the power of the troll!

KrIsis avrted bEkuz US Ofixls rEalIzd cat cu wrld iznt gOing tU fal fOr cer sO cald 'conclUsiv' intelijens.

i predictedthis online a week ago

its what they used to do with battleships

I predict further that "international" custody = Russian custody.

@xeno:
reminds me you never replied to my last post in the alphabet topic.

One word: Israel.

Even if Assad survives his civil war with his power intact, he'll come out of it as a conventionally armed power threatened by a paranoid nuclear neighbor with a much more modernized conventional force that has empirically had no problem bombing nearby countries and letting the rest of the world pick up the pieces after the fact.  So Assad might stay in power, but he'll have to be a much more mellow Assad, particularly in the international arena.

Not to mention that your argument assumes international law is equivalent to domestic law.  There's an obvious difference in that the Boston bomber is pretty much at the mercy of the US government.  In contrast, power politics matters in international law.  Sure, we could have sought to topple Assad if we wanted to.  But then that whole Russia thing would come into play...

Finally, remember that the objective of the bombings was never to knock Assad out of power.  Even Obama said their goals were simply to target Assad's chemical weapons stockpiles.  So absent diplomacy, the end goal of the military strike would have been the same as if the diplomatic route was successfully pursued (assuming everyone plays honestly... granted, not guaranteed).

So yeah, as far as international law goes, this is justice being carried out.

EDIT: Okay, in retrospect, that was much more than "one word."

He is losing a lot of soldiers in his efforts. This is why Hezbollah had to go to assist him... he was almost done for.

Their assistance helped, significantly, but it may not be enough.

This fight is drawing a lot of Al-Quieda, and they are against Assad. A sort of devil vs demon of a fight. The victor will be close to 25% strength when done imo. While that 25% will be skilled, it will include injured men and those who will want to retire from militancy afterwards.

Assad is done with the international scene. His control over his people will rely upon him making their lives better, which means less cash for weapons. His nation has already lost one major city to the level of combat being used. It lies mostly destroyed. His capital could be severely damaged as well.

Refugees may or may not return as well. A whole new issue for Jordan, Turkey, Iran, and Lebanon.

In terms of conventional weapons, no, there's no doubt Israel could wipe the floor with Assad before the war.

However, warfare isn't a boxing match.  Nations don't line up their armies in opposite ends of a ring, wait for a referee to say "fight," and go.  Analyses of so-called comparative military strength ignore the deterrent effect of WMDs.

Sure, Israel could clobber Assad in 2005.  However, any action by Israel could be met with an Assad launching of chemical weapons against Israeli populations.  That's important because a line of Israeli tanks at the Golan Heights doesn't prevent a SCUD from releasing Sarin gas in Tel Aviv.  So even if Israel had every reason to believe in a future engagement that their military could pretty much walk through Syria with little problem, the Syrian chemical weapon served as a deterrent.  With successful diplomacy, that deterrent's gone, so if Israel did decide they need to curbstomp Syria, there'd be MUCH less of an asymmetrical response Syria could provide.

No, becauseN.Korea had decades of peace with a still popular leader.

Assad is not so popular and will not have luck with peace. Kurds, Jews, Sunnis, Shittes, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al Quieda, and other interests will conspire against peace. Welcome to the new Lebanon.

Whats happening, I have to tell both Zarf and Einstein they're right in one thread. Am I aging more rapidly then you guys or am I being to honest?

thx for your answer Zarf, you shouldn't have

So, I don't want to read the news.  Has WW3 started yet or not?