There is an argument out there that the enemy of the good is the perfect, and that regime change would still be an improvement over the dictatorship. Would it really? It is clear that the majority of Syrians don't agree. You have only to look at Libya to see what the counterrevolution has in store for Syria.
Another argument is that the process of transition to something else - anything else - other than the dictatorship is a positive and necessary step on the road to final reform. Is that true? I see the American-Saudi-Israeli counterrevolutionary plan as ending with the installation of the Salafist regime, a regime whose main selling point is that it will ignore the issue of the continuation of Zionism in the Middle East. