pegged to Dollar, Syria is self-efficient food-wise, doesn't import food, on the contrary, it exports food to needy countries most are allies to USA; Syria exports oil, yes, target the oil, starve the people, wait.. Don't jump to conclusions and don't celebrate, Syria has powerful allies and broad alternatives to export oil to.. You fail once again.
Ok, let's seal their borders, we have Iraq, wait a minute, did you say we have Iraq? Correction, you removed Saddam to hand over Iraq to Iran, the closest ally of Syria!! Seal the sea? Last time you did something similar you lost 240 marines in one blow, still want to give it a try? Syria will provoke you into a confrontation and you lose.
Want to do something useful? Don't mess in internal issues of other countries, you are not the World's Sherif, mind your economy and welfare of your people & stop creating more enemies by committing more crimes and atrocities, and at the end you lose again.
It's thinkers like the writer of this lame peace that caused 250,000 jobs list lost year in the States, 50,000 Libyans killed over 6 months, over a 1 million Iraqi dead, plus millions displaced, wounded, the famine in Somalia is your creation...
US citizens elect their leaders to concentrate on the well being of these citizens, not to commit crimes in their names then ruin their economy.
OK so now we would be engaged in 6 different countries. Slowly climbing toward world war. I just love this promised hope and change.
Don't put a single American boot on the ground! No more of our blood spilt to try and help people who hate us. Syrians (like all other middle easterners) hate Americans, they hate us today, they will hate us tommorow and hate us even if we finish the job for them. Then they will find something else to blame on the United States. Let Muslims sort out their own affairs for once.
This video is full of lies and manipulation of the facts. It is from Rassian media that supports the syrian regime. Why the syrian regime does not allow free media in Syria? It is obvious they are afraid from the truth. The fact is there are mass peaceful protesters demanding freedom and dignity, but the regime responded with mass killings using military, security forces, and gangs to terrorize the people.
All media is biased, including CNN. Look at other bias can be useful, they do not report daily about shelling cities from ships, because cities are not razed. Half million people in a city shelled by ship and not a single picture of video of it happening, does that tell you something?
Also protesters are not so saintly in Syria. Large number of security forces are dead. Look at WikiLeaks, USA funded many Syrian opposition groups, TV's and there are dispatches where ways of Syria weakening are discussed as it is an enemy state.
Syria may as well now be an enemy state to USA, because of USA foreign policy being stuck in cold war mentality. Same as Iran, maybe you should not overthrow it's elected president before Islamic revolution.
Would you please define "freedom and digity". The root causes of the protest lies in the dire economic situation, and slogans have to be raised , and your "freedom and digity" can fit in all opposing situation in any country . Stop lying to people.