Activists seeking to break the iron-fist rule of Syria's president called Saturday for daily protests after at least 32 people were killed in the single bloodiest day since the uprising began three weeks ago.
The rallying cry by protest leaders was met with a sharp warning by Syrian authorities that they would crush further unrest, raising the risks of further bloodshed as President Bashar Assad's regime faces unprecedented challenges to its sweeping authority.
At least 170 protesters have been killed so far.
I wondered if the Syrian military remains loyal enough to carry out a Hama-scale assault on a city to kill tens of thousands of civilians. This article says the military remains loyal to the Assad clan:
Unlike the armies of Tunisia and Egypt, Syria's military will almost certainly stand by the country's leader as President Bashar Assad faces down an extraordinary protest movement.
Assad, and his father before him, stacked key military posts with members of their minority Alawite sect over the past 40 years, ensuring the loyalty of the armed forces by melding the fate of the army and the regime.
The power structure means there could be darker days ahead in Syria if the struggle for reform gathers steam. Analysts say the army would likely use force to protect the regime at all costs, for fear they will be persecuted if the country's Sunni majority gains the upper hand.
What do we do then? We did intervene in Libya when the violence against civilians was far more in the predicted than actual realm (not to defend Khaddafi--he deserves whatever bad fate we can help along).
And on top of the potential for many more civilian deaths, we do have the Syrian role in terrorism both against Israel and more recently Assad's role in killing many American troops and many more Iraqis by funneling al Qaeda suicide bombers into Iraq and otherwise supporting Iraqi Baathists in waging terrorism and insurgency inside Iraq.
Funny enough, President Obama has warned the Assad regime about responding to protests:
I strongly condemn the abhorrent violence committed against peaceful protesters by the Syrian government today and over the past few weeks. I also condemn any use of violence by protesters. ...
Syrians have called for the freedoms that individuals around the world should enjoy: freedom of expression, association, and peaceful assembly; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; and a government that is transparent and free of corruption. These rights are universal, and they must be respected in Syria.
Until now, the Syrian government has not addressed the legitimate aspirations of the Syrian people. Violence and detention are not the answer to the grievances of the Syrian people. It is time for the Syrian government to stop repressing its citizens and to listen to the voices of the Syrian people calling for meaningful political and economic reforms.
Assad can't assume they are safe. Not since the Libya War was begun. Who would have thought this president would start this war? Once that barrier was broken, a fourth war isn't so far fetched--especially since we have retired from the combat portions of the Libya operation to let NATO take the lead. Heck, we have almost 50,000 military personnel in Iraq (including 6 combat brigades) that have to leave Iraq by the end of this year, anyway. Who says that the have to go south to Kuwait first?
A Nobel Peace Prize winner has a license to kill, you know. At the very least, Assad can't rule that out. And protesters might be pushed along with even a slender hope that we will intervene. If the protesters can sustain daily protests, both Assad and President Obama may face serious decisions in short order.
