Intervention in Syria

[Silleuksa]

Even though it was a brutal example of modern imperialism, I think it's widely accepted that the Western involvement in Libya and the no-fly zone ensured that the rebels overthrew Gaddafi. You can see that until the no-fly zone was enforced, government troops kept pushing back the rebels and were definitely going to crush them.
In Syria theres an even more distressing situation, and government troops are pushing back the rebels more and more every day. Is intervention the only way Assad will be overthrown? Are soldiers defecting at a fast enough rate? Are Islamist foreign fighters the only help for Syria?

[Revolutionary_Marxist]

No, the NTC has proven to have been very barbarous, so NATO/US intervention in Syria would be very distastrous for the already deteriating conditions based upon the situation in Libya. The only way out would be a mass revolution to overthrow the Assad regime.

[yaik7a]

Generally any intervention is a terrible idea, because removing the baathist regime will cause the entire stability of the region to drop and allow for a theocratic Islamist government to take over and start ethically cleansing the Christians/Atheists/Alwites.

[marksist-leninist]

intervention in syria is only imperialist massacre (by el-kaide and muslim brotherhood) to open market for monopoly capitalism in crisis.

[danyboy27]

State never do anything out of kindness, its always linked to some sort of bourgeois national interests, they dont want to help the people over there.

Syria regime could be changed without an intervention. Of course many people would die, it would take several years, but eventually assad and its good will have to go and personally i think it would be preferable to an intevention.

[marksist-leninist]

Syrian regime ( Baath Party) is secular and anti-imperialist. so, syria is a castle against imperialist/monopoly capitalism atrocity (as all of us know this "atrocity" use el kaide, muslim brotherhood etc collaborationist). So, Syrian regime and Baath Part y is legitimate and rightful.

[ckaihatsu]

Recent reports seem to indicate a softening of the international community's hawkish peering at Syria, so it's possible that a geopolitical standstill has set in. This may be a better situation for the people of Syria to assert self-determination.

[Brosa Luxemburg]

Even though it was a brutal example of modern imperialism, I think it's widely accepted that the Western involvement in Libya and the no-fly zone ensured that the rebels overthrew Gaddafi. You can see that until the no-fly zone was enforced, government troops kept pushing back the rebels and were definitely going to crush them.
In Syria theres an even more distressing situation, and government troops are pushing back the rebels more and more every day. Is intervention the only way Assad will be overthrown? Are soldiers defecting at a fast enough rate? Are Islamist foreign fighters the only help for Syria?

I am not informed enough to make a statement as to whether intervention is the only way to overthrow Assad and I doubt anyone else is but intervention is a horrible idea. In Libya, the "rebels" have executed Africans at mass rates because they suspect them of working for Gaddafi (racism anyone?) and have held many people in indefinite detention and tortured them. They, in my opinion, are worse than Gaddafi. The new Libya will be controlled by the United States for it's own gain, and that is pretty obvious. The same will happen in Syria if we intervene.

William Blum has a good article about this: http://killinghope.org/bblum6/aer97.html

[l'Enfermé]

Generally most civilian casualties have been inflicted by the "rebels" in their assassination and terror campaigns to destabilize Syria and they don't really enjoy as much support as the Assad regime.. I would approve of an international intervention on the side of the Syrian government, though it's not really necessary as under current circumstances pro-Assad forces are bound to win.

Assad is pretty bad, sure, but not as bad as the rebels. You only have to remember that even the Kurds, who fucking despise Assad(and how enough reason to despise him even more), don't support the rebels.

[ckaihatsu]

I would approve of an international intervention on the side of the Syrian government,


You do realize that NATO has been *vilifying* Assad, and that it supports the "rebels" *against* Assad (SNC, FSA) -- ?

The Blum article notes that the "rebels" in Libya behaved far more like businessmen than as a *political* force -- certainly the tip-off is any over-reliance on militaristic means (just like NATO), instead of appealing to popular opinion with a political program.

[danyboy27]

Syrian regime ( Baath Party) is secular and anti-imperialist. so, syria is a castle against imperialist/monopoly capitalism atrocity (as all of us know this "atrocity" use el kaide, muslim brotherhood etc collaborationist). So, Syrian regime and Baath Part y is legitimate and rightful.
The syrian state was a nest for imperialism long before that whole arab spring started. Canadian and european corporations helped the regime to build their military facilities, helped to build their oil industries and got their fair share of profit from it.

[l'Enfermé]

You do realize that NATO has been *vilifying* Assad, and that it supports the "rebels" *against* Assad (SNC, FSA) -- ?

The Blum article notes that the "rebels" in Libya behaved far more like businessmen than as a *political* force -- certainly the tip-off is any over-reliance on militaristic means (just like NATO), instead of appealing to popular opinion with a political program.
Yes.

[marksist-leninist]

The syrian state was a nest for imperialism long before that whole arab spring started. Canadian and european corporations helped the regime to build their military facilities, helped to build their oil industries and got their fair share of profit from it.

Syrian state have lots of economic and political relations russia and china since past for. And this means that Syrian regime have closed great part of market of US and EU imperalism.

[ckaihatsu]

On a problem at the People’s Summit, May 13 [Chicago]

A very bad development unfolded at the Counter Summit on Sunday, May 13th. People who don’t belong at anti-NATO events presented ideas that can easily confuse those who are new to politics.

In one workshop two presenters repeatedly stated that NATO should intervene militarily in Syria, with a no-fly zone and more. It is unfortunate that this group was given a chance to speak at the Counter Summit.

People from another disturbing trend were also allowed to speak on the 13th-- focusing not on opposing U.S. government intervention in Iran, but instead, echoing the U.S. government demonization of the Iranian government. They insisted on focusing on Iran’s leadership, especially Ahmajinedad. They were asking the U.S. anti-war movement to take the same stand on the internal politics that the U.S. government takes. This echoes the U.S.’s criticism of the Iranian government at a time when the US and NATO are funding opposition forces and threatening war on the Iranian people. This diverts Americans’ attention away from the immediate danger of another U.S-NATO war on Iran. It diverts away from the illegal and unjust U.S. government interference in the internal affairs of another country.

It is the threats of illegal interference and war that demand our all-out opposition. The responsibility of Americans is first and foremost to oppose our own government which is defying international law-- with Obama and Clinton saying repeatedly that the U.S. is ready to use military force against Iran. They state their aim repeatedly --regime change, in Syria and Iran.

The issue for us is to work to stop the criminal threats, actions, and use of force by the U.S. and NATO. After all, Iran has not attacked the U.S. or any NATO countries; so, under international law, it has no right to attack Iran--regardless of whether it likes Iran’s government or wants Iran to stop its peaceful nuclear program. Diversion away from U.S. criminality against Syria or Iran can only cause more confusion and weaken efforts to stop U.S. and NATO crimes. The best support we can give people around the world is to get the U.S. and NATO off their backs.

Naturally the people of each country are the ones who have a right to decide their own destiny--free of outside intervention. And, of course, Iranian Americans or Syrian-Americans are free to say whatever they want--but not inside anti-U.S./NATO actions. We are trying to unite all who can be united against NATO.

Neal Resnikoff of the March 19th Anti-War Coalition. [email protected]

[Djoko]

There will be no NATO intervention in Syria because Syria is "given" to the Russia (which has big military base in Syria) and China (in the smaller extent). Sorry for my bad english.