and don't forget of "occupied Mexico" in the south west - can they have their land back too?

Again, the morality arguement. It isn' that you don't care because you have some morality. It is that you don't care because they don't have oil. If you had to pay $12 for gas because of what was happening in Syria, you'd suddenly be telling me about all the children who are dying and suddenly care.

Let's call it what it is. It isn't because anyone really cares. It is because we all want to keep money for ourselves. I have no problem with that until people start pretending they are good Christians, or good people, or telling me they really, really do actually think one of our political parties is JUST SO MUCH BETTER and the other one is just so terrible, boo hoo, cry, cry, faux anger.

I saw let Syria sort out their own problems. We have enough problems of our own here and around the world. If anything, let the rich Gulf states help them since they have all the money in the region.

@ Ranger Jimmy -

With the ebb and flow of human difusion over the centuries, you can compile of list with hundreds and thousands of similar moral equivalencies to support your argument.

You might as well be screaming about the ethnic rights of the Welsh in Cornwall, the Normans in Brettany and the Greeks in Sicily. The list goes on an on.

I comprehend your point. But the argument is weak. This is the 21st century. We have a system of laws based upon the establishment of the UN in 1945. Let's try to achieve the greater good based upon these laws and modern codes and ethics in regards to warfare, civil strife and ethnic cleansing.

A fallacious argument. These aren't people trying to seize land from their modern owners or even a normal rebellion. The armed revolution is a direct response to a government slaughtering innocent protesters without restraint.

There was drama as the conference got under way at the Palace Hotel in Tunis, when several hundred pro-Assad protesters breached the grounds, forcing Clinton to be diverted to her hotel and delaying her appearance at the meeting. Police wielding batons stopped them getting inside the hotel itself and drove them out the parking lot after about 15 minutes.

Ahhhh so we just want the wacked out Al Qaeda types to demonstrate not Assad supporters. Use the sarin Assad, today. Then let the west arm what's left.

People need to stop with the whole "oh poor innocent peaceful protesters bs". The fact of the matter is these people see westerners as naive and think they know how to manipulate us, hence all this parading around dead children in front of cameras etc. Its a culture that values death as much as it values life and they love dying for any cause which they convince themselves is righteous and will go to paradise for. They love being martyrs and will grant martyr status to anyone that applies. Their values are not compatible with ours so F them and let them sort it out themselves.

Russia and China are doing us a favor by vetoing un resolutions, because they realize what kind of hell will be unleashed once the Assad regime is toppled. We need to stop looking at them through our Western glasses and projecting our values on them because these are 2 different civilizations. Mainstream news is running all this BS footage with these "rebels" saying all they want is freedom and are fighting for it.. please its complete BS, please tell me what kind of freedom will be achieved once they topple Assad? Religious? Social? Cultural? Women's? Cmon stop being so naive theyll go back to killing and raping each other (must be all that repressed homosexuality).. there spinning this crap and you're buying it. Theres 1 billion muslims in the world why dont these peaceful protesters appeal to them for help and weapons?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said ahead of the meeting that rebel fighters would become “increasingly capable,” saying they will “from somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves as well as begin offensive measures."

Funny...? This statement from a woman who assaults the 2nd amendment of our Constitution, while working underhandedly toward the UN small arms treaty! Such a hypocrite!

Hey, I have an idea, let's put on a show!!! Uh no, I meant a no fly zone, then we can slaughter a few tens of thousands of syrians like we did the libyans. They're not killing themselves anywhere nearly fast enough.

