Obama authorizes secret U.S. support for Syrian rebels

This is very interesting. Now, it looks even more grim for Assad, he is on lifeline support at this point and there is no stopping this onslaught. I really hope he has an exit strategy, he has "dead man walking" written all over him. It will take awhile, it did with the other dictator as well to overthrow them, but it is NOW for sure inevitable. The clock is ticking. Assad, your options are quickly running out.

Not much of a secret if even JT writes about it...

"Not much of a secret if even JT writes about it..."

Releasing this is one part political and another part designed to ratchet up the pressure on Syria.

It is is apparently better, in Obama's mind, to be criticized for doing something, even clandestinely, rather than for doing nothing. But it is wishful thinking to expect that whoever succeeds Assad will be a nice guy who wants to cooperate with the US and its allies. This is, after all, the Middle East we are talking about

Reuters first reported last week that the White House had crafted a directive authorizing greater U.S. covert assistance to Syrian rebels.

Ah, so up to this point there has been some covert assistance to the Syrian rebels by the US now it is being increased and made public. So the US has been involved in yet another civil war, when will they learn to just butt out of things that do not concern them

Not much of a secret is it?

Obama’s order, approved earlier this year

So it actually was signed before and thus has been in effect for some time. Exactly as myself and numerous other posters have indicated.

The White House is for now apparently stopping short of giving the rebels lethal weapons, even as some U.S. allies do just that.

"Apparently" is the key word in that sentence. In fact they are, either directly or indirectly but won't admit it, at least for now.

NBC said the shoulder-fired missiles, also known as MANPADs, had been delivered to the rebels via Turkey.

So I hope that the idea, touted by several on this board, that the rebels are fashioning their own weapons and are not being supplied by foreign interests is absolutely out of the window.

I think that by now, it's been firmly established that foreign, non-Syrian parties are supplying and instigating this attack on Syria.

Recent news reports from the region have suggested that the influence and numbers of Islamist militants, some of them connected to al Qaeda or its affiliates, have been growing among Assad’s opponents.

Can anybody explain why Obama and Hillary are arming Al-Qaeda? In terms of body count I think the Syrian army has killed or captured more Al-Qaeda than the US army ever has.

Maybe Obama should give Assad some kind of medal for fighting Al-Qaeda.

So the US is supporting the same "rebels" that Saudi Arabia is supporting? Do they know that Saudi Arabia only funds extremists, such as the Taliban? Do they know that the Saudi Arabian plan for Syria is to impose an illiberal, religiously extreme government that will limit women's freedom and discriminate against non-muslims?

Saudi Arabia only supports enemies of the west. Give it a few years and the US will be condemning these same "rebels" as "terrorists" and sending in their drones to kill them.

"Can anybody explain why Obama and Hillary are arming Al-Qaeda?"

Where does it say that?

"...intelligence agencies do not believe the militants’ role in the anti-Assad opposition is dominant."

"Saudi Arabia only supports enemies of the west."

First of all, not true. Second: Old proverb, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

And Obama jumps into another war the US doesn't need to be involved in...

paulinusa

"Saudi Arabia only supports enemies of the west." First of all, not true.

Actually you are incorrect, Saudi Arabia supports Hezbollah financially, financed OBL in his fight against Russia in Afghanistan, financed AQ in its early years, financing Syrian rebels, they financed LeT and the Taliban. So you want to stick by your comments. Oh and werent the vast majority of 9/11 terrorists Saudi nationals..

Are the rebels Obama supports the same rebels that, just a couple days ago, uploaded a video of them committing a war crime? (The video showed the rebels making a detainee, allegedly pro-Assad, stand against a wall before murdering him with an onslaught of machine gun fire.) Some secrets are better kept secret, Mr. President!

combinibento

Are the rebels Obama supports the same rebels that, just a couple days ago, uploaded a video of them committing a war crime? (The video showed the rebels making a detainee, allegedly pro-Assad, stand against a wall before murdering him with an onslaught of machine gun fire.)

