Originally Posted by kimilseung (Post 10879843)

Now that France (correctly) are acknowledged as Americas longest alliy (by Kerry), what insult should the Brits have? I just heard "Marmite eating surrender badgers" on the BBC..

Originally Posted by sir_eccles (Post 10878119)

One wonders if it is a sort of Neville Chamberlain moment. Sick of what they saw in the previous war they would rather wave a piece of paper. The overall likely consequences being less severe though.

That said, I agree with many commentators that none of the options available are good options.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10878229)

I think there is the unspoken, and so far as I'm aware unnoticed by the mass media ( in the context of the civil war in Syria), link between Syria and Iran. When the "Arab Spring" took hold a couple of years ago, the regimes in several countries fell like dominos, and once Libya fell it was inevitable that the next in line would be Syria.

The Assad regime in Syria has hung on a lot longer than expected, but once it topples, the next in line will be Iran, and the itinerant band of mercenaries of varying types that have been wandering around the Middle East and north Africa since they fled Afghanistan, causing mayhem and bloodshed all the way from Iraq south to Yemen and west to Algeria, will no doubt turn their attention to Iran.

Iran was already weakened from 30 years of sanctions, but the significant tightening of sanctions a couple of years ago which has greatly reduced Iran's ability to sell it's oil, has pushed Iran to the brink of collapse. When the Assad regime falls, Iran will be the next in line.

And the point of all this? ..... The next in line after Iran is North Korea; its time will come. The game won't end for many years yet, ... and this thread might still be running a decade from now! :huh:

Originally Posted by Michael (Post 10881094)

This is the "Love Triangle" I don't quite understand. Iran is Shia and the Assad regime is Sunni whose primary military action is against the Shia. The Sunni and the Shia have never gotten along in the middle east but Iran likes the Assad regime since it supports Hezbollah. Besides fighting the Shia, Assad is now also fighting the Sunni (Al Qaeda, etc.) but if Assad loses, Syria will likely be led by the Shia which would seem to even be a stronger ally of Iran.:confused:

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10881128)

No, there are several errors in your understanding/ analysis. Assad, his family and cronies are Alawites, an esoteric offshoot of Shia Islam, so aside from backing the Shiite Hezbollah, the Alawites would tend to be allies of Shiite Iran. In summary Iran, Hezbollah, and the Assad regime are all Shiite, or an offshoot of Shiism.

The large majority (about three quarters) of Syrians are Sunnies, so in any roughly democratic Syria, the country's overall religious leaning would be Sunni Muslim, and therefore opposed to both Iran and Hezbollah, so Iran has a strong interest in opposing the overthrow of the Assad regime.

Originally Posted by Michael (Post 10881136)

I incorrectly assumed that since the Assad regime was the Ba'ath party, it was a Sunni party like Saddam's Ba'ath party in Iraq and therefore assumed that it was the minority. One wrong assumption lead to a second wrong assumption.

Originally Posted by Pulaski (Post 10881161)

Hmmm, I'd never even thought about the Ba'ath party angle. I guess it just goes to show how one incorrect assumption can lead to other errors.

Originally Posted by AilsWallace (Post 10881044)

Is it just me or does anyone else see a resemblance between Assad and Beaker from the Muppets?

Originally Posted by Boiler (Post 10887217)

Anybody else play Poker on their smart phone?

(Talking about Muppets.)