world

Assad must go, U.S. says, as Syrian war enters fifth year

37 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© 2015 AFP

©2020 GPlusMedia Inc.

37 Comments
Login to comment

"Assad must to" = "ISIS must stay".

The fools in the white house simply refuse to learn.

It is disheartening.

7 ( +12 / -4 )

Every middle eastern country that the allies have attempted to effect or enforce western style democracy through regime change had opened a pandora box of radical islamic extremism that will take decades and hundreds of thousands of lives to reverse and eradicate.

9 ( +9 / -0 )

Without the departure of Assad, it would not be possible “to fully stabilize” the country, Psaki said.------------------------------

You mean, without the departure of Assad, we can't install our puppets and ruin the country.

5 ( +7 / -2 )

@itsonlyrocknroll No problem with that from my perspective. Better dead then a Russian ally.

-9 ( +1 / -10 )

The idea of humanitarian interventionism has been discredited, especially in the Middle East.

Assad is infinitely better than ISIL - when the realistic choice is between two mad dictators, or between a mad dictator and anarchy, the obvious choice is the less mad one.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

when the realistic choice is between two mad dictators, or between a mad dictator and anarchy, the obvious choice is the less mad one.

The better choice is no choice at all - let them work out their own garbage. Trying to choose sides between a dictator and an anarchy is a waste of time, money, energy, and life.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Unbelievable. Have they learned nothing from their previous regime change efforts nor from the curent ISIS debacle?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

Hi scipantheist, Well Russia does have good reason, if Assad regime was to fall the implications and possible radicalisation of eithic Islamic populations of Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Kyrgyzstan and Azerbaijan, peoples of which reside inside Russia’s own boarders will become more than a reality. Radical islamic fundamentalism is stretching as far as China's Muslim-majority Xinjiang Province. It is a catastrophe that the Allies disastrous policy failures and dithering has fundamentally brought about a cultural, religious and political vacuum in Libya, Egypt, Iraq and Syria that has allowed ISIL to create a caliphate that has the potential to provoke Israel into unleashing a nuclear apocalypse.

6 ( +6 / -0 )

Every middle eastern country that the allies have attempted to effect or enforce western style democracy through regime change had opened a pandora box of radical islamic extremism that will take decades and hundreds of thousands of lives to reverse and eradicate.

I think that is their goal. Whenever they regime-change a country, it is never for the purpose of improving the quality of life of its inhabitants. The west created the mess in Syria.

-4 ( +1 / -5 )

"The Shah must go" --> Ayatollha Khomeini "Saddam must go" --> ISIS "Gaddafi must go" --> Al Quaeda / ISIS "Mubarak must go" --> Morsi and the Ikwhan "Assad must go" --> ISIS in the "liberated" areas ....

How do you call repeating the same mistake, expecting a different outcome?

8 ( +9 / -1 )

How do you call repeating the same mistake, expecting a different outcome?

Einstein said that "Making the same mistake over and over is a form of insanity".

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Hi JJSullivan, I'm inclined to believe and it a humble opinion that it's a mixture of religious and political miscalculations on the part of western governments. Our political leadership cultural illiteracy and ignorance of Christian-Muslim historic struggles coupled with a rather conceited belief that the indigenous people of these counties would embrace our social norms, ethical values, customs, belief and political systems with open arms.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

So, US-bashers, what is conspiracy theory on how Yemen collapsed? Shiite Yemenis outraged at the noise of drone strikes against Al-Qaeda?

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

Better dead then a Russian ally

scipantheist@ Your hatred of Russians is defying any common sense and is very disturbing. You're just like a man from 50s ("Russians are coming!!!"). May be you should consult a good psychologist?

