March 6, 2012

The Case for Arming the Syrian Opposition?

Here's the problem with arming oppositions (see below): Unless you know WHO or WHAT you're arming, there's a good chance that one day those arms will be used against you (and/or your allies).

It happened with the Taliban, it happened with Yasser Arafat and the PLO, etc. Now we're hearing calls to arm a Syrian "opposition," which only days ago said it was willing to work with terrorist group Hezbollah (story here).

Our understanding of the Muslim world and mindset leave much to be desired, which makes arming them a dangerous crapshoot.

[p.s. Where is the UN (which the U.S. funds) in all of this? And where are the oil-rich Arab League countries, which the U.S. arms and aids?]

The Wall Street Journal  |  March 6, 2012

The Case for Arming the Syrian Opposition

The U.S. secretary of state should have more to say than simply that anti-Assad forces will 'somewhere, somehow, find the means to defend themselves.'

By Mark Palmer and Paul Wolfowitz

Syrian opposition.jpg
Syrian opposition. Photo courtesy:

While the slaughter continues in Syria, the U.S. is in danger of repeating the mistake made 20 years ago when we refused to arm the Bosnians. We left them at the mercy of Serb militias for three horrendous years with well upward of 100,000 deaths, until finally—after the massacre at Srebrenica and thousands more dead—NATO was forced to intervene directly and send 60,000 peacekeepers.

There may be a way to avoid such a scenario in Syria. Yet today, while Iran, Russia and China—the new authoritarian capitalists—solidly support Bashar al-Assad's brutality, the U.S. seems capable of nothing more than rhetorical condemnations ...more here.


[Comment Rules]
We welcome your comments, but please comply with our Comment Rules. You must be registered and logged in to leave a comment. Comments will display your Username and location.

Log In »

Not a member? Register here!