So, Who Feels Someone Should Step Up And Help Syrian People?

The Arab Spring seems to have never ended. We've come a full seasonal rotation and now people are dying in Syria because Asad doesn't want to let go. News reports guesstimate that so far 8, 000 people have lost their lives in Syria and the situation seems to be getting worse. Whole cities are under siege and the civilian population is being oblitirated.
The UN doesn't seem to know what to do ( let's have monitors, let's not ) and in the mean time more and more innocent people are getting caught in the crooss fire going on between Asad and his opponents. No one seems to know who these opponents are and who is leading them , hence the reluctance of the international community to get involved.
The US seems to be in the same mode. In the mean time Russia is sendiing more weapons to support the Asad regime.
I think it's high time for the US to step up and be a leader again and provide at least some air support to the rebels, whoever they may be.
The time for dictators like Asad, who ruthlessly murder their own civilian population, is over and that message should be sent.
Any one else agree?

We (the West) are overstretched and war-fatigued. Plus, the Syrians don't have anything we want and, from what I hear, Asad has a proper army with a proper command structure. With all that taken into account, those people are going to keep dying because it's not in any nations interest to stop it. Well, not any nation with the capability to, anyway.

Actually, a regime that supports the west would not be a bad strategical choice in Syria. The Asad regime openly supports Hazbalah and is very anti-Israel.
What I don't get, the US allowed Mubarak to get overthrown in Egypt and he was a staunch ally for forty years.

We got Iran to worry about. The Syrian people are on their own. Any government that replaces it will still be unfriendly to the West. They don't like us over there. They will accept our military support if we gave it to them, then turn hostile once they topple Asad.

__________________
It reminds me of a toilet paper on the trees
- Paula

Yeah, that's one of the worries. We could however play a more active role and put people in power that we want and can control.
In Afghanistan we put a guy in power that we have no control over and Pakistan we smother with foreign aid to no avail because we had no input into who rules that country now.

So, you are actually saying that the USA should put people in power that they can control? Never mind the good of the actual citizens in those countries, WE GOTTA CONTRAL DAT *****!

You must do your fellow countrymen proud.

Isn't that how democracy works...?

__________________

How about just a few well-placed trained countersnipers to take care of those cowards shooting innocent civilians

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

There is evidence, not just Syrian propaganda, that Al Qaeda is part of the rebellion, so us getting directly involved in that mess would be a huge nightmare. We should just do what we have been doing, criticize Asad, support the people with our mouth, and not do much more.

I can't tell if you're serious or sarcastic.

The Syrian people are the only people who can help themselves. They just don't think they can. That's the bottom line I feel, even if a Western country goes and ****s with it all, once we leave it'll revert just like always. The US does not have any obligation to help anyone, so no it is not time for anyone to step up except the repressed citizens. Rebellion is a better message than more stupid wars no one can afford.

Can America seriously afford to help anyone, America can't help itself.

__________________

Plaster this everywhere please

You know we had help from the French ourselves, right? That was a good thing.

I'm not saying we should go into Syria, but just as "we'll just go in and fix things" is simplistic, so is "it's up to them to help themselves." Sometimes intervention can make a huge difference. Sometimes it can devolve into a cluster****. There is no universal principle that you can apply to all these situations.

Of course not but the instigation for a societal revolution should not be outsourced

We could very well end up in a war with Iran before the year is over. Now is not the time to be talking intervention in Syria. One war at a time in the Middle East.

Anyone who is interested in history should know there has never been peace in that area, there has been war after war for the past 2,000+ years, there never is going to be peace.

Here, I'll make you feel better:

Would either one of those make you feel better?

I'm not saying anything new. It's an established US policy to contol, when it get's envolved. Never mind the fiasco in Iran ( when they toppled the Shah and brought in a whole new nightmare ) and anti-Mubarak support which now they might be doubting.
And yeah, I'm proud to be an American. Bitch about us all you want, but we have helped the world more than any one else has ( so what if we got something out of it, what matters is, is that the world is better for it )
If I was you, I wouldn't be moralizing too much, you got your own Congo to be ashamed about.

The United States didn't topple the Shaw. The Iranian people did that all by themselves. We didn't intervene to help him. How could we? He was hated and we were resented because we put him in power in the first place.