+1
Jerry Eichenberger wrote on 09/01/13 at 09:24:23:I sick of supporting regime change in these Middle Eastern and other Muslim countries, Iraq included.
Back when the dictators were in power in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Egypt and Syria, and nobody messed with the other, things were fine - stable, that it.
Libya learned its lesson from Reagan, and all was quiet until two years ago. Sadam was quiet at 1991 until GWB decided to throw him out. Iran was quiet until Carter chickened out, wouldn't let Israel kill Khomeini while he was still in Paris and thereby keep the Shah in power, then we sit back and let Egypt go nuts.
Those people can't handle self rule - Muslims want theocracies, not democracies. I say, protect the strongmen - at least they bring stability to the region and keep the crazies under control.
My own considerations, especially considering Italy alone has far more Syrians and Lybians over here than you have or will ever have.
AND
we're much closer to the Middle East than you are,
AND
we've got a good 3000 years experience of dealing with "the East Coast" of the Mediterranean, way back in the days when the Phoenicians were running the Persian Kings' Navies against Greeks and Egyptians...
1. Remember Guernica (if you don't know what Guernica is, it's a city in Spain; google it and read about it)
Whereas during the Spanish Civil War everybody blamed the Loyalists (Fascists) for bombing Guernica, some 60 years later a former Republican (Communist) Leader admitted on his death bed the bombing was actually Republicans on Republicans, done on purpose in order to cause a public outcry hoping to gain international support.
It worked, but what parent would hurt his own children in secret in order to gain support?
2. The Syrian regime started opposing public demonstrations (which were simply asking for new elections), and the "violence" was limited to tear gas and rubber bullets
until someone started shooting at policemen... with precision weapons (sniper rifles)
THAT caused an escalation. Incidentally, Assad's claim that the "rebels" were supported by "external terrorists" was proven correct in more than one instance, with prisoners being identified and linked to Iraq, Al Qaeda, and even some US muslim converts (!!!)
3. The Syrian regime lost a number of cities - which means it also lost the local garrisons and armories; the original protesters soon cried out to international media that their protest had been pried away from them by "violent extremists" who fight with heavy machine guns, bazookas and mortars - which is something someone demonstrating for new elections will clearly not do.
4. The "external terrorists" have recruited volunteers from Iraq, Afghanistan and some Central Asian Republics - those same which provided fresh recruits to the Taliban Regime in Afghanistan.
The proof is the languages those guerillas speak (not always Arabic but Urdu or Turkik) and the techniques used to produce IEDs, Improvised Explosive Devices.
As any Bomb Squad can testify, every "bomber" has his own technique and every explosive device carries a "signature" - the IEDs filmed by European Journalists have all been identified as "the same kind used in Afghanistan and in the first years of the Iraqi Occupation" - hence, they were made by those persons or by their trainees.
5. WHO IS THE LOCAL SUPERPOWER ? The USA ? Think again.
The local superpower is TURKEY. If Turkey is sitting pretty then nobody should make so much as a hint of a move.
If military action in Syria causes retaliation or a reaction by Syrian forces or forces of another nation, Israel might well be targeted; and if Israel reacts (it would be entitled to) we are in for yet another full scale war in the Middle East.
NOT IN MY FRONT YARD !!!
PS: given the level of high tech and strategic transportation available to all...
.. as 9/11 already pointed out, the US are NOT as untouchable as they were during WW2.
I am a convinced non-interventionist, and you should be, too.