NationStates Jolt Archive

I suspect you've heard the news that not only did the UN find that Syria was involved with the assassination by carbomb of former Lebanese PM Hariri, but that the UN is really angry about it too.

There was a heated exchange with the Syrian Foreign Minister today, and we can expect a few more of those.

But my question to you is: What should be done about it?
Syria left Lebanon (at least on the surface), you can't force them out.
Syria is very poor, sanctions would not so much hurt the Government's policies as the people who have to live there.
Apparently the Syrian President has been doing his best to try and reform the system, fighting all his daddy's cronies while at the same time trying to keep the population happy.

So how do you deal with a situation like that?

First, I am surprised the UN is angry.

Second, I agree with you about economic sanctions. They are the worst type of cowardice, and they only hurt the disenfrachised. Which are the very people we are supposed to be helping in the first place.

I don't know, maybe we should get the G7 together and try and buy these corrupt leaders out, and set up democracies. Either that or invade. But short of some direct intervention, there really is very little that can be done which is productive.

Direct military intervention would be the best way to out the old and setup a democracy. It wouldnt take as much as Iraq. Just a push and the whole house of cards will fall. I say we change the regime there too.

Direct military intervention would be the best way to out the old and setup a democracy. It wouldnt take as much as Iraq. Just a push and the whole house of cards will fall. I say we change the regime there too.


That's what they said about Iraq too. Never under estimate the power of nationalism. And what is it with Americans and the best solution always being "invade" sheesh, jump into the 21st century here. There are better ways. Besides the current president of Syria is a pretty decent guy. As stated he is trying to get Syria in order. Just because there maybe some bad apples left over from the old regime, doesn't mean you invade a country. My gawd! :rolleyes:

One can practically feel the desire of the crazed monsters who rule the United States to invade Syria and set up another Middle Eastern client state.

Unfortunately for their hegemonic plots, they are still tied up with resistance to their rule in Iraq.

Better yet: stay the hell out of it. What happens in the Middle East is none of our business. Meddling will only make it worse.

I suspect you've heard the news that not only did the UN find that Syria was involved with the assassination by carbomb of former Lebanese PM Hariri, but that the UN is really angry about it too.

There was a heated exchange with the Syrian Foreign Minister today, and we can expect a few more of those.

But my question to you is: What should be done about it?
Syria left Lebanon (at least on the surface), you can't force them out.
Syria is very poor, sanctions would not so much hurt the Government's policies as the people who have to live there.
Apparently the Syrian President has been doing his best to try and reform the system, fighting all his daddy's cronies while at the same time trying to keep the population happy.

So how do you deal with a situation like that?

If the UN is angry, what will they do?

I suppose an angry letter to Syria is in the works

One can practically feel the desire of the crazed monsters who rule the United States to invade Syria and set up another Middle Eastern client state.

Unfortunately for their hegemonic plots, they are still tied up with resistance to their rule in Iraq.

yes, the terrorists/insurgents don't want to let go of the power Saddam gave them... they don't want the 80% Shi'a/Kurds to rule their country. Heaven forbid 100% of the people attain freedom... while in the past, really only the Sunnis had it.

lol

personally, i'm not too thrilled with Syria for allowing terrorists to help the Sunni insurgency in Iraq.... they're keeping our soldiers there longer than they need to be there, delaying the operational status of the new, free Iraq and its democratically elected government. We're for freedom, they're not.

If the UN is angry, what will they do?

I suppose an angry letter to Syria is in the works

Well given the UN only stands for United Nations, the UN doesn't do anything, it's not their job nor their mandate. It's only mandate is to promote peace and security by giving countries a venue to work out their differences. The UN has no army nor was it ever suppose to. It's up to member states to do anything if all agree. The UN is just a name. When is that going to get through to all these people who some how think the UN has any power other than that of venue.

yes, the terrorists/insurgents don't want to let go of the power Saddam gave them... they don't want the 80% Shi'a/Kurds to rule their country. Heaven forbid 100% of the people attain freedom... while in the past, really only the Sunnis had it.

lol

personally, i'm not too thrilled with Syria for allowing terrorists to help the Sunni insurgency in Iraq.... they're keeping our soldiers there longer than they need to be there, delaying the operational status of the new, free Iraq and its democratically elected government. We're for freedom, they're not.

Out of curiosity, have you ever heard of, say, Moqtada al-Sadr? Do you think his family was given power by Hussein?

"You cannot hold free and fair elections under foreign military occupation." - George W. Bush

The US record in Iraq is horrid, and it is foolish to expect anything better from brutal imperial aggression against Syria.

If the UN is angry, what will they do?

I suppose an angry letter to Syria is in the works
Well, that, but exactly that was my question: What do you do?

Currently China and Russia aren't convinced that Sanctions are a good idea (and to be honest, neither am I).
Military Invasion will need extra troops from the US, and I don't think the population will go along with that this time - especially since there is no way in hell even the most patrotic American could believe Syria is a threat to him.
And Hizbollah will gladly start the fight again - they can get heaps of know-how from both Iran and the various insurgent groups in Iraq.
Zarqawi will do a happy-dance, because he'll march right in there.
And then you have two Iraqs to deal with.

The problem with this fantasy of regime changing many Americans seem so starry-eyed with, is that nations are dispite allt their grevences, nationalistic. I hate the current Australian adminstration and believe it is undermining democracy and civil rights and doing so by grossly abusing thei power in Parliament. However, is America invaded to out the government I would immediatly take up arms in defence.

Each nation should be externally pressured and internally encouraged to democratically reform itself. The use of war in a nation like Syria, where it's government is truly making inroads into reform is nothing more then a thinly veiled stunt and frankly insulting to presume that only the great west can save he world.

If the UN is angry, what will they do?

I suppose an angry letter to Syria is in the works
:D Team America(the movie) rocks!

So how do you deal with a situation like that?

Loot money and run away to some island :cool:

There is no answer. Political islam is a failure since the day Muhammed (peace be upon others) died.