US is ready to work with Russia and Iran on Syria but says Assad can’t stay in power

[craigt3365]

The problems in Syria started because of Assad. We are where we are today because of this "Arab uprising" against him. And support for him by external interference. If he stepped down, like some world leaders do when they've lost the confidence of their country, we might not be in this mess. Maybe another mess, but not this one.

Was Assad democratically elected by the Syrian people?

Should the Syrian people decide if he should step down in an election?

Or does America only support state sovereignty and democracy when the result is a leader they approve of?

Ukraine had an elected president, who was removed with support from America. Egypt had an elected government, removed with support from America.

Who appointed the Obama administration the decision makers for other electorates?

Maybe if America hadn't messed with internal Ukraine politics they wouldn't be in the mess they are too.

The US is involved in pretty much every country in the world. In one way or another. Many other countries are in the same position. Doesn't mean the elected president of Ukraine was toppled 100% due to the actions of the US. Far from that. Plus, he was about as corrupt as they come. The country is better off with him.

Too many countries around the world mess with local politics for their benefit. You can include a lot of countries in that camp.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bashar_al-Assad

In 2000 he succeeded Hafez al-Assad, his father, who had led Syria for 30 years until his death.^%5B2%5D He was confirmed by the Syrian electorate twice in 2000 and 2007 in referenda that did not include any opposing candidate.

Hardly democratic.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine#Orange_Revolution

In 2004, Viktor Yanukovych, then Prime Minister, was declared the winner of the presidential elections, which had been largely rigged, as the Supreme Court of Ukraine later ruled.^%5B122%5D The results caused a public outcry in support of the opposition candidate, Viktor Yushchenko, who challenged the outcome. This resulted in the peaceful Orange Revolution, bringing Viktor Yushchenko and Yulia Tymoshenko to power, while casting Viktor Yanukovych in opposition.

Again, hardly democratic. Politics in Ukraine are seriously messed up. Lots of outside influence.

[Loptr]

I'll make a little prognostication... This time next year Assad will still be in power, while there will be regime change in the House of Saud...

America had it's chance to go after ISIS and has shown a lack of commitment to complete the task, all the while Russia and China have been watching events unfold, including the mass migration of people from the region to Europe... This destabilizing event for western Europe prompted Russia and China to act to put a stop to the madness... They have given Washington ample time to correct their mistakes by creating ISIS in the first place to take out Assad, but the mass migration to Europe tipped the scales... With both Russian and Chinese having military on the scene in Syria, Washington will either have to step up their actions on the ground and not their rhetoric or face losing further credibility in the action... Russia, China, Iraq, Iran and Syria have formed a strategic alliance to remove the ISIS threat whether the US likes it or not... Checkmate...

Not checkmate...Syria has nothing the Americans can use other than taking away Russia's buffer zone.

The conflict in Syria is a proxy war which was instigated and is perpetuated by the US for Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Qatar... The US is looking after Arab interests, not their own...

[connda]

Article from The Guardian - Australia set to abandon opposition to Assad as part of Syria settlement

Between that and Australia's refusal to become a refugee dumping ground, I'm sure they are now on the US's 'defecation' list.

[ggt]

If Putin would convert to Islam...become more like an Iranian...the negotiations would go much soother...IMHO

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.

[Credo]

A lot of US bashing going on here, but little is being said about Russia. I wonder why?

Russia does not have a stellar reputation in it's interference in other countries.

So, let's see how they do in Syria.

[Thaidream]

In discussing US relations with Russia- there are really two issues. ONe is Ukraine which was once part of the Soviet Union. Russia has every right to be concerned about the possibility of Ukraine becoming part of NATO as we have already seen with Romania, Hungary, Poland and Bulgaria. Putin's seizure of the Crimea-which was once Russian territory- is saying to America and Europe-- stop encircling russia and he has drawn a line. Russia is thinking of their own national interest. If I was America and the West, I would back away from this part of the conflict but assuring Putin that Ukraine will not become a part of Nato as long as Russia indicates it will not seize more territory.