The very same rebels who it is now being reported did exactly the same to a group of men. Lined them up and shot them all. Hmm definitely the group you want to support hey

Obama authorizes secret U.S. support for Syrian rebels

Yeah, don't tell anyone.

yanne: "And Obama jumps into another war the US doesn't need to be involved in..."

'ANOTHER'?? Do tell... what were the 'other' wars he started?

smithinjapan: yanne: "And Obama jumps into another war the US doesn't need to be involved in..."'ANOTHER'?? Do tell... what were the 'other' wars he started?

Yanne's comment did not state that Obama started the "other" wars it says "the US."

smithinjapan: yanne: "And Obama jumps into another war the US doesn't need to be involved in..." 'ANOTHER'?? Do tell... what were the 'other' wars he started?

Yanne's comment did not state that Obama started "the other"wars it says "the US."

" President Barack Obama has signed a secret order "

So where is the secret now?

Not that it was much a secret before, actually. The Obama administration has been siding with the muslim brotherhood and Al Quaeda affiliated "rebels" in Syria for a long time.

smithjapan:

" yanne: "And Obama jumps into another war the US doesn't need to be involved in..." 'ANOTHER'?? Do tell... what were the 'other' wars he started? "

Does Tunesia and Libya ring a bell at all? Two other muslim brotherhood Shariah uprisings that the Obama administration enthusiastically supported. Fools!

Oh and werent the vast majority of 9/11 terrorists Saudi nationals..

Well, their paper passports that emerged from the infernal metal-vaporizing fireball indeed indicated so.

Obama is in trouble. Human life is not worth going to war for, and Syria has no oil. What to do, what to do...

Sure...America will channel tons of money to them then once Syrian rebels accomplish said task the "New & Improved" leadership will quickly denounce and shitte on America. Its almost as if thats becoming the favorite past time of countries in that area.

Well, their paper passports that emerged from the infernal metal-vaporizing fireball indeed indicated so.

Actually, their paper passports emerged from their rented car indeed indicated that.

The US should not get militarily involved in this conflict. The future of Syria should be decided by Syrians themselves.

Paulinusa:

" "Saudi Arabia only supports enemies of the west." First of all, not true. Second: Old proverb, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend." "

First of all: that is absolutely true. Saudi Arabia has been financing radical sunni muslim organizations for a long time. Second: Yes, this "enemy of my enemy" thinking seems to guide Western politicians. However, it has come back to bite many times, and will be doing that in Syria too, once the Assad dictatorship is replaced by a radical Sunni Muslim Brotherhood Shariah theocracy.

The sheer stupidity of Western governments actively support the muslim brotherhood is mind-boggling.

Iran is an enemy of Saudi Arabia. Iran is also the enemy of many,many western countries. Syria is the same situation. I'm not condoning that, but it's a fact and sometimes allied countries can make strange bedfellows. So if as some of you claim, these regime changes are counterproductive to western interests, why do those western countries support change? Should we always look the other way when dictators are in power? Sometimes you DO have to make a choice, however unpopular.

How to keep a secret 101 - No:1 dont tell JT.

Paulinusa:

" So if as some of you claim, these regime changes are counterproductive to western interests, why do those western countries support change? "

I put it down to simple stupidity. These western governments, like many journalists, naively believe that the muslim brotherhood supported "Syrian rebels" want to bring freedom and democracy. (They should have lerrned better from the disastrous lessons in Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Tunesia, Libya... but the did not).

If you believe in conspiracy theories, you can of course come up with much wilder explanations.

Cletus:

" Actually you are incorrect, Saudi Arabia supports Hezbollah financially, financed OBL in his fight against Russia in Afghanistan, financed AQ in its early years, financing Syrian rebels, they financed LeT and the Taliban. So you want to stick by your comments. Oh and werent the vast majority of 9/11 terrorists Saudi nationals.. "

You are mixing up things here. Hizbollah is a Shiite organization and therefore an Iranian client. They are definitely not supported by Saudi Arabia. The Saudis are of course supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and its various Sunni jihadist arms.