To Anthony,

The greater good is not letting the West dictate to the rest of the world.The UN idea at inception was wonderful,but the great powers have managed since then to bend it to their wills.And now except for some of the humanitarian programs they run,its worthless.We hear countless times,hypocritical outrage over Russia and China,thwarting the "will of the International Community",while no outrage about the countless UN Resolutions we have vetoed, that thwarted the "will of the International Community".This campaign against Syria by the West and their pardners in crime among the Arab Gulf states is based on Syria's relations with Iran.The latest whipping boy of the West.The facts are that if Assad falls in this rebellion,there will be unleashed horrendous sectarian passions that could consume Syria in the same manner as the Iraq disaster.Also,brought on,by our not understanding the countries we meddle in.There are millions of Christians,Shia,and secular Sunni,that could be killed,have to flee,or that will be oppressed,in what is now one of the last secular societies in the MENA.I've heard all this talk before from the western leaders.They listened to the Iraqi exiles,most of which hadn't been in Iraq for years.That there would be Nirvana after Saddam fell.But they dismissed the experts that knew the truth about what was going to be unleashed.Now we hear from Syrian exiles,about "peace and reconciliation committees".An idea that some westerner probably advised on,to make it sound like what happened with South Africa.Unlike the western savvy exiles.The real rebels in Syria just want the weapons to bring down the government.Then they will start imposing a fundamentalist regime on Syria.We never seem to learn.First we support Israels mistreatment of the Palestinians,which laid the first bricks in the wall of Muslim hatred of us.Then we support dictators in the region,as long as they are on our side.Sending billions in "aid" to the military,and a trickle to help the people in those countries.The next row of bricks in the wall.Then,because we wanted revenge for Vietnam,we arm the Jihadi's in Afghanistan,helping to create Al Queda,and increasing the influence of the most regressive form of Islam,Wahabbism,another row the the brick wall.The results from that was,the 9/11 blowback.You would think we would have learned from that.But no,we jump in to Iraq,turning a once secular nation,into a sectarian killing fields.We invade Afghanistan,probably the most isolated,tribal state in the Middle East,and after 11 years,have managed to make the Taliban look good to the average Afghani.Now we want to bring the "blessings" of democracy to Syria.A nation,that while a dictatorship,had managed to do almost the impossible in the Middle East,they managed to keep religious peace.But we in partnership with of all people,the Saudis and other repressive dictatorships in the Gulf.Have the audacity to condemn Assad,as a dictator.We were condemning Syria for human rights violations at the same time as the Saudis were sending troops to Bahrein to crush protests against their oppressive ruler.Yet nary a word from us about that.Where also was our outrage against Assad,when shortly before our government was "renditioning" Jihadi prisoners to Syria to imprision for us.Just the other day,Israel Arab Druze students retured to Israel from visiting relatives in Syria and told reporters that except for scattered protests in some areas,Syrians weren't massing in the streets against the government like we are being told.That most of the trouble is from rebel Islamist's.Our "friend" Israel isn't calling for the overthrow of the Syrian government,because they are smart enough to not want another radical religious state on their borders.Then,even it this story,we see hundreds of "pro" Syrian protestors beaten away from the Tunis meeting.If we are concerned about protests,you'd think we'd be interested in that crushing of protestors.Americans,once again,are not seeing that being in league with radical religious dictators,and ex-colonial masters,is not in our interest.If our involvement in this mess wasn't so sad,it would be laughable.

idiocy is not worth a reply

The west should take a better look at the pedigree of these so-called rebels. They are really just different sects of Islam who all want control for themselves. This is the reason they have not been able to unite into a single force to fight against Assad, they hate each other as much as they hate Assad. This is the problem with many of these Muslim sects, they each feel that they are the only valid form of Islam and anyone who does not go along with their particular views is an infidel to be killed. Having Assad leave will not make things in Syria any better. In fact, it could very well make things worse. Under Assad's rule, all of the different flavors of Islam were free to worship as they chose. I would not go so far as to say Assad is a secularist, but he is far more tolerant of other sects of Islam than many other rulers in the region. I do not support Assad or condone what he is doing in any way. All I am saying here is that to a degree I understand why he is doing it.

The different flavors of Islam and their underlying attitudes towards each other is the reason why real democracy will never work in the Middle East. The only way to unify a country where the people practice different flavors of Islam is through a strong hand. It takes a strong ruler with might and the willingness to use it in order to keep the varying sects in line and keep them from fighting with each other. Iraq is a prime example of this. Now that the US has left, the entire country has descended into sectarian violence with the different Islamic groups are attacking each other and fighting for power. It is impossible to get them to come to the table and work together in unison because each feels the other should not even exist and because of this they refuse to share power with each other. You see it is not just non-Muslims that these fanatics hat, it is anyone who does not adhere to their particular brand of Islam. I am not sure of the exact count, but I believe that there are something like 17 or 19 major different branches of Islam. Of course some are more violent and less tolerant than others, but each feels that they are the only true Muslims.

Bob.....you forget one thing: Those fanatics will decapitate you because you don't bow to their fanatic leader!

They decapitate each other because someone doesn't believe the same as they believe. And, they will be after you next.

The American "Wild West" cleaned itself up. How? Everyone was armed and allowed to be armed.

I say, fly over all those countries with a hundred C5's and drop tons and tons of weapons so they can kill theirselves off. Blanket the countryside with weapons. Oh, and don't forget the ammunition.

The reasonable people there - who are not fanatic - will clean up the country by killing off the fanatics, if they are given weapons and time to do it.

Syria is bigger than this one town of Homs.

