Saturday, June 22, 2013

"measures which will make a practical difference to the situation on the ground in Syria"

Thus BBC radio news, toeing the Government line in most uncharacteristic fashion, on the decision to send arms to even up the balance of the Syrian civil war.

I think I get it :

Islamists killing soldiers on British streets - bad.

Islamists killing soldiers on Syrian streets - good.


I liked the quote from the Qatar PM :

"providing arms may be the only means of achieving peace"

In other news :

The late Col Gaddafi takes "measures which will make a practical difference to the situation on the ground in Britain".

Mohamed Sidique Khan takes "measures which will make a practical difference to the situation on the ground in London"



There's no doubt that Assad is a nasty piece of work. I'm just not at all sure that any replacement will be any better. The fate of the Iraqi Christians is ever before me. It seems from here highly likely that Syrian Christians will suffer similarly in a post-Assad Syria.

You'd think that the post-invasion unpleasantness in Iraq, which while not the apocalyptic peoples revolt against imperialism predicted (and hoped for) by the Left, certainly wasn't the flowering of civil society that some people foresaw (my fourth-ever post still seems pretty cautious and prescient, even if I say so myself), might have made minds in Washington and London more cautious about a repeat performance.

If, that is, the welfare of the average Syrian was the priority. Maybe it isn't.


7 comments:

staybryte said...

Our govenment (whichever party label it applies to itself) is mad. Utterly, barking crazy. And tragically it seems to be catching.

Laban said...

There's method in the madness, I think. Dan Drezner may be onto something :

"To your humble blogger, this is simply the next iteration of the unspoken, brutally realpolitik policy towards Syria that's been going on for the past two years. To recap, the goal of that policy is to ensnare Iran and Hezbollah into a protracted, resource-draining civil war, with as minimal costs as possible. This is exactly what the last two years have accomplished... at an appalling toll in lives lost.

This policy doesn't require any course correction... so long as rebels are holding their own or winning. A faltering Assad simply forces Iran et al into doubling down and committing even more resources. A faltering rebel movement, on the other hand, does require some external support, lest the Iranians actually win the conflict. In a related matter, arming the rebels also prevents relations with U.S. allies in the region from fraying any further."


http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog/2013/06/morality-necessity-and-realism-in-syria.html

Anonymous said...

I assume the Russkies are in it for the harbour facilities. I have to say whenever I've seen these insurgent types get the better of a no doubt swinish government I have had the premonition that all this victory and military experiece will one day be aimed at us. Imagine a day when the central authority here is powerless to stop some kind of islamic insurgency supported from abroad. That is what happens when you have a society divided so deeply along ethnic and religious lines particularly involving Islam. we must not let this happen and the only way is to stop a powerful islamic demographic block building up in western countries. We have to tell those who disagree to simply fuck off. It's a matter of sanity and survival.

JuliaM said...

"...might have made minds in Washington and London more cautious about a repeat performance."

Why? What consequences did they suffer?

Yaffle said...

"It seems from here highly likely that Syrian Christians will suffer similarly in a post-Assad Syria"

They're already suffering Laban, probably worse than any other group in Syria. Not that you'd know it from the BBC/MSM of course.

http://syriareport.net/syria-militants-massacre-christian-village/
http://barnabasfund.org/US/Christians-in-Syria-targeted-in-series-of-kidnappings-and-killings-100-dead.html

etc.

staybryte said...

Feasible Laban. If one accepts Drezner's view then the similarities with Spain in the 30s are striking IMHO.

Anonymous said...

"The BBC Radio News, toeing the Government line in a most uncharacteristic fashion..."

That depends on what the Government line is. Leftist types like the BBC regard Islamists as one of their favourite victim groups. Hence the BBC/Guardian's almost hysterical demands for military intervention in Kosovo in the late 1990's.

The real reason for Western powers giving the Syrian rebels limited support is to keep the war going, with neither side winning outright.

As Drezner notes, that keeps Iran and Hezbollah on the rack, and prevents the Russians from gaining a secure Mediterranean naval base.

The BBC are merely gullible idiots.