Thursday, October 11, 2012

Remote Controlling Syrian Conflict

While military intervention in Syria may be impossible, imposing a no-fly zone is not. To be sure, a no-fly zone over Syria would not be a simple undertaking: substantial resources would be required, and, given the regime’s military capabilities, it would not be a risk-free operation. Yet it was accomplished for more than a decade in neighboring Iraq to keep Saddam Hussein from attacking segments of his own population, so we know that it can be done in Syria as well.
Because Russian and Chinese intransigence precludes the UN from establishing a no-fly zone, the Arab League and NATO should jointly take the lead. And, while the participation of the US, which has by far the greatest logistical capacity, is essential, it should not be in the forefront. As in the case of Libya, this would be an excellent opportunity to “lead from behind.”
A no-fly zone is by no means a solution to the conflict in Syria. But it would be a modest step in the direction of reducing the great harm currently being done. A more comprehensive approach, if one could be found, would be far preferable. Until then, it seems well worth pursuing efforts that would help to abate the carnage.
I disagree one thing, well nice to sit at front of TV and remote controlling telling this and that, it is well to say “solving problems without military involved” that is ok but how about arming the FSA? Now the problem is  they need heavy weapons, if FSA not fighting what happen then?  They could be  killed more  and also the terrorist  Assad and his gang all sort of excuses lies try to justify their terrorism for their own people and their own countries. Syria people don’t want to him so they will not give up their struggle so this conflict end when criminal Assad is remove by forces.