Where is the rest of the country? Why isn't this 'rebellion' taking hold in other parts of the country? Let the Middle east take care of it, we need to stay out.

Uncle Bob:

You really think that it communicates effectively to put your thoughts in all bold (screaming) in one colossal paragraph with bad punctuation and no breaks? It looks like you might have a point worth considering, but in your effort to tell us how important and valuable it is it gets lost. How can every single word be your "main point"?

I've got a wild crazy notion. Don't give weapons to anyone.

Hmmm... I remember the US supporting a guy who just wanted freedom, too, because we thought he would make a great ally against the Soviet Union. His name was Saddam Hussein.

We need to stay out of their civil war. From what I can tell from the LITTLE factual information out there about these freedom fighters, it's just another branch of the same tree of intolerance and backward thinking. I can't see that this new regime would help the average Syrians trying to scratch out an existence any more than what they already have. Which may explain why more average Syrian citizens aren't out fighting, unlike what we've seen in other countries.

Ok, so we help them, and the can have the Palestinians in return.

To Rlquall,

I consider "bold" easier to read on these pages.If the posts had been in capitols,that would be "screaming".As to your comment on punctuation.If that is your retort on my points.You have no argument.

Wow

Help them now, so they can hate you later.

Just announced from the SofS: $ 10,000,000 in aid (and where oh where is this $$$ coming from ?) if the violence STOPS.

Yep, typical administration ploy.

How about we let Hammas and the Arab League arm them. They seem to be taking the rebels side so they should tend to their own backyard.

I have to agree with Uncle Bob, and that says a lot because I am a generally disagreeable person. Now, I love democracy. It's a wonderful form of government. It is not, however, our right to impose it on every nation we step foot in. The U.S. will not commit a single soldier, a single weapon unless it forsees having the ability to create another democracy. Who's to say we're not wrong? The Soviet Union stagnated when it suddenly dumped communism for democracy. If we're going to lend aid to a nation it should be done freely, with no expectations. It should be offered for no other reason than, as the most powerful nation in the world, we can.

Now, am I in favor of arming Syrian rebels? Nope. It's not because I want to see them slaughtered either. Does no one recall the lesson of Osama Bin Laden? When the Soviet Union rolled its tanks across the border in to Afghanistan we saw Bin Laden as the man who could lead a successful resistance. We gave him everything from small arms to stingers. Flash forward to September 11, 2001, when this turbaned maniac had beaten back the Evil Empire and needed a NEW Great Satan. He took those weapons we gave him and began killing U.S. soldiers with them. I, for one, don't want to see my brother Marines cut down ten years from now by an M-249 we shipped over there. I'm sorry. I feel for these people who want nothing more than our for fathers did 236 years ago. That civilians are being mowed down is deplorable. We need to sit this one out, not only because we may one day have our own sword thrust through our bellies, but because we are incapable of helping the Syrians without forcing our government and culture down their throats.

IWONDER So you say our air campaign their killed tens of thousands of people?? I would like to know where you got those figures?? Taliban website?? Maybe the Iranian news agency?? This is almost as bad as the propaganda mill that runs in Palestine saying the Jews are slaughtering thousands.. The Arab League can arm these people, they hate us no matter what we do..

The Rich Oil Gulf States do not get involved with their own brethen.

They leave it up to the United States/Allies to settle their disputes. Look at the Slaughter created by Syria's Government. Over 7,000 people killed (believed to be a low estimate) and no one cares there.

They are lazy, waiting for the US and their Allies to fix the bloodshed. Heavens, the Quran should be at work right now--Arabs start reading about your Peaceful lives! I am sorry for the little kids; and women. What a terrible life to endure.

Assad should be hung up by his Hitler mustache--and the citizens called tear him apart like "Pulled Pork".

To roadrunnero,

Wikipedia on Iraqi death and refugee totals:

The IBC was also given access to the WikiLeaks disclosures of the Iraq War Logs and has estimated that these documents show the total number of Iraqi deaths since the 2003 invasion to be over 150,000, with about 80% being civilian.

As of November 4, 2006, the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees estimated that 1.8 million Iraqis had been displaced to neighboring countries, and 1.6 million were displaced internally, with nearly 100,000 Iraqis fleeing to Syria and Jordan each month.

And on Afghanistan,

No one has made a comprehensive list of civilian casualties for the 11 years of the war so far.But there are a few partial lists.

