Strategypage has it right about our Syria dithering:
The West could end the Syrian War quickly by providing air support and much more weapons and other aid on the ground. That doesn’t happen because Western politicians fear later media accusations (true or not, makes no difference) that this support aided Islamic radicals and their goal of attacking the West and turning the world into an Islamic religious dictatorship. Arab public opinion (which tends not to get much attention from the Western media) sees this reluctance as a Western plot to get more Arabs killed.
What tends to be missed in all this is the fact that all revolutions are messy and there are always fanatic factions ready to keep killing after victory is won. Headline hunting politicians treat the fanatics as something to run away from when, in reality, you are going to have to deal with them eventually, so you might as well get on with it and take care of the mess now. History will view timid and media shy Western leaders as short sighted and the cause of much more misery in the long run.
We should have thanked our lucky stars for such a break a year and a half ago when the revolt took off. We should have sent arms just on the chance we could crush Assad. Just giving him a good scare would be useful even if he won, no?
But no, we dither and more Syrians die, jihadis gain ground, and Assad believes he can win. Is it any wonder that much of the Arab street thinks we want Arabs to die? How's that for repairing our relations with the Arab Moslem world.
