Friday, 14 June 2013

Syria - a game of two halves

Bluntly, there's no mileage for the UK in any active involvement in or support for either side in what is squaring up to be a very bloody sectarian war. The choice is between supporting Hezbollah and the mad Mullahs of Iran, or Al Quada and the insane Imams of Pakistan. This is a Shi'ite / Sunni war, not a proxy for East vs. West or communism vs. capitalism. This is Islam eating itself, and the harsh reality is that every Jihadist from either side who succeeds in killing themselves in Syria is one less that we have to worry about. 

The press may be concerned about the several hundred Pakistani youths reported to have left the UK to fight for the rebels. They shouldn't be. Those few that aren't killed by Assad's forces should be arrested, convicted and imprisoned if they try to return to the UK - either way, they're out of action. 

As in the Iran / Iraq war, the two sides will only have the will to stop fighting once a certain level of blood has been spilled; we're nowhere near that point yet in Syria. Both sides still believe victory is possible and are negotiating for weapons, not peace. The best thing we can do is stand back and let them get on with it until they're both exhausted, then step in with the reconstruction contracts.

12 comments:

Barnacle Bill said...

Unfortunately this Coalition seem to have as much as a taste for blood as nuLabor did under B-Liar.
So expect Cast Iron and the Boy Vague to get us involved somewhere along the line.
This is one civil war that would actually benefit us if we just stayed at home.
I realize it would mean gory pictures of Syrian civilian casualties being plastered non-stop on our screens.
But I would rather put up with that than pictures of Fallen Heroes on our own streets with their killers getting their fifteen minutes of infamacy.

Anonymous said...

Why is it our politicians can't come up with a policy like this one?

DeeDee99 said...

"The best thing we can do is stand back and let them get on with it until they're both exhausted, then step in with the reconstruction contracts. "

Agreed - and help provide humanitarian relief for the women and children who are fleeing the violence.

However, it seems Obama is set to start arming the insurgents and no-doubt we will be dragged further into the quagmire along with the USA.

Do they never learn?

Mustapha Peenow said...

Yup - twas ever thus; and that's the religion of peace (pieces?) for you. Wonder which side the Izzies are funding....

Anonymous said...

Nice to read some common sense on this subject.
I am trying to understand why Cameron wants to intervene. What possible reason can he have? As for Hague, he seems to have taken up dope, how else can one explain such a stupid determination to get us embroiled?
This is an Arab matter. If Saudi Arabia wants to get into the Sunni side they can risk their own blood, not ours.
Presumably the Saudis are offering money to Cameron, extorted from us, or the Americans are twisting his arm to get us in. I prefer to wait until the Swiss or the Swedes invade Syria before I want to be involved.
Obama thinks that the Syrian regime have used chemical weapons. It became inevitable that chemicals would be used as soon as he said that would be his red line. Every rebel must have been set to work to provide false evidence from that moment in order to implicate Assad.
Let the Russians Iranians and Chinese take the rap, stay out I say.

Anonymous said...

We must be mad to intervene, other than to sell (not give) arms to both sides. What have the rebels ever done for us - or the other side for that matter?

Isn't the situation comparable to that of the communist/socialist people who went to fight in Spain? Isn't it their free choice? If they die, then we are free of their ilk here.

Anonymous said...

If I were any sort of christian living in Syria, I would be on my knees praying for Assad to win. If the "Rebels" win, god help the Christians who could then expect rape ,torture, and murder, as in the rest of the Middle East.

Anonymous said...

The best outcome would be for both sides to lose!

vi said...

The war is being driven by Qatari interests meddling ..

See:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-05-16/mystery-sponsor-weapons-and-money-syrian-rebels-revealed

Even after acknowledging this our support is strange as none of it is to our (national) advantage - is especially arming wahabbist rebels against a (relatively) secular/religiously tolerant regime.

Dave said...

The Brits and Americans must know the best result would be gleaned from standing back and watching the fireworks BUT there seems to be an agenda at work here.
Claims of chemical warefare laid against Assads regime seem dubious in the extreme (he's not that daft) and we're all familiar with WMD scaremongering to engineer intervention.
Intervention WILL bring in the Russians and the prospect of escalation outside Syrian borders is the only possible conclusion. But, then again, we've had worse excuses for starting World Wars and it's not as if a war wouldn't benefit the relevant economies of the participants......
If only they NEEDED that...

Thud said...

Anything that weakens Iran is fine by me.

Anonymous said...

Arrested and imprisoned?

I can't disagree with the sentiment, but wouldn't it be cheaper to buy them a one-way ticket to Syria, and then revoke their British passports?