According to Marc W. Herold's extensive database, Dossier on Civilian Victims of United States' Aerial Bombing, between 3,100 and 3,600 civilians were directly killed by U.S. Operation Enduring Freedom bombing and Special Forces attacks between October 7, 2001 and June 3, 2003. This estimate counts only "impact deaths" – deaths that occurred in the immediate aftermath of an explosion or shooting – and does not count deaths that occurred later as a result of injuries sustained, or deaths that occurred as an indirect consequence of the U.S. airstrikes and invasion.

According to Jonathan Steele of The Guardian, up to 20,000 Afghans may have died as a consequence of the first four months of U.S. airstrikes on Afghanistan.

As of January 2011, the UNHCR estimates there are approximately 415,000 internally displaced people in Afghanistan. Many return refugees have been unable to go back to their places of origin for reasons of continued insecurity or the lack of a viable livelihood. Poverty and natural disasters have also contributed to the recent displacement of Afghans, but violence has been the major factor in involuntary migration. Between June 2009 and September 2010, more than 120,000 Afghans fled their homes as a result of armed conflict.

As of 2011, there were still 1.8 million Afghans living in Pakistan given both security and economic instability in their country. However, the country that for decades has hosted Afghan refugees has become the site of extensive military activity that has displaced Pakistanis internally as well as back and forth into Afghanistan.

Uncle Bob, well said, but the fact of the matter is that the West, especially the USA, forgets faster than it learns and keeps repeating the same old mistakes over and over again. As for Afganistan, or any country for that matter that chooses to attack the USA as Al Qaida and the Taliban (which controlled Afganistan) did on 9/11, there is ALWAYs pay-back, and Americans ALWAYS demand blood. The problem is that the USA has forgotten the use and meaning of war since WW2, and this is why we've had one draw, one loss, and quagmires in Iraq and Afganistan that are not over and will most likely end up a loss if we keep giving "rebels" arms which they will later use on us or our allies. When you declare a "war" on an enemy, you are saying that there is a nation or people that you are going to export violence to, and anyone that supports your enemies efforts to kill you is a target. Do you think your grandfathers worried about the Japanese people in Hiroshima or the Germans in Dresden? NO, because they knew the fastest way to peace was total war and NOT nation-building. When we displaced the Taliban and Al Qaida in Afganistan and killed Bin Laden it was time to go. Let the Arab states deal with their cancers! The USA should never get into a war based on nation-building BS or democratization; only when our national security is threatened or it's people are attacked. When that happens, we don't arm guys that were shooting at our soldiers a few months ago (much of Al Qaida in Iraq has joined the Syrian rebels), we tell them to f— — k off and let them kill each other and then KILL them if they start jihad against the USA. Enough said.

Again, the morality arguement. It isn' that you don't care because you have some morality. It is that you don't care because they don't have oil. If you had to pay $12 for gas because of what was happening in Syria, you'd suddenly be telling me about all the children who are dying and suddenly care.

Since there seems to still be a lot of people who don't know this fact, Syria is an oil exporting country. As a matter of fact they have more oil than Libya where we saw fit to intervene with the so called "no fly zone" that resulted in many civilian casualties from NATO air strikes in the name of protecting civilians.

What's happening in Syria is a much smaller scale internal conflict from what was happening in Libya but nonetheless a civil war that we have no valid reason to be involved in. A couple of "rebel strongholds" are being bombarded by the Syrian military in a war being fought there. If the Syrian government was indiscriminately using chemical weapons or bombing entire cities to the ground all over the country we'd have the "humanitarian" argument for intervention, but as long as it's a regional conflict internal to a small section of Syria we need to stay the heck out of it and let them decide the fate of their own nation without us doing further harm.

Yes, and any terrorist attack in the future indirectly related to this will be called blow black - just as us arming them in the 80s and sept. 11 is called today.

This is Operation Fast & Furious II. DEA has all the serial #'s for these guns, honest. The ammunition is designed to kill Assad forces, not rebels or DEA agents. US intends to get the weapons back after the rebellion, honest.

Paul, where does it say that America is arming the rebels? It doesn't. It doesn't say our policy is to arm our enemies. It says that the rebels have outlined a new government and are asking for weapons so that they can make it a reality.

O'Bama armed our enemies in Libya and Egypt, Syria is no different. He ignored the U.S. Constitution and pushed his own agenda, that is why O'Bama is considered "a Son of Islam" by a number of Islamic Terrorist Groups. SYRIA AND THE SYRIAN REBELS (ACTIVIST) SHOULD SOLVE THE SYRIAN PROBLEMS WITHOUT ANY INTERFERENCE FROM NATO, WESTERN EUROPE OF THE U.S.. Will the U.S. arm the Russian Rebels (activist), the Iranian Rebels (activist) the Saudi Rebels (activist) in addition to no-fly zones for these countries? O'Bama, by his own actions, is creating an environment that could cause similar revolts in the U.S., I doubt these countries will arm the U.S. Rebels (activists).