So I hope that the idea, touted by several on this board, that the rebels are fashioning their own weapons and are not being supplied by foreign interests is absolutely out of the window.

I don't recall anybody saying that. I believe the most common statements were in response to your assersions that there were massive armies of foreign mercenaries roaming about Syria.

I, and others, have awknowledged that its highly likely that Turkey and the US are providing weapons and intelligence to the Syrian rebels. No surprise.

I think that by now, it's been firmly established that foreign, non-Syrian parties are supplying and instigating this attack on Syria

See, thats where I disagree. Right there. Where you keep acting like there was some massive plot. The truth is that the aid Turkey and the US have provided has been given exceedingly grudgedly and there is no evidence to prior planning by any outside parties. The whole thing started as a violent crackdown on anti-government protests that escalated into a full scale civil war thanks to the failings of the Syrian government, the disorganization of the rebels, and the timidness of the international community.

In terms of body count I think the Syrian army has killed or captured more Al-Qaeda than the US army ever has.

Actually quite the reverse. Here's a neat little news blurb I found.

According to Bayati, it is well known in Baghdad that the regime of Syrian President Bashar al Assad allowed al Qaeda to use Syria as a crossing point and springboard to attack Iraq - and now Syria is tasting a bit of its own medicine. Terrorists, he said, kill everyone, even women and children, and the support that a country gives to terrorist groups can sometimes backfire.

"It is well-documented fact that the majority of terrorists who came to Iraq after 2003 came through the Syrian border," al Bayati said. "At that time the Syrian government said they were not aware of these terrorists coming to Syria and crossing the borders. But they are from all Arab countries: They came from Saudi Arabia, the majority of the terrorists came from Saudi Arabia, but (they also) came from Yemen, Sudan, Algiers, Tunisia."

That came from http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162-57485002-503543/al-qaeda-a-cancer-in-syria-says-iraqs-u.n-ambassador/

The article is titled "Al Qaeda a 'cancer' in Syria"

It's good to see the President really earning that Nobel Peace Prize. /sarcasm

Leave Syria to the Syrians.

BTW, some facts for people here: Muslim Brotherhood lost in Libya; the secular Liberals won.

http://english.ruvr.ru/2012_07_18/Secular-liberals-outstrip-Muslim-Brotherhood-in-Libya/

http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/12174/world-citizen-why-liberals-won-in-libya-and-why-it-matters

http://lawinrem.wordpress.com/2012/07/28/what-went-wrong-for-the-islamists-in-a-muslim-conservative-libya/

The Nobel Peace Prize made him do it.

Well, Well

Obama kept his promise to get the U.S. out of Iraq. He is working on the same promise for Afghanistan.

So what does he do, he replaces those with Syria and threats of Iran.

This American is sick and tired of seeing the young of my country being sacrificed for people who for the most part hate us and will always hate us.

I'm not trying to make this about political parties, in Obama's case he got us out of Republican messes, and Nixon got us out of a Democrat mess, it goes back and forth. Charity begins at home and both parties are good at forgetting that. $billion$ that could have been better spent on police, fire and roads to name three things. And the lives that would not have been wasted.

Actually, their paper passports emerged from their rented car indeed indicated that.

I have come across lots of wild conspiracy theories regarding 911, but this is the first time someone has suggested that they drove a car into the WTC?

Anyway, this American support is far from secret. Hillary has stated clearly more than once that the US will continue to provide assistance to the rebels (i.e.; Al Qaida); she called it something like "none lethal assistance" but considering her history, I suspect US aid is more than just "none lethal assistance".

It's good to see the President really earning that Nobel Peace Prize.