In regard to Syria- the real issue is ISIS- a group as bas as was the Nazi's. They must be soundly defeated and the US needs Russia to do this. Syria is a sideshow and Assad can be dealt with at a alter time. No one wants suicide bombers in New York or London.

[cookee68]

Well it will help the Russian economy

[StasD]

why Obama did not notice China? As I know now Russia, Iran, China and Iraq co-operate in figth with ISIS

[StasD]

In discussing US relations with Russia- there are really two issues. ONe is Ukraine which was once part of the Soviet Union. Russia has every right to be concerned about the possibility of Ukraine becoming part of NATO as we have already seen with Romania, Hungary, Poland and Bulgaria. Putin's seizure of the Crimea-which was once Russian territory- is saying to America and Europe-- stop encircling russia and he has drawn a line. Russia is thinking of their own national interest. If I was America and the West, I would back away from this part of the conflict but assuring Putin that Ukraine will not become a part of Nato as long as Russia indicates it will not seize more territory.

In regard to Syria- the real issue is ISIS- a group as bas as was the Nazi's. They must be soundly defeated and the US needs Russia to do this. Syria is a sideshow and Assad can be dealt with at a alter time. No one wants suicide bombers in New York or London.

Obama rules Ukraine directly. One his call and Ukraine does everything he wants. But Obama cannot call to Syria even he can we all know the answer)))

[arjunadawn]

Name one country where the US has been behind removing the leader (and there's a few!), and where the country is doing better ever since.

Syria might be different. Syria is such a complicated basket case, perhaps it would be better to forget about democracy, go in, clean up, take over and control it for a generation, and slowly wean the next generation into forward democratic thinking.

Bravo! Spot on. At what point will the US, in blind pursuit of imperial designs, concede they've failed in Syria and now allow actual resolution. It is overwhelmingly clear Russia is among the greatest beneficiaries of US folly in recent years. Russia sees both geopolitical must and opportunity in Syria. The US assertion that Assad must go no matter what seems almost like blind rage at this point. When the forces to depose Assad themselves become a greater threat than Assad ever was the US must consider yielding to new realities on the ground, irrespective of whether removing Assad in 2007 was a good idea- it may be unworkable now. The US has compromised every other proclaimed value or red line it has why would it not now allow Assad to remain in power if in doing so a functioning solution for, perhaps, multiple interests can be found? In allowing Assad to remain State level functioning could begin to repair much in the region, though the actual warring may hardly be touched.

I do not believe that the US will fold on its resolve to remove Assad, though it should. While the US could politically gain from announcing they might support some outcome under Russian auspices the fact is the local sunni tribes will now never be put back in the box- they are a majority and are tired of shia oppression. Whether it is US and her proxies or Russia seeking to mete out the future the Alawites cannot remain in power. This outcome is not possible. But the US gains nothing but decreased trust by insisting Assad go. (While this may appear to appease the US's sunni allies it does little as the damage from the Iran deal cannot be glossed over by Assad's ouster).

Could [we] really take over and control it for a generation like the British or French Mandate? I think not. Those days are passed. What manner of coalition would have any legitimacy in doing so? Not Western, not Russian, not Shia, but the best possibility is a Sunni arrangement. Russia can be made to agree to this if some Guantanamo bay like deal is struck affording Russia use of Tartus for 99 years or some other lease. I just think there are options but the American side will not exercise any constructive ends. They are literally using the playbook "Which Path to Persia" with the string of pearls strategy of acting upon Iran.

Let us always keep in context that both the administration and leading current and former officials concede there is actually no strategy in the region. It is apparent.

[simple1]

How can peace be achieved in Syria without simultaneously addressing the Sunni disenfranchisement in Iraq which was the trigger for the rise of Daesh. The same question mark with settling the various Kurdish nationals aspirations.

[IAMHERE]

It pleases me that Putin is willing to negotiate. It worries me that Obama will negotiate, he and his team aren't that good at it.