Obama also armed Yemen. In 2009, he sent $155MILLION dollars to Yemen for

arms. You can check that out yourselves my friends. $155MILLION dollars to Yemen??

WOW!!!!

"where does it say that America is arming the rebels"

You don't think that Mrs. Clinton's assurance that "They'll find the arms somewhere," means that we're doing it indirectly, sort of like how Ollie North knew that the Contras would find some arms somewhere?

Rlquall - or charlie wilson and the afghans.

Rlquall, actually, what happened in Libya is that we didn't arm the rebels at all and left it to completely unaffiliated countries and supporters. The sense I got from Clinton was that America wasn't going to stand in the way of the arming of the rebels.

Joe, who did Obama arm in Egypt? And why do people say O'bama verses Obama? Spelling problems?

Worst thing we could do is put more weapons into the hands of more violent Islamists!

Of course these would ultimately be used against us; and against religious minorities in Syria (Alawites, Christians), against Kurds, against Shi'ites (since it is the Sunnis, along with al-Qaida, that we'd be arming)...

And--no matter which side ultimately prevails--our weapons would be used against all the Syrians that the new ruling power in Syria decides to oppress at least as brutally, and probably more so, as Assad did.

If we want to bring down the Assad regime, the way to do it is to bring down the one who's arming him and keeping him in power: Ahmadinejad of Iran. If we don't have it in us to support Iranian opposition and get him out of power, all we really have to do is take away his toys...especially, the nuclear ones he's very fast preparing, along with long-range missiles that can bring their deadly cargo to the US and all points in between.

when Syria fall will go to Muslim brotherhood as Egypt, Libya Tunisia, Yemen,

as we all know Muslim brotherhood believe in sharia law and make a big middle east under one Sunni rule, and abuse the Christians in the middle east, it is Muslim and no body else, Christians are the origins of these countries

this really will bite USA at the end, USA help its enemy and at the end the enemy will deceive USA and bite it, like Taliban in Afghanistan

i see a lot of Christians people here do not care about the Christians in the middle east, we should be one

hand to defeat the Antichrist, if president obama is supporting Muslim brotherhood now, i will see you in the next

election and i will not vote for you, i guess just American Muslim and Muslim brotherhood organization

will vote for you, i am sure now catholic will not vote for you either.president Obama said USA is not a Christan nation any more and it is a Muslim and what else religion, but president obama do not forget whoever built USA are Christians.

We need to tell Syria to give us a list of leaders and a comprehensive plan for the replacement government. Why do we need to support another Islamicist movement. We mad the mistake in Afghanistan, Egypt and Libya.

Nice boys that they are, I'm sure that they'll happily give up any arms we lend them as soon as the conflict is resovled, because they know that if they don't, then the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, and Santy Claus won't be good to them any more.

Selling and/or giving weapons to the Syrians is a very bad idea. We are still missing the weapons given to the Libyans. Not only that, but the Libyans are now in league with the Muslim Brotherhood (which is also taking over Egypt). The Syrians have a written plan because they think it will be enough for us not to worry about the VERY REAL possbility that the Muslim Brotherhood might hijack their cause or that another part of the Syrian rebel leadership might actually hand the entire cause over to the Brotherhood. They did it to the Libyans and will probably do it to the Syrians.

I say let them fight it out. They will appreciate their freedom much more if they have to be far more creative than just asking the US to "please, give us weapons because we are the good guys" and "see, we have a written document indicating our intentions". How much more gullible will the US be when it comes to radical Muslims and the Middle East?

Enough already!

Ladi, we didn't arm the Libyans and if we did, why would we ask or need a bunch of hand guns and pick up trucks back? So your point is that Gaddafi and Assad's terrorist supporting actions are better than the alternative (an election)? Maybe we should have been arming Assad and Ghaddafi since they are only responsible for a few hundred a American deaths.

No hek211 -

such antiquated ideas of yours have no place in the modern political arena. Sure you have your presidential candidates in Gingrich and Santorum who you can find common ground with, but these men are truly pariahs on the world stage. Your jingoistic-ethnocentric opinion puts you in league with these men, who are earning the scorn and disdain of America's allies on a daily basis.