Obama must be the Nobel-prize-winning leader with the most blood on his hands.

Frank Vaughn: This American is sick and tired of seeing the young of my country being sacrificed for people who for the most part hate us and will always hate us.

And the American is sick and tired of ass backwards non-democratic regimes still existing in this day and age and forcing the world to get involved. With some minor reforms Assad could have avoided all of this, now we have a hornets nest with a country with chemical and biological weapons falling into chaos because of an idiotic crackdown on protesters. We now have a choice to get involved and help influence events or sit on the sidelines and let another Afghanistan happen. Damned if we do, damned if we don't, but this would all be a lot easier if Syria were a liberal democracy.

"And the American is sick and tired of ass backwards non-democratic regimes still existing in this day and age and forcing the world to get involved."

Russia and China are the real whores here. America has been trying its' best not to get involved, as have the rest of NATO.

If this bloody fiasco doesn't call for serious reform of the UNSC then the organization is surely doomed.

I'd like to chime in more often but everything I (and a few other noteworthy posters) have been saying all along is now being openly admitted in the media.

When it was first suggested that the rebel army was foreign-backed I was almost kicked off the board. Now that same information is on AP. Including an open admission that the US is supplying and has been supplying the rebels covertly for an unspecified period of time, but probably from the beginning. The fact that fundamentalist Saudi muslim extremists are financing the rebels is common knowledge now too.

This debate is practically finished as the pro-rebel/al Qaeda posters have become increasingly marginalized and the world is becoming increasingly weary of these crazed Islamic rebels running around with AK47s executing anybody they don't like.

The obvious solution to this problem is for USA, Turkey, and Saudi Arabia to mind their own business and spend taxpayer dollars at home instead of giving it to Muslim extremists and their al Qaeda brethren.

If Hillary doesn't like Assad then she can't deal with him with diplomatic means.

Supplying guns to bands of al Qaeda rebels in a perverted attempt to topple the Syrian government is not the answer.

"The vast majority of Aleppo residents are cheering on their army."

NeverSubmit JUL. 27, 2012 - 07:42PM JST

Oh and werent the vast majority of 9/11 terrorists Saudi nationals..

Well, their paper passports that emerged from the infernal metal-vaporizing fireball indeed indicated so.

Yes, DoLittleBeLate, I remember remarking that this was rather odd, too.

Now, there's a secret that . . .

Readers, 9/11 is not relevant to this discussion.

And the American is sick and tired of ass backwards non-democratic regimes still existing in this day and age and forcing the world to get involved.

Considering that two major sponsors of the rebels' are Saudi Arabia and Qatar, this whole mess cannot be about introducing democracy to Syria.

America has been trying its' best not to get involved, as have the rest of NATO.

They started it! They have been planning and preparing for it for over a decade.

I guess the rebels must be winning if the West is starting to help them.

NeverSubmit

This debate is practically finished as the pro-rebel/al Qaeda posters have become increasingly marginalized and the world is becoming increasingly weary of these crazed Islamic rebels running around with AK47s executing anybody they don't like.

Wow, you aren't prone to hyperbole and sensationalism, are you? Your posts read like a propaganda flyer. So all the rebels are crazed Islamists, are they? Theyare all al Qaeda affiliated are they? They are all killing wantonly, are they? Nope, and if you follow the news on this story at all you wouldn't write such disingenuous rubbish.

But this admission is hardly a surprise. The US has done such things for years - as do other countries with a vested interest in the politics of a region. It's common practice.

Tamarama:

" So all the rebels are crazed Islamists, are they? Theyare all al Qaeda affiliated are they? They are all killing wantonly, are they? "

Basically, yes, and if you had followed Syrian history you would know that. It is not like that the muslim brotherhood desire to overthrow the Alevite Assad regime is something new. It has been going on for decades. E.g. read up on how Assad Senior dealt with the muslim brotherhood "rebels" when they had taken over the city of Hama in 1982. He had the armee bomb the city to smithereens and killed 20,000 of them in one fell swoop.

