You might be surprised that there are many Syrians who do not want to live under a dictator or a theocracy. Kind of like Americans, Europeans, Canadians - well, kind of like everyone else.
While I think we should not provide the opposition with weapons (too many long term problems associated with that), I realize that weakens the non-AQ opposition as a fighting force, motivates some of them to join the faction that does have access to weapons and increases the profile of the jihadist faction of the opposition as a result.
Since Assad is a smart guy, this was part of his long term scenario. If he could get past the peaceful demonstration phase and can militarize the crisis, he stands a good chance of holding on to his hereditary rule. He has a strong army which is likely to prevail if things degenerate into a civil war which has happened. And as a civil war then drags on the opposition will be increasingly radicalized. The 'bad actors' (the most violent) will become more relevant as peaceful protest and negotiations become impossible. Voila! Assad's protestation that he has been using since the protests began that it is "Me or the terrorists" which was ludicrous at the beginning, magically becomes more and more accurate.
The fact is that Assad is a nasty piece of work who will destroy Syria in order to remain in power. The fact is that there are many Syrians who do not want to live under a dictator or a theocracy. The fact is that the nasty side of the opposition gains strength as the civil war goes on. The fact is that there is little we can do about any of this other than provide aid to refugees - anything else will make a terrible situation for the Syrian people even worse.
Those are the facts on which we should base our policy - which should be non-intervention. What we should not do is start with a policy that we want - non-intervention - and then create "facts" (both sides are equally bad and anyone who opposes Assad is a terrorist) that support our desired policy. That's what republicans do. Want to invade Iraq - create the necessary 'facts'; want to cut taxes for the rich - create the necessary 'facts'; don't like EPA or the existence of global warming, create the necessary 'facts', etc., etc., etc.
I get the sense that Obama is living in a 'fact-based' world and trying to figure out what to do in Syria. McCain and other republicans live in a 'fact-free' world (crowded with republicans on a variety of issues) where they know the policy they want - send in the bombers - and will create the 'facts' they need to achieve their policy.
= new reply since forum marked as read