Anthony,

You need to read some history. History may not always repeat, but it certainly does rhyme. Hek seems to have a much better hold on the reality of these cultures than you do. Everytime we arm any of these muslim people Americans and/or our allies get killed with these weapons. As for the modern political arena just take a look at Egypt. As soon as their "horrible" dictator was toppled the military took over and the radical Islamic Brotherhood gained a majority in their parliment. Dont be a fool we need to stay out of everyone elses business and stop pushing our cultural views on those who disagree with our culture.

chris-2201326 -

We'll agree to disagree. I firmly believe that indviduals like Hek and yourself are truly lost and do not comprehend the greater lessons of history. I'm not just saying that - I believe it. You are doing nothing but parroting (per Orwell - duckspeaking) the propaganda memes that you've learned via AM Talk Radio and Fox News. Individuals like yourself do not have the cognitive capabilities nor the education to grasp the unfolding of events now and their relationships (or non-relationships) with history. You've taken the easy route (i.e. the black-n-white, good vs. evil) to make an opinion by simply assigning everything occuring in the mid-east to the rise of the Neo Islamo-fascist Caliphate. That is your belief system. Since you believe it, it must be truth. Your kind are quite prevalent in our society, but easily countered with logic and education. For my part, I don't attempt to argue with folks like you, just I would not attempt to pursue a deep discussion with someone who doubts the moon landing or disputes the theory of evolution.

Bottom line is that you and Hek are wrong, regardless of your nuances of opinion in US foreign policy - the underlying premise of your belief system is flawed.

In regards to Egypt, the US and the Obama administration did the correct thing by supporting the 83 million voices clamoring for democracy. There is no way that the Obama administration or any republican administration (regardless of today's position of the candidates - may be revised by the hour depending upon changing events) could have supported Mubarak after the ugly scenes in the streets of Cairo. Backing a dictator under those circumstances would have been a compromise of American tradition and values. If you can not comprehend that, then you comprehend nothing about our national character. So please - don't even try to give me a lecture on history.

Yourself making an attempt to enlighten us about history is as absurd as an Orc from Mordor attempting to function as a good-will embassador to the humans of Middle Earth.

Anthony: Please show us the government in an Islamic country where human rights are respected. When there are mobs outside Bagram Air Base killing people over the burning of the Qu'ran, a book, these people ARE EXPRESSING the "will of the people". (If Christians were murdering people over the burning fo the Bible there would be no voices saying "you just have to understand the culture of these people".) The "will of the people" in the Islamic countries IS FOR the subjugation of women, the oppression and murder of homosexuals, the stoning of rape victims, and, especially, the elimination of all "blasphemers" (those who aren't Muslims or support and practice the "wrong" forms of Islam). "Democracy" is a wonderful thing were the rights of dissenters to free speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly, etc. are honored, and a horrible thing were they are not, as it is just the "tyranny of the majority". Cite the exceptions to this -- what majority Muslim country has anything resembling the basic human rights? There are NONE. Turkey as built by the secularist modernizer Attaturk comes the closest, but it is far from truly free and is drifting inexorably toward Islamism. I wish the world worked the way that you seem to think that it does, but facts are stubborn things.

Rlquall -

Can not respond. Your questions do not have anything to do with the subject of of this article.

If you have a problem with Islam, then that is your own crusade. I'm not religious. I find all members of our species that profess belief in a higher power to be somewhat backwards. Whether in the pulpit of a Baptist church, the vatican, a synagogue, a mosque, Budhist temple or the animistic faiths chanting around the campfire clinging to ceramic figures - it's all pretty strange stuff to me.

My faith is in science and the advancement of our species will be determined by the intellectually superior members of the human race - not the stale and superstitious clingers to theology.

Sorry that I can not participate further in whatever it is you want to talk about. If you'd care to elaborate on your opionions of the geopolitics of the Syria, the sectarian divide of this society, the UN, etc... I'm willing to give you a fair hearing.

Anthony just lost any credibility as a reasonable person and his "opionions" about what he's see's as the ramblings of the inferior should be disregarded as fanatical and overly zealous. There isn't anything more dangerous in this world than a man who thinks he's better than everyone else.

Problems will be solved by more sober minds. For now, we can only hope that time will bring wisdom and perspective to him.

But dante2308 - such wisdom could never originate from your mind. Therefore, no perspective will be forthcoming to alleviate me from loss of credibilty and unreasonable opinions. Sadly, I'll have to continue to wait for salvation.

If you are the sober mind that somehow comprehends everything, you certainly have not demonstrated anything. Bring on the genius that you evidently feel you possess. I won't argue with you about ideology, I'm not ideological and there is no ability to win such an argument. But if you have sound opinions in regards to the Syria, the UN, geopolitics, history, etc... I'll know as soon as you start writing. I suspect that you are a chump in terms of intellectual capabilities. Perhaps you've watched a few documentaries on the history channel. That must certainly be the qualifier to be an expert in your world and circle of intimates.