The only difference is that then, Western politicians and media were not sympathizing with the islamists. Now they are. Why? Your guess.

This will end just as well as Afghanistan and Iraq and Libya and all the other attempts to "spread freedom"

Tamarama,

"So all the rebels are crazed Islamists, are they? Theyare all al Qaeda affiliated are they? They are all killing wantonly, are they? Nope, and if you follow the news on this story at all you wouldn't write such disingenuous rubbish."

Last week the rebels weren't even Syrian and there was no uprising so you really have to wonder from what alternate reality that poster is on.

Willi,

The secular moderate regimes that rose from the ashes in Tunisia and Libya have you on the run. Come and join us with some positive thoughts for Syria hoping the outcome will be similar once the dictator is dead.

Oh for god's sake... here we go again.

Has anyone seen the news reports about the rebels murdering POWs? These people are as bad as Assad's government forces. Leave them to it... all you will do is allow more Islamic rebels to take control of a secular middle east country and turn it into another Iraq.

Just let them wipe each other out and walk away.

Anyway, this American support is far from secret. Hillary has stated clearly more than once that the US will continue to provide assistance to the rebels

She never suggested it was military assistance. She has been working with the UN and NATO to resolve the crisis.

(i.e.; Al Qaida); she called it something like "none lethal assistance" but considering her history, I suspect US aid is more than just "none lethal assistance".

If you have more than your usual suspicions, please state them clearly. I suspect you do not. This is a homegrown movement and you and other posters who share your conspiracy theories cannot back up your claims that it is not. It is no secret that the US, the EU, NATO and the UN have stated their clear intentions to offer assistance to stop the Assad government from killing its citizens. This could have been avoided had the Assad government not reacted violently to political protests against his government.

I really like the sectarian aspects of this conflict, and it does not seem to have been home grown.

It seem that in the not-too-distant past the Western media was touting the ascent of Assad the doctor and his Western educated wife as representative of moderate that could even be seen as a slightly progressive arrival on the political scenario in the Mid East.

That was before the "Arab Spring" uprisings, however, and it seem that Assad was targeted for "regime change" not long after that, in conjunction with a strategy to weaken the Iran-centered power block in the region.

Of course the case of Bahrain and its protest and suppression come to mind.

This is another tragedy that didn't need to happen.

it does not seem to have been home grown

Based on what exactly? The protesters that were killed were Syrians, many women and children. They were from Syrian and they died in Syria at the hands of their own government.

It seem that in the not-too-distant past the Western media was touting the ascent of Assad the doctor and his Western educated wife as representative of moderate that could even be seen as a slightly progressive arrival on the political scenario in the Mid East.

Indeed, until Assad went back on all his promises of reforms. He let down his nation. It is a shame. He could have made Syria into something amazing. Now, militants, some of highly questionable morals and character themselves will possibly be in charge of Syria. However, the original blame falls squarely on Assad and no one else.

What does Assad's buddy Putin have to say about this?

@Ben Jack

I don't really know much about the details relating to reforms in Syria, but I was under the impression that some progress was being made.

What I meant to say about the "sectarian aspect" is that I really DON'T like the religion angle to this conflict and throughout the region.

Was Syrian society under such oppressive conditions that the Sunni's needed to revolt? What reforms were retracted?

Do you think that other actors might have played a role in fomenting the conflict? In particular, countries hoping to ally themselves with the Sunni in a Sunni vs Shia opposition?

I don't approve of political dynasties in the modern age, basically, and think that the Assad dynasty should have been phased out through electoral reforms, etc, but that doesn't happen overnight.

And the fact that his family is from a sect that is a minority and has been excluded from political power when the country was under Sunni control in past centuries.

The protesters that were killed were Syrians, many women and children. They were from Syrian and they died in Syria at the hands of their own government.

