[arthurus]

If intervene we must then it should probably be on the side of the current regime. As nasty as it is it protects minorities because, being from a minority itself, it needs them for support. The rebels are all Sunni Sharia Islamists and the Christians, Alawites and other minorities will be "cleansed" and the Sunni Caliphate will have another charter member. This is all part of the inter-Islamic War that has been under weigh for a while in the Moslem world since the Shi'ites got into a position of power with the fall of the Shah in Iran. It will end with conquest by or of Iran.

It seems likely that the the Sunni kenyan will intervene on the side of the Sunnis against the Alawites(a tiny sect within Shi'ism) in his campaign against Iran. If the kenyan feels he needs a real war that is supported by the American popplation to get himself re-elected then he will attack Iran in the late summer this year. That would likely improve his electability and promote his dream of a monolithic Sunni Caliphate.

[Zhang Fei]

This is all part of the inter-Islamic War that has been under weigh for a while in the Moslem world since the Shi'ites got into a position of power with the fall of the Shah in Iran.

Alawites aren't Muslims. They were classified as dhimmis under Turkish (Ottoman) rule and had to pay the special poll tax like all other non-Muslims. The Mufti of Jerusalem was induced (bribed?) to make a special declaration that Alawites were Muslims in order to reduce the sting to Sunni Arab sensibilities in Syria of being ruled by ruled by Alawites, who are, notwithstanding the fatwa, still considered heretics and apostates by both Shias and Sunnis. Ultimately, Assad stands with Iran not for religious reasons (because there are none), but because unlike the West, Iran won't pressure him to democratize, which would spell ruin for him as an Alawite leader in a country that is 60% Sunni Arab.