Dempsey: Syrian rebels wouldn't back US interests

AP via Yahoo! News ^ | 8/21/2013 | Bradley Klapper

[cll]

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration is opposed to even limited U.S. military intervention in Syria because it believes rebels fighting the Assad regime wouldn't support American interests if they were to seize power right now, Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, wrote to a congressman in a letter obtained by The Associated Press.

Effectively ruling out U.S. cruise missile attacks and other options that wouldn't require U.S. troops on the ground, Dempsey said the military is clearly capable of taking out Syrian President Bashar Assad's air force and shifting the balance of the Arab country's 2½-year war back toward the armed opposition. But he said such an approach would plunge the United States deep into another war in the Arab world and offer no strategy for peace in a nation plagued by ethnic rivalries.

"Syria today is not about choosing between two sides but rather about choosing one among many sides," Dempsey said in the letter Aug. 19 to Rep. Eliot Engel, D-N.Y. "It is my belief that the side we choose must be ready to promote their interests and ours when the balance shifts in their favor. Today, they are not."

Dempsey's pessimistic assessment will hardly please members of the fractured Syrian opposition leadership and some members of the administration who have championed greater support to help the rebellion end Assad's four-decade family dynasty. Despite almost incessant bickering and internal disputes, some opposition groups have worked with the United States and other European and Arab supporters to try to form a cohesive, inclusive movement dedicated to a democratic and multiethnic state.

[MasterGunner01]

The demographic breakdown of Syria tells the tale: Alawites (Assad's tribe of Muslims), Shi'ite Muslims, Druse Muslims, and Christians compose a 26 percent minority of the Syrian populace that rules Syria; the 74 percent majority are Sunni Muslims. If the Sunnis take over, you're going to see genocide on a scale that would make the most rabid Nazi blush. That fact is what motivates Assad and the other minorities to fight.

Assad also knows that Israel could vaporize Syria if he decides to get aggressive with them. Assad is a survivor; he is not suicidal.

[ek_hornbeck]

It just dawned on Dempsey that Muslim Brotherhood backed Syrian rebels won't support US geopolitical interests?

I guess this isn't surprising, considering how virtually everyone was promising that "Arab Spring" uprisings would inevitably lead to western-style Democracy all through the middle East. Maybe reality is starting to set in after seeing what Morsi accomplished in Egypt and the direction in which Libya is now headed.

[SunkenCiv]

Don't worry, I'm sure the Assad regime, and the Iranian mullahcracy, and the Hizbollah, and the Russians used special gas that only kills jihadists. Y'know, jihadists other than Iranians and Hizbollah.

[ek_hornbeck]

Don't worry, I'm sure the Assad regime, and the Iranian mullahcracy, and the Hizbollah, and the Russians used special gas that only kills jihadists. Y'know, jihadists other than Iranians and Hizbollah.

And I'm sure that the Syrian rebels that you support don't have a single Al Quaeda fighter among them, and righteously refuse any and all arms and funds sent to them by the Muslim Brotherhood and Wahhabist Saudis. After all, they have Barack Obama, Lindsey Graham, and John McCain to vouch for them!

[SunkenCiv]

No, the Syrian, Iranian, and Russian mass-murderers that you and your fellow pro-commie/anti-American/pro-jihadist/anti-Israel FR trolls support are lousy up the eyes with Hizbollah and Syrian killers of American troops going back decades to the Marine barracks bombing in Lebanon and continuing during Syria’s support of the murders of US servicepeople in Iraq and elsewhere.

And no one on FR is surprised in any way by that.

[Sirius Lee]

Ha ha. You two are fighting over which of your skunks stinks less.

[ek_hornbeck]

You just can't bring yourself to admit that the Muslim Brotherhood supports the same Syrian rebels that you do, can you? I can see why.

There's an obvious asymmetry here. You keep repeating that I'm "supporting" Assad, yet I've never once advocated arming or funding him.

In contrast, you actively support arming, funding, and perhaps even sending US troops to fight on behalf of the Syrian rebels. Once again, if I'm a commie agent of Iran for thinking that Assad might be a lesser evil in this civil war, what does that make you for supporting the same side as the Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quaeda? Mohammed Morsi's lover?

It reminds me of how people like you used to shriek "commie traitor" at those who opposed Clinton's war against Serbia, and accuse such people of being agents of Milosevic. The funny thing was, none of the critics of Clinton's war wanted to arm Milosevic or send troops on his behalf. In contrast, people like you liked nothing more than seeing Hashim Thaqi and the Kosovo Liberation Army (once classified as terrorist by the US state department) armed and funded.

[ek_hornbeck]

You two are fighting over which of your skunks stinks less.

There's a difference though. I'm not denying that Assad is murdering civilians, nor am I advocating active US support for his regime.

Sunken, on the other hand, can't bring himself to admit that the Syrian rebels have Muslim Brotherhood and Al Quaeda among them, and actively supports us arming them or even sending troops to fight alongside them.