Russians may be are not nice (and they are not obliged to be nice), but on the ISIS problem Russia is firmly on the same side with the US and it actively helped Iraqi government to fight ISIS. And by supporting Assad Russia effectively helps to prevent ISIS from spreading further, to prevent the region to become a complete and irrepairable mess it almost become after US exploits at Iraq, Libya and Syria.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

scipantheist:

" So, US-bashers, what is conspiracy theory on how Yemen collapsed? Shiite Yemenis outraged at the noise of drone strikes against Al-Qaeda? "

Yemen is an example of the Sunni-Shiite struggle throughout the region. To our credit, Western governments did not intervene there to "spread democracy". Then again, it did not have a secular dictator before or after, so the misguided dreamers in our governments did not find a "cause" I suppose.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

scipantheist all governments foreign policy should and must be subject to strenuous public scrutiny and debate. It mustn't be misinterpreted as bashing.

American culture leads in modern technologies and positively aids industrialization in smaller nations, boosting their economies, has advanced the concept of political stability in the form of democratically elected government.

Where the middle east is concerned to single out the US government as the villain would be grossly unfair and a misinterpretation of the facts. The United Nations collectively has a share in the chaos and subsequent mayhem.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Shah must go" --> Ayatollha Khomeini "Saddam must go" --> ISIS "Gaddafi must go" --> Al Quaeda / ISIS "Mubarak must go" --> Morsi and the Ikwhan "Assad must go" --> ISIS in the "liberated" areas ....

I will also add Afghanistan.

Communists must go>Mujahideen->Infighting>Taleban>Al Qaeda>9/11

I mean how many times, really, how many times do you have to step in to a relatively stable country, remove the leader and then watch the country fall apart and still not learn a lesson.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

@WiiliB So basically the western intervention had nothing to do with it huh? Isn't it just possible the same thing is true with Iraq and Syria?

@itsonlyrocknroll I'm all for introspection. There are many here, though, that are not familiar with the US at all and worse, support Russia and China in their world views. They are not out to help advance freedom or democracy in the slightest.

@Asakaze See my comment about not advancing freedom or democracy in the slightest. Just ask Olegek what he thinks the source of the problem is. Iran would make a better ally to the US than Russia.

-4 ( +0 / -4 )

What is the color of the line Obama going to draw this time? All this foreign policy's fiasco will bear a great burden to future generation. Iran is a state sponsored terrorism across the globe with nuclear ambition to set the score with Sunni, as referee announces "let's the game begin". What about U.N.! Syrians are dying everyday and more to come! Shame.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I'm inclined to believe and it a humble opinion that it's a mixture of religious and political miscalculations on the part of western governments. Our political leadership cultural illiteracy and ignorance...

They can't possibly be that stupid or, as some have pointed out, insane to continually make the same "mistakes". It must be intentional, at least on the part of the decision makers. Many of the boots on the ground actually think they are doing a good thing. The US has been planning the Syrian regime change for a long time, long before the fighting broke out. Try googling "Wesley Clark 7 countries in 5 years"; Syria is one of those 7 countries the US intended to regime-change.

-6 ( +0 / -6 )

what Americans want is another Iraq and Libya instead of slightly stiff but functioning government. Assad is not his father and he should not be blamed for him. Until Americans and Muslim terrorist started the uprising Syria was peaceful and not even talked about. Just like in Libya it was all pre planed and organized by the Americans and their Muslim terrorist allies. Rest is all lies as usual.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

scipantheist@

Iran would make a better ally to the US than Russia

And what's the problem? I see no progress in this plausible alliance, no concrete steps. Iranians seem to think that they're better off without US, with Russians, because they are genuinely interested in victory against ISIS, as @ itsonlyrocknrol correctly explained.

not advancing freedom or democracy

You're interested in promoting democracy? Noble cause. In case you forgot: now, after Iraq-2003 and Libya-2011, Syria remained the only secular regime in the Middle East, all others (except poor Yemen) are absolute monarchies with medieval mindset and the same approach to the human rights. If you Americans love democracy so much that you bomb and invade other countries for the sake of democracy, why not to bomb Saudi Arabia? It would be logical and well-deserved, particularly after Saudis helped Bahrain to crush pro-democracy movement in 2011. And Bahrain itself should be bombed, just an example of what's going on there:

