Obama: Assad Shooting At American Planes Would Lead To His Overthrow

[Scootaloo]

31. Not particularly, but killing him and toppling Syria's government will do more harm than good

That is my concern here, msanthrope. What, do you think putting a bullet in Assad's head, and destroying all the infrastructure of Syria's government and military, is going to make everything come up daisies and gumdrops?

No.

It will throw Syria into complete anarchy as we have seen in Iraq and Libya. It will empower the already-powerful radical groups operating in Syria. We will be unable to secure the military and government resources of the Damascus government; these will fall into the hands of assorted "rebel groups." None of these groups are freedom-loving sons of liberty seeking wholesome liberal western democracy. Most are butchers and freaks on par with IS, and just not as resourceful. You would change that latter part. Boom, they've got their hands on al lthat fun stuff Assad had, and we can't do anything about it.

What then? Well, after general carnage in Syria - a three way fight, with the US and its "rebel" allies slaughtering a few hundred or thousand Syrians, and the Syrian government fighting those two factions - and probably with the rebels shooting at us as well - it's likely that the most powerful groups in the equation - IS and al-Nusra, will consolidate and sweep up the rest of the rebel groups, either wiping them our or absorbing them. Congratulations on handing the crazies the keys to Syria and all its military resources, msanthrope.

What next? Lebanon. Lebanon's military is the weakest military in the region, and IS no doubt sees its borders as artificial as they do Iraq's. Hezbollah will fight, but lacking the resources, it will lose. Lots and lots of Lebanese will die. especially once Israel gets involved, and yes, Israel will get involved, because it does not want either Hezbollah or IS-types to be ascendant on its north frontier. And this is before considering any attempt to re-take Golan by the new Syrian regime you've installed.

or maybe those arms and resources will go back into Iraq, msanthrope. it'd be a good time for IS to break their truce with the Kurds, and hte sudden influx of weaponry and manpower will have bad results there. The Kurds fall back into Turkey, both from Syria and Iraq, the fight follows, and Turkey is obligated to get involved. The war expands north. Suddenly it's a NATO issue, and won't that be fun!

And of course we need to think about Jordan. As Amman is a benefactor of IS and its attendant groups, Jordan's frontiers have been nice and peaceful. I don't imagine that an empowered and emboldened IS will care much about that, and after Lebanon, Jordan's the kicking-dog. And just like Lebanon, a Jordan on the verge of collapse brings Israel in. Israel has said as much, in fact.

Every possible outcome from toppling Damascus leads to the empowerment of the murderous fundy-types, and from there the expansion of war and death through the region, like a metastasizing cancer. Every possible outcome, msanthrope. It's a hideously bad idea no matter what angle you approach it from.

As repulsive as it is, the US needs to work with Damascus instead of threatening it. Assuming the US' goal is to prevent more destruction and death - that's what I hope the goal is, don't you? Because as gross as Assad is? He's better than what would happen if his government fell, and his government is currently able to be a very useful tool in securing a stable situation that greatly reduces those risks.

But no. Go on howling for more war and blood and carnage like a damned doofus.