Do you think Syrian President Bashar al-Assad has to go for there to be peace in the country?

Al-Assad can go or he can stay but peace in that country will require everyone to be on the same page OR agree to debate without a reliance on weaponry. Gonna happen?

I voted 'no' because I look at what has happened in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Egypt and it seems to me the removal of the leader however dictorial or whatever they are does little to usher in a new era of peace. Quite the opposite in fact.

If people ain't careful, Syria will become a proxy fight between the west and Islam, just like Vietnam was a proxy fight between the west and communism. Not going to end well. Especially when Russia is helping Iran along with their nuke program.

I'm reading stories how all these "massacres" are staged so the military industrial complex can get in there and make some war money. The Western-Christian-Democracies vs. Islam-Ex-Communists might very well be WWIII if folks in charge aren't careful.

No. Remove outdated and barbaric supernatural beliefs and peace just might have a chance.

Abstaining from voting. Recent history has shown that, as SimondB mentioned above, "the removal of the leader however dictorial or whatever they are does little to usher in a new era of peace. Quite the opposite in fact." Foreign intervention seems to have the effect of benefiting the foreign nation rather than improving anything in the transitional nation. While I do not support foreign intervention because of this, revolution with a nation also takes an extremely long time to recover from (some never recover), and, depending who is next in line for the seat of power, the country can go either way.

gaijinfo:

I'm reading stories how all these "massacres" are staged so the military industrial complex can get in there and make some war money. The Western-Christian-Democracies vs. Islam-Ex-Communists might very well be WWIII if folks in charge aren't careful.

"Staged," you say? I find it difficult to believe that you're bothering to put any credence to "stories" you can't corroborate by having your own feet on the ground in Syria. The only "military industrial complex" that's abusing the situation is Russia's. So stop creating, or being naively sucked into, the fallacy of conspiracy theories. What's happening in Syria is nothing short of a bloody regime change that's taking longer than it should. If Assad was assassinated, things would cool down rather quickly.

Assad is still widely popular among Syrians.

This militant insurgency is nothing more than an attempted subversion by Western powers.

Despite being on site investigating the massacres the UN has been unable to prove that the Syrian Soldiers did it. In fact most witness reports point to the rebel militia.

After all, who gains from the massacres? The rebels are desperate for international attention but the Syrian soldiers have no necessary to slaughter their own people, instead it's detrimental to them because it draws media attention to their attempt to quell the subversion.

At this point Assad is damaged beyond repair. I don't think he can survive in the long term.

Assad is still widely popular among Syrians.

Shhh, people are not supposed to know that.

I agree that the west is behind this crisis.

For there to be peace, the west and their allies need to back off.

Shhh, people are not supposed to know that.

Shhh, is that because it's not true? Otherwise, you are not making sense.

I agree that the west is behind this crisis.

Well gee, I guess that means you can provide some concrete proof of this? Cause Never Submit has had a lot of trouble on this front.

For there to be peace, the west and their allies need to back off.

Umm, I don't think that will satisfy the problems facing Assad. You see, he still has this problem of unsatisfied Syrians to contend with.

It was reported quite a while ago that weapons were sent by the rebels (or whatever you want to call them) in Libya. It is hardly news and it alone hardly points the finger at the "CIA". Try a little harder.

@Ban Bingo

the west is behind this crisis.

Que? Assad is murdering his own people and you blame the WEST? If you are going to blame the west, blame them for not doing enough to help the Syrian people so far but you can't lay the cause of all the bloodshed at their door.

The assumption that there would be "peace" in Syria once the Saddam regime is removed is naive in the extreme.

Have people learned nothing from the pathetic "successes" of the American interventions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, and the string of "Arab spring" aka Shariah winter rebellions?

In what way, shape, or form would a Muslim Brotherhood dominated Sunni regime in Syria equal "peace"??

Mind-boggling.

Syria is just Iraq 2.0.

Except that Assad isn't near as bad as Saddam as Assad is generally supported by the majority of Syrians.

Also the US is trying a different tactic this time, subversion from within, using professional mercenaries supported by Western-supplied officers with satellite support, communications and endless ammunition.

He has to go, for the simple reason that a big portion of the Syrian people will no longer accept him. The problem is how to get this done without destabalizing the region and nation itself. Doing nothing will mean a lengthy civil war which will most likely be won by Assad. While sending troops or any other kind of military intervention could piss off Russia, China and Iran. Even sending in mercenaries or small special task forces to take out Assad might backfire since a power struggle will follow after the removal of Assad.

Also as mentioned by many other posters, previous interventions were no succes. In my opinion this is mostly because the West intervenes and then when support drops because of deaths among Western soldiers the West pulls out its troops in order to win the next elections and so on, whilst the country itself is not yet capable of handling everything by themselves. Western troops basically leave behind baby 'democracy nations to fend for themselves.

The West has put itself in the miserable position by first supporting Assad (as with many dictators in the Middle East) and now screaming for his removal. Considering the nasty stuff Assad has done and the pressure put on him by the West, it is no longer possible for the West to let Assad crush the rebellion and get back in full control for it will then lose most of its credibility. There will be no solution anytime soon for Syria.

@NeverSubmit

Despite being on site investigating the massacres the UN has been unable to prove that the Syrian Soldiers did it. In fact most witness reports point to the rebel militia.

Of course, they can't. How can they and the journalists....ooops, forgot, they kicked out almost all the foreign journalists, only the Syrian journalists are giving a one-sided point of view, so we have to get information that has been smuggled out. Nice try in trying to blame the West, that dog won't hunt!

After all, who gains from the massacres?

Through ethnic cleansing: The Syrian government, that's who.

The rebels are desperate for international attention but the Syrian soldiers have no necessary to slaughter their own people, instead it's detrimental to them because it draws media attention to their attempt to quell the subversion.

Even you cannot believe that ludicrous statement you just made.

Syria is just Iraq 2.0

Could be.

Except that Assad isn't near as bad as Saddam as Assad is generally supported by the majority of Syrians.

ROFLMAO

Also the US is trying a different tactic this time, subversion from within, using professional mercenaries supported by Western-supplied officers with satellite support, communications and endless ammunition.

Do you know how many times you made that hollow, baseless, diatribe? Where are your facts. You always say that as if you know with 110% accuracy that this is without a doubt factual, if so, show us the info or just state that what you are saying is "your own personal opinion" Let the readers of JT see your facts, otherwise you are just spouting out personal talking points.

They got rid of Saddam... and there are still mass murders in Iraq. They got rid of Gadaffi... and in Libya rival gangs are still out killing people. I don't think cutting the head off the snake always works. Some snakes are Hydras.

Would be better a pool about: "Do you think American government should stop invading and killing in foreign lands?" The situation in Syria will resume to normal when US and UN stop throwing logs on fire.

The Syrian president must stay, dead of course. If he killed that many he won't live that long to regret it.

Why do we have spend so much time worrying about muslim countries?

Can't we just leave them alone? They seem to disdain or even hate us and want to live in their own little sharia world... leave them to it, I say... and in the meantime find an environmentally friendly alternative to oil.