The Assad shiite regime is already the worst one installed, so I reason if Free Syria took power, then at least their wouldn't be chemical weapon attacks. Only problem is when the democratic army and the ultra theocrats Al-Qaeda win, they'll be fighting over which government to put in place.
The Free Syrian Army will destroy Syria and Arabic Unity. This is not a fight between oppression and freedom, this is a fight between Arabic Unity and Jihadist oppression. The United States must not intervene; it fails to realize that Ba'athism will shut the highest critics of American companies, i.E Al Qaida and others down, because Ba'athism is secular. The Ba'athist Regime has been lied against, hated, and criticized by the United Nations, only because they interviewed 225 ppl allegedly "PART OF THE PROTESTS" but yet it has not submitted that report for the Assad Regime to analyze. What can the United Nations do? It can only spread lies about Arabic unity to destroy it. If I had to choose between Ba'athism and Jihadism, I'd go for Ba'athism. Glory to the Ba'ath!
Lol, the free Syrian Army is democratic. Something Syria is not right now. Only a portion of the country and ethnic arabs support the kurds. If anybody symbolizes unity, it would be a sunni transjordan group, like Free Syria.
@ChosenWolff: "Riad al-Asaad stated in October 2011 that the Free Syrian Army (FSA) has no political goals except the removal of Bashar Assad as president of Syria" Its second largest ally is the Islamic Front, aka Jihadists. Is this what you want for Syria? Sharia? Theocracy? If we implement *TRUE* Ba'athism, Arabic Unity via the creation of the United Arabic Republic would be preferred than the mock Ba'athist movement of Hussein.
Assad isn't recognized by the EU, NAFTA, and all but three members of the Arab League. His existence is harming the people of Syria rather than helping it. As soon as he abdicates, Syria will stop functioning as a proxy war sandbox for the foreign powers. If the people of Syria want to be fascist, they can do it democratically. The people should vote their fate.
Assad does not prepresent Syrian unity. He's not completely ethnic Syrian, represents and rules using the minority religion, shiite, and has been disgraced by half of the nations in the UN, and the other half refuses to open dialogue. The best way to "Syrian" unity, is by letting the Syrians make unified decisions. Nationalism doesn't have to be a result of authoritarianism.
The EU has taken away the sovereignty of Greece. NAFTA has literally done nothing but destroy Iraq and Afghanistan. You call the Assadist Regime proxy? What is this? The Assadist Regime is supported by Hezbollah et all, but they are not controlled by anyone else, not even the Arabic Ba'ath Party. The SNC is the one being puppet-controlled by the US and other Islamic movement. A true Ba'athist regime is more preferable than a Sectarian Democracy.
Assad himself isn't a proxy. The was that's in place do to his regime is. Assad being in power has made the nation a endless struggle fueled by US and Russian arms, while American and Chinese business man leach off the war economy. He doesn't represent sovereignty, nor does the EU have anything to do with this conversation. A sovereign nation is independent of interpartisian politics, and abides by their constitution. Syria can do that and be Democratic. I would argue that the Russian troops in the nation helping Assad, are making Syria lose sovereignty at the moment. All sides in the conflict are being pulled by foreign strings, and I simply choose the better of the two. The one which seeks European intergration (Technically Syria , Iraq, and Turkey are transeuropean), democracy, and rule based on secular decision making. Assad winning this war means another Russian puppet state. Much like Armenia, Kazahkastan, Belarus, and Serbia are today.