Ben, were you there yourself or are you just quoting the Damascus blogger again.

You have to laugh at all the "secrets" that the government publishes. I guess this is just for political purposes, as has been said. But you have to wonder what else the government is getting up to, don't you?

I don't really know much about the details relating to reforms in Syria, but I was under the impression that some progress was being made.

Sadly, there were lots of promises, but no reality behind them. It really is a sad case, because he did have a chance to make things better and, in some way, take back some of the bad his father did.

What I meant to say about the "sectarian aspect" is that I really DON'T like the religion angle to this conflict and throughout the region.

Fair enough. We can agree in this. I am extremely concerned about what might happen if the Assad government does fall. I have a sinking feeling things will not improve.

Was Syrian society under such oppressive conditions that the Sunni's needed to revolt? What reforms were retracted?

There are essentially no opposition parties allowed in Syria, There is Assad and no other choices. Assad promised many reforms of which you can easily research on the internet. All were retracted. Basically, the same situation as before Assad inherited power from his father.

Do you think that other actors might have played a role in fomenting the conflict? In particular, countries hoping to ally themselves with the Sunni in a Sunni vs Shia opposition?

I think it is wholly possible that other countries are taking advantage of the unrest and the situation. However, the history of the Assad family squashing protest is not a recent one and did not start with this Assad.

I don't approve of political dynasties in the modern age, basically, and think that the Assad dynasty should have been phased out through electoral reforms, etc, but that doesn't happen overnight.

It has been taking a long time in Syria already. It certainly has not been overnight. As I said, I am not very positive about the future of Syria should Assad's government fall. However, the electoral reforms that you write of were not going to happen in Syria without this kind of push. I am not sure that this is a good thing for the Middle East or the world if I look at it selfishly. It is certainly easier to have Assad in power and just have him have his thumb over everything and keep it quiet as he and his family have done since they came to power. However, I also do not think it is ours to say.

And the fact that his family is from a sect that is a minority and has been excluded from political power when the country was under Sunni control in past centuries.

That is generally how it works in the Middle East. Jordan is very similar. The government has to keep a tight rein on power or they will be swamped.

However, having said all this, I am very worried aobut the kind of people that are among the militants. Suicide bombings, and the shootings I have been reading about are the acts of scum. They are no better than the government they say they are fighting against. I can't see a bright future for Syria and I truly hope I am incorrect about this.

Ben, were you there yourself or are you just quoting the Damascus blogger again.

You've already asked another poster if they had been to Syria. When they said yes, you disappeared from the conversation and ignored their question to you as to whether you had been there. Have you? Until you back up all the stuff you have been writing, perhaps you had better hold back on such questions.

A significant portion of Iranian support is for Hezbollah’s party links to Iran and Syria. Hezbollah’s capacity for force that has made the party so important depends almost entirely on Iran and Syria, not just financially but logistically. The fall of the Baath regime in Syria would leave Hizbullah high and dry. Its rockets and other weapons, and communications abilities, depended on Syrian help. The downside of any weakening of Hizbullah is that it could encourage Israeli expansion in South Lebanon.

Ben, you have a lot of disparaging things to say about the nation of Syria. You seem to be making it out to be something akin to Nazi Germany or something like that.

Syria has and has had elections for some time and it's a relatively progressive secular country stuck in a bad neighborhood. Until recently, Christians, Jews and Muslims lived peacefully together and Syrians were allowed international travel and they have an educated population.

The endless stream of accusations you have about Syria seem to be a rehash of what the Damascus blogger touted last year and also what we've seen reported by rebel activists via Skype (whereabouts unknown) whose reports were unfailing noted as "unconfirmed".

Do you have any concrete or credible information to convince us of your claims of the apparently ruthless brutality of the Syrian government.

Ben, you have a lot of disparaging things to say about the nation of Syria. You seem to be making it out to be something akin to Nazi Germany or something like that.

