2011 Syrian Protests

[samusaran253]

So basically Syria is the next Libya. There's a civil war forming there, and it isn't very civil. The Syrian government has fired upon Syrian protestors and it's getting bloodier by the hour. What do you think will happen in Syria? Will this spark a civil war? Who do you support, the government or the protestors? Do you think the United States should intervene, like we did with Libya, and if so, how should we intervene? If you want, please try to keep all discussions and news articles about the Syrian protests in this thread.

 

[Shakermaker]

An American / NATO attack on Syria will result in an explosion of the Middle East. No, thank you.

 

[samusaran253]

Syria sends army reinforcements into Deraa

The Syrian army has sent more tanks and reinforcements into Deraa as part of a widening crackdown against opponents of the government, and sporadic explosions are being heard in the flashpoint southern city, witnesses say.

Witnesses said a convoy of about 30 tanks were seen on the circular highway outside the Syrian capital, Damascus, on Wednesday.

Troops have been deployed since Monday in Deraa - where the uprising began more than five weeks ago - and activists said more gunfire could be heard on Wednesday.

A resident of Deraa, speaking under the condition of anonymity for his own safety, said that security forces had taken over the town hospital, and were shooting at anyone who approached the building.

"Snipers are on top of all the buildings in Deraa and there are lots of bodies on the streets," the man said in a phone interview. "They were left on the street for three days and we couldn't remove them."

Troops had sealed off the town, and were searching homes at night.

Read more: http://aljazeera.com/news/middleeast/2011/04/2011427142619235903.html

 

[Stigmata]

Any US military operation in that area is for the purposes of covertly co-opting rebel movements, instating IMF banks, and seizing resources.

 

[Escaep]

No. We're already involved in Iraq and Afghanistan, and to a lesser extent still involved in Libya. I say let the Arab League enforce something if they want to.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Dear OP,

Do you mean 'The UN'?

Sincerely,
The World.

 

[The Monkey]

Why do you automatically assume that the US is the only country that could or should intervene? Let the Austrians have a shot!

 

[GreatEmperor]

The US has to justify its massive military business budget, or it might get *gasp* cut to a reasonable level so we can have some civil services. So it would accomplish at least one purpose if we did

 

[No Limit]

I think we are all far more interested in hearing what you think. We usually get member's political views before we head off to the mountains with them.

 

[leib10]

If anything, a trade embargo. Nothing more for sure. We've stuck our noses in enough places.

 

[Solaris]

I wouldn't like to see the USA get involved as they wouldn't be well received. I wonder if the Iraqi army could play a role in helping their neighbours get rid of the baathist bastards just like they once did.

 

[Asknoone]

AMERICA THIS AMERICA THAT >: |

 

[Sulkdodds]

There's only really one answer to the poll question, which is: maybe, if a UN resolution supported by the Arab League gives them a warrant.

 

[Solaris]

**** the Arab Leauge, that's some of the most corrupt countries there are.

 

[Sulkdodds]

Because the UN includes no corrupt countries either. But fair enough, I figured that one might be controversial.

So we could have two poll options: "if a UN resolution backed by the Arab League gives them a warrant" or "if a UN resolution (**** the Arab Leauge) gives them a warrant."