How Should the Syrian Conflict be Resolved?

Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser

Guest
Lrtnl said:
It is our problem because if we leave it alone, the war will spread across the Middle East, and in the worst case, across the world, if we help it may backfire, and end up making it worse then when it was decided to help. That's why no-one wants to actually do anything major.
Click to expand...

When has the US or Britain getting involved in a war ever permanently solved the problem in question?
 
Link of time

Link of time

Phrourach
Shadis said:
When has the US or Britain getting involved in a war ever permanently solved the problem in question?
Click to expand...
Well, after many many many years, they usually win.
For example it took about 30 years go get through to Germany they will not rule the world..
Did I say that right? Hm....
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Guest
Well I was referring more to Vietnam and other middle east countries.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I didn't even know there was a Syrian conflict. O___O Shows how much news gets shown in the middle of nowhere.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Let's just say that
39405931.jpg
 

DeletedUser

Guest
If no one has anything to contribute, do not. It seems that people aren't willing to research into the matter - if that's the case, I'll close the thread soon.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Russia is supporting the Regime, which if we were to use the argument 'leave it to sort itself out' (which is flawed anyways) then that's not happening, due to the involvement of Russia

Governments also dislike the prolonging of the war, as they see more militant groups becoming involved in the war, and are worried that it will turn into a Jihadist state.

So the only solution I can see without risking lives is supporting the rebels with weapons and communications, to help speed the war to a close, as the regime is not winning quickly, even with Russian support.
 

DeletedUser27621

Guest
Lrtnl said:
It is our problem because if we leave it alone, the war will spread across the Middle East, and in the worst case, across the world, if we help it may backfire, and end up making it worse then when it was decided to help. That's why no-one wants to actually do anything major.
Click to expand...

I have made bold the parts that I disagree with. No-one has gotten majorly involved in this war so I don't see how it will expand beyond Syria.

Killer of hell said:
a 100,000 is no comparison to the millions who have fled. This is not our problem...it's the Syrians problem for killing the 100,000 people....but a vast majority fled did they not?
Click to expand...

1.5m have fled, and Syria has a pop. of 20.8m. Not exactly a vast majority.


I believe that whoever wins this war Syria will be worse off and definitely not a democracy. I believe the only way to solve this problem (and many others similar to it) is to re-divide the middle east into different countries for Turks, Arabs, Kurds, Persians etc. so we don't have such unstable countries then can they can begin to build better governments and democracies can thrive because people in the same country don't hate each other.

Of course implementing this plan is near impossible so it will never happen and would cause chaos for some time but in the long run would fix a lot of things. This idea may fail miserably but so far so has everything else.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Evan of Skaro said:
I have made bold the parts that I disagree with. No-one has gotten majorly involved in this war so I don't see how it will expand beyond Syria.



1.5m have fled, and Syria has a pop. of 20.8m. Not exactly a vast majority.


I believe that whoever wins this war Syria will be worse off and definitely not a democracy. I believe the only way to solve this problem (and many others similar to it) is to re-divide the middle east into different countries for Turks, Arabs, Kurds, Persians etc. so we don't have such unstable countries then can they can begin to build better governments and democracies can thrive because people in the same country don't hate each other.

Of course implementing this plan is near impossible so it will never happen and would cause chaos for some time but in the long run would fix a lot of things. This idea may fail miserably but so far so has everything else.
Click to expand...
Why not remove all weapons, all systems of government, then kingdoms will be built, which can be converted to democracies. We're not colonial any more, and not in a position to do this as we have very little control over the countries now.
 

DeletedUser41523

Guest
The US shouldn't care. It doesn't win of it gets involved anyways.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
The Smilodon Fatalis said:
The US shouldn't care. It doesn't win of it gets involved anyways.
Click to expand...
The US doesn't "win"

It would have to enter a direct war with the country to "win", it would instead have to support one side or the other, so they would not be representing the war effort, the rebels would be.

They would achieve their objectives, but they would not gain any more territory, possibly an ally. (Though Libya has proven the opposite effect, since they did a raid on the American embassy after Britain assisted militarily, and America assisted with communications etc)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Is it not in America's/Europe's interests to assist the rebels, to prevent the Assad regime from supporting potential anti-Western nations, such as Iran and Russia?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Shadis said:
Let them solve it on their own. I'm quite sick of the US jumping in to support foreign wars. We need to focus on our own country before we can help other countries.
Click to expand...

I agree. We need more experience in wars, so we should do our own. Then later on we can stand by other countries because we'll have more experience.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Pushty said:
Is it not in America's/Europe's interests to assist the rebels, to prevent the Assad regime from supporting potential anti-Western nations, such as Iran and Russia?
Click to expand...

So naive... We take one down and another pops up. We stop one 'wrong' government and another takes it's place

The US should better itself before it tries to better other nations.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Pushty said:
Is it not in America's/Europe's interests to assist the rebels, to prevent the Assad regime from supporting potential anti-Western nations, such as Iran and Russia?
Click to expand...

Why should it be? We have no right to this conflict...I agree with Shadis, we need to better ourselves.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top