Hmm, I don't know, but seeing dead and mutilated children and men and women, people tortured and a sector of the population being targeted for ethnic cleansing, I would say that, that does have similar underpinnings and a tinged of Nazism to it, call it an assumption if you like, but that's what most people call it. I mean, if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck....

Syria has and has had elections for some time and it's a relatively progressive secular country stuck in a bad neighborhood. Until recently, Christians, Jews and Muslims lived peacefully together and Syrians were allowed international travel and they have an educated population.

I'm not quite following you "Syria" is stuck in a bad neighborhood? The country is in a bad neighborhood??? What does that mean? AS far as Christians, Jews and Muslims living together you had that in other mideast nations, including Iran, but everyone was FORCED to get along, it wasn't like they were all cozy with one another. After the Iranian revolution what happened to the majority of the Jewish minority? How about Iraq and Egypt?

The endless stream of accusations you have about Syria seem to be a rehash of what the Damascus blogger touted last year and also what we've seen reported by rebel activists via Skype (whereabouts unknown) whose reports were unfailing noted as "unconfirmed".

Slow down, buddy. No one is accusing the Syrian government of anything, everyone is just going by what they see and read on the news, which are hundreds of news outlets in many, many languages and shown from different angles and points of view, that means, people can make kind of an assessment as to what is going on. As for the accusation, speculation and "unconfirmed" reporting, we will leave that to you.

Do you have any concrete or credible information to convince us of your claims of the apparently ruthless brutality of the Syrian government.

Do you have ANY, ANY solid or concrete or credible information to convince us otherwise? How about it? Where is your evidence that these atrocities are NOT being perpetrated by the Assad regime!! NeverSubmit, I have called you time and time and time to show us ANY proof to back up your (and I am calling you out on this) your false accusations. But I know you will dodge my post because you can't show us, you will just bypass and ignore it and keep posting your regurgitated, propagated Assad government talking points. But, I digress. For once, prove us wrong, it shouldn't be hard for you, because you seem to have the confidence to back you up, now all you need is the proof. WE ARE WAITING!

Where is your evidence that these atrocities are NOT being perpetrated by the Assad regime!! NeverSubmit, I have called you time and time and time to show us ANY proof to back up your (and I am calling you out on this) your false accusations.

One must really be going out of their way to avoid this evidence. It is well documented, including by the UN observers.

I am also pretty sure that many (all?) of the protesters that were killed at the very beginning of this crisis were not killed by the Syrian military.

I don't really know much about the details relating to reforms in Syria, but I was under the impression that some progress was being made.

You are correct, some progress was being made.

WilliB

Basically, yes, and if you had followed Syrian history you would know that. It is not like that the muslim brotherhood desire to overthrow the Alevite Assad regime is something new. It has been going on for decades. E.g. read up on how Assad Senior dealt with the muslim brotherhood "rebels" when they had taken over the city of Hama in 1982. He had the armee bomb the city to smithereens and killed 20,000 of them in one fell swoop.

Thanks , but I'm well aware of what Assad's Daddy did in '82, it's common knowledge. Clearly, he handed the manual to his son just before departure because Syria has been run like a jail ever since. But you are seriously confused if you think the current civil war is about the same thing. It isn't. The armed uprising of 82 was initiated and carried out by the ultra conservative Muslim Brotherhood of the day. This recent uprising is far broader that that, and whilst it no doubt has great appeal to specific groups within Syria - some of them conservative, and some more than happy to be involved, it is simply incorrect to attribute the uprising to them alone..

NeverSubmit

Syria has and has had elections for some time and it's a relatively progressive secular country stuck in a bad neighborhood.

Oh, dear me. More foot in mouth. NeverSubmit, only one party is allowed to legally hold office in Syria my friend - the Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party. You might be allowed to vote in Syria, but your ballot paper only has one box to tick. What a progressive government it is, huh? (And this is a big hint about what they started protesting about last year. Wink.wink)