But the real point in all of this is that I've hit a raw nerve by not acknowledging the belief in your religion. It's ok, you'll get over it.

Any, Mr./Ms. sober mind, let's see what you've got. I'll be checking throughout the night for your response.

Spartacus Vengeance starts tonight at 10pm EST so do get busy before hand so that I can devote proper time to reading your words of wisdom. Cheers!

anthony - You sir are an ass. Your oh so sophistication, and the way you present it, you must be a pretty isolated person. You might have science, but you forgot your soul, and truly you have just contradicted yourself. religious people are backward, yet you think the ME should be supported in their (religious) rebellions. For science, you make no sense, thus I will not entertain your line of thinking either.

I will however 'pray' for you. Doesn't that just gaul you?

Again, you've said nothing except that you lack the ability to think rationally without bias or prejudice. You've assumed so much, I couldn't even begin to address your errors in judgment. It would be futile in any case because you're just expressing a simple superiority complex and I lack neither the ability, the will, or the patience to argue against a narcissistic alternative reality.

Since you're so proud and vocal about your misguided assumptions, speaking about a real word issue with you would accomplish nothing more than to provide a medium for your issues manifest themselves.

On that note, I do wonder about individuals who feel the need to prove (to themselves) that they are more intelligent than everyone or place high value on that comparison. I've never felt that insecurity and I haven't known anyone I considered to be a actual genius to exhibit it either. This would thus seem to be further evidence that a superiority complex is also coupled with an inferiority complex. Since debate on the topic of Syria is out of order here, I'd love to hear your views on your own mental state.

Lee, a scientific mind doesn't have "faith" in science or exhibit bias the way this person does. It goes without saying that this person is not a scientist. This is aside from your comments about religion. Nothing about this conversation is about religion. This person is just exhibiting a social and/or personality disorder with predictable traits which leads to predictable points of view about people who are in any way different.

Anthony, I would like to delay our conversation until around Sunday. I have plans for the majority of the weekend.

dante2308 -

No need to respond further. You've made a nice attempt to make a comeback, and I applaud your efforts.

To be clear, I have no conflict with you. You chose to chime with arrogance, I had to respond.

This site has such potential for good discussion. 90% of the posts disseminate misinformation and the standard hateful partisan smack downs. I choose not to engage in such stuff. Bush bashing and Obama bashing are types of discourse for another segment of society.

Anyway, as I've read your posts and have determined that you just don't have any real knowledge of world affairs to really be able to opine on such complex subjects as geopolitics and history with any real value. No offense intended, I'd tell you the same thing to your face and not hide behind a computer screen.

@ LEE - CHICAGO -

Go ahead and pray for me, I'm not offended. I love the use of the word 'gaul'. I'm imaging a barbarian crushing the head of a Roman centurian. I believe the word you intended was 'gall', you ignorant fool.

Believe in god or fairies of whatever form of deity worship you feel necessary in order to have a fulfilling life.

Peace be to your soul my brother....

Anthony: Whether or not any new Syrian regime is composed of radical Islamists or not is very pertinent to the topic at hand. And whether "democracy" might constitute an improvement over Bashir Assad is as well. Since the track record with Islamic "democracy" is to this point nonexistent (in contrast to that of the Baptists whom you also cite, another religious group I'm not a member of, but know their democratic tendencies in contrast to Muslims), it is a pertinent point, even if you choose not to see it as such.

Anthony, I don't regard you highly enough to take offense from your comments. Your dangerously out of proportion ego and lack of self-awareness makes it impossible to even associate your ramblings with reality. We're all here watching a very real and untreated problem play itself out like a grotesque spectacle.

The most disheartening of all is that the nature of the problem is such that one with it cannot imagine himself having a problem. How on earth does on who cannot comprehend religious people expect to make a useful long term policy decision for a country of religious people? It doesn't make sense and yet you see your complete lack of imagination or ability to comprehend as a strength. How could anyone expect to learn something regarding Syria from someone who cannot fathom its people?

Of course, I doubt you are self aware enough to understand the problem even if told directly. I suppose you will go on thinking you have something to contribute to the lesser fools that inhabit your universe. I'm still, just for the purpose of intellectual curiosity, interested in hearing your own views on your mental state. If it helps, I'll ask a question:

Would you please define a situation where a person is overly egotistical?