<http://www.sampsoniaway.org/blog/2011/07/03/pro-democracy-bloggers-sentenced-to-life-in-bahrain/

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@Asakaze

I could get behind bombing Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and even Jordan. I think unfortunately there are far too many in the US that are beholden to Israel's interests or those countries have proven to have reliable supplies of oil. The western world didn't until recently have access to the amount of oil that Russia has, and so we have been forced to make unpleasant bedfellows. It helped that they also were opposed to Russia. From that same realpolitik angle, however, China and Russia 1.) have large populations and therefore a lot of power 2.) have an enormous number of neighbors and convert them to their ideology 3.) don't have the dogma of religion to promote "alternative values" 4.) have virulent anti-American attitudes at present and 5.) oppose the west on every measure of importance on the Security Council. So yeah, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain are small potatos. You can say it is heartless to work for regime change in Russia and China, but we have had good success in Eastern Europe and almost the entire Western Hemisphere. Come join us in the group that aspires to be more than sheep!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Would indeed be crass naivety not to acknowledge that the aftermath of 9/11 did not invoke a marked change, and transformation in middle eastern US foreign policy.

And let's not forget the American public were not alone in demanding retribution. From a personally open of view Wesley Clarks remarks don't reveal anything unexpected. Events required more than a token corpuscle. 9/11 demanded vengeance be inflicted in far greater spirit to the match a deep hellish disgust and hatred of the perpetrators of this global outrage.

Middle eastern counties who sponsored terrorism could expect no quarter, mercy or forgiveness. In the red mist of soul-seething hatred, without forethought for the implications to religious, political, military, and economic challenges, the legacy of those actions and the subsequent events have brought the region to where we are today. As for the Stupidity of our political elite we no need to look no future than the cause of our economic problems since emerging from the 2008 global financial crisis, why would this not also manifest equally in foreign policy? As a late 20 something, I am still on life's learning curve, however did take full advantage of an higher education from what some would consider a leading institution.

Thomas Hobbes, constantly quoted to me when a menial researcher states “he that performeth first has no assurance the other will perform after, because the bonds of words are too weak to bridle men’s ambition, avarice, anger, and other passions, without the fear of some coercive power… and therefore he which performeth first does but betray himself to his enemy.”

JJSullivan humbly witness the depths of stupidity, media manipulation, lies, spin, outright deceit, smearing and downright lunacy, Britain's political establishment will unleash on the British electorate in the upcoming general election.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

scipantheist@

Splendid, at last you are very honest. To sum up your words, all the talk about "promoting democracy, human rights" and other stuff US politicians like so much to talk about, all this is bull...t. Only political and economic interests - only that matter. Well, I suspected it for a long time, but it's nice for you to articulate it so explicitly. And I can understand that the West has its interests. But I can not understand why the West becomes so enraged when other countries try to defend their interests? Stop lecturing other countries about democracy and other bull...t even you don't believe in, respect interests of other countries, and a lot of world conflicts would be over.

About your "5 points". All false.

a) Large populations does not equal "a lot of power". Indonesia has a large population, so what? And a large population does not mean hostile.

b) Russia and China do not "convert" neighbors to their ideology. China spreads the sphere of its economic and political influence, but not its (Communist?) ideology. In Russia ideology does not differ much from its neighbors.

c) Russia and China have their values, religious and moral. May be they are different from western, but it does not mean they are bad. At last Russians and Chinese do not impose their values, do not invade other countries for the sake of their values and do not cut throats.

d) You mean "virulent anti-American attitudes" appeared from nowhere, without any reason? May be there is a reason? Have a think about it (hint: respect other countries' interests).

e) First, not on all measures (ISIS, Somalia pirates). And second, why not to put in other way: "US opposes Russia and China on every measure of importance on the Security Council".