For the record, this isn't a comeback or whatever kids are doing these days. To thing about my comments is that each word of it was an honest and reasoned assessment of you. There is nothing exaggerated or filled with emotion or defensiveness. This is exactly how you are being perceived. If your comments are intended to insult as per the insinuation that my comments were a comeback, as a courtesy, I'd like to inform you that I have grown past the maturity level where one would base his emotions on random blog postings of complete strangers.

Marty:

It will be nice some body arm us against our Government that is increasingly incapable no matter whch party they come from. Will Congress let someone else help us with sophisticated arms that we will need to deal with intimidatinly powerful our GOvernment infranstructure with trillions at its disposal

RAJ paranoid or what? How would our Government convince US troops to fire on Citizens? They are not bat@!$%# crazy middle Easterners..

To US citizen,

While I don't think we are at that point,and hopefully never will be.Don't ever think they wouldn't fire on us if ordered to.There have been several examples that they will.The aftermath might spark a Revolution,true.But at the beginning they would fire.Now on a sarcastic note,rebellious elements here might be able to get Assad to arm them if they ask.If I was him,I'd be mad enough over our meddling in Syria's internal affairs to want to return the favor.

Uncle Bob, with deep respect, could you please turn off the bold and use your space bar between sentences at least? I really would like to read what you're saying, but I can't because your type is giving me a migraine. Thank you.

Jen - Lighten up. Bob already said he can read it better that way, and while a little jarring it isn't impossible to read, Bob is probably an older person that cannot see the small grayish lettering very well, I can actually relate, and some day you may also. Hopefully people will be understanding then as well.

It is not Millions, It is Billions.

Send some badass weapons, weapons like Nuclear Bombs!

Yeah Bob, I say we kill them all!

For the Allawite sect that forms the backbone of the regime, there is no turning back.

For the Sunni opposition fighting against Assad and the Allawite (shia) minority, there most certainly is no turning back.

For the minority groups (Christians, Kurds, Druze, Turkmen) that have dominantly sided with Assad - assumedly a choice of the lesser of two evils - there is no turning back.

The nation is a Sectarian powder keg reminiscent of Yugoslavia prior to disintegration. Only the UN can solve a crisis of this magnitude, and for that reason I find the actions of Russia and China to be absolutely offensive.

To be clear, the Russians and the Chinese have not taken the high road with their Security Council vetoes. Their actions were based upon selfish actions of self-preservation (guised as respect for national soveignty) to prevent future UN involvement in their own nations in the trans-Caucusus region and for China on their frontier with central Asia.

So Anthony - for such a large brain and intellect can't you see that China & Russia could only support Syria, as they want to have the same power flexing ability with their citizens. to not support Syria would be to turn their back on their own practices and intentions. so you seriously think a country, any country should act against their own interests?

Lee -

I wish I could respond, but I can not make any sense of your paragraph.

Apologies, I've read and re-read your words, but I can not determine what it is you are attempting to say.

It would be nice if you could really participate in this discussion with real knowledge, facts, citations of historical precedence, etc...

You are so disappointing. Sigh... Well, at least you still have your love for god and your soul is pure and clean.

Anthony -- I agree with your analysis. Lee is also correct if I am interpreting him correctly. One can hardly reasonably expect Russia and China, who always reserve the right to deal with people under their sovereignty in a similar fashion, to act to condemn an ally who is only doing what they would do and have done under similar circumstances. My only point of disagreement with you is that you seem to ascribe purer motives and more ability to the UN than would I. But sometimes, despite its limitations, it's the only realistic, reasonable option.

TFF Sal

She is looking a little weathered.

Thank you! Next time America gets involved in WAR it needs to be "For Real"... No more rules, no more hands tied behind soldiers backs.

The media propagandists must be smiling at this one.

Is somebody saying we should accept an Arab Leaque of non-democratic states? There is only one sure thread behind all of this illogic- and that is the desire for an all out near-east war. One thing you can be sure of- those calling for war won't be doing the fighting.

If the Arab League wants to sort it out, let THEM do it! They have bought lots of armaments, among other things, with their petrodollars. Where is this our fight? Is it in our American nature to see every group of "rebels" as the modern equivalents to Washington, Jefferson, Hancock, Patrick Henry, etc.? Sure, Assad is a horrible dictator and bloodthirsty murderer. Does that make his opponents "good guys"? Some of them, no doubt, want to recompense for his relative toleration of Druze, Christians, Shi'a, etc. They are just a different set of cruel oppressors, kind of like when Mao Tse-tung overthrew Chaing Kai-shek in China. There isn't an "our" side in this fight, so we should just STAY OUT.