Come join us in the group that aspires to be more than sheep!

You mean to become world robbers? No, thanks. I'll wait and see when you are busted during another heist.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Assad must go... in exchange for the allies destroying the Syrian rebels.

Let's play this out... if Assad stepped down today, would the allies have a plan to stop the ISIS take over of Syria? I mean, I have great ideas! But unless I have a plan then I mostly keep them to myself!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

oh yeah, get rid of Assad so ISIS can have a much easier time controlling all of Syria. That's a fantastic idea. The brutal reality is that a dictator like Assad is also an enemy of ISIS, and in this kind of situation the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Let him stay in power - ISIS emerged from the vacuum left by the removal of another dictator. Hell, I would even go as far as to supply him. Much less risky than supplying rebels who will ultimately end up with ISIS or Al Qaeda...

5 ( +5 / -1 )

Yes, this dictator absolutely must go so a bunch of smaller and more violent people can replace him and terrorize the region and require still more US interventionism resulting in even more offenses and frothing-at-the-mouth vengeance-seekers shooting, beheading and blowing up people here there and everywhere from now on.

3 ( +3 / -1 )

Uniden:

Spot one. Besides, keep in mind that the biggest "crime" that Assad committed is changing Syrian constitution to allow even non-muslims to take office as president. The Muslim Brotherhood went ballistic when they heard that. And our leaders, in their infinite wisdom, support them.

4 ( +4 / -1 )

Without the departure of Assad, it would not be possible “to fully stabilize” the country, Psaki said.

Bollox. To stabilise the country you first need to rid it of ISIS and the other radical Muslim groups... and that's not happening anytime soon. You get rid of Assad and HIS supporters start a civil war against the US-imposed puppets put in charge. Haven't they learned? Saddam gone = chaos. Gadaffi gone = chaos. Getting rid of Assad will have the same effect... or worse.

3 ( +3 / -1 )

Assad must go, U.S. says, as Syrian war enters fifth year

And I wonder who will replace him? Oh wait, I here that Ahmed Chalabi would gladly take the job. Or maybe the Obama Administration could ask his Muslim Brotherhood friends to take over. Either way it's a win win scenario for his cause.

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2015/01/16/white-house-support-muslim-brotherhood-leaves-some-in-middle-east-puzzled/

http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/5179/us-terrorists-ally

http://www.westernjournalism.com/no-tears-egyptian-christians-muslim-brotherhood-friendly-white-house/#aKl7KQgmZPKvRRij.97

0 ( +1 / -1 )

There are hints/shades of current allied policy, especially in Iraq gained from analysis of the soviet afghan war -

The Muslim Battalions: Soviet Central Asians in the Soviet-Afghan War -

http://www.academia.edu/1909451/The_Muslim_Battalions_Soviet_Central_Asians_in_the_Soviet-Afghan_War

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Prelude to yet another catastrophy.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

The only explanation is that the US actually wants mayhem and instability in those countries, it gives them a reason to forever meddle in the region.

-3 ( +4 / -7 )

Poor Syrian people. It seems they must either have either the dictator Bashar Assad or Islamic extremists like IS running their miserable lives.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

@ itsonlyrocknrol

Thanks for an interesting article!

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

@Asakaze

Stop lecturing other countries about democracy and other bull...t even you don't believe in

No. Until you recognize that Russia in fact has no freedom of speech, you are below us.

In Russia ideology does not differ much from its neighbors.

My point was proven by this very statement. This needs to change. NK would not exist without Russian support.

You mean "virulent anti-American attitudes" appeared from nowhere, without any reason?

Oh there is a reason all right: your bald-faced propaganda that would make Goebbels blush.

US opposes Russia and China on every measure of importance on the Security Council

You have measures of importance on the Security Council? Last I checked it was just shameless things to support your allies. Promoting human rights would run counter to your goal of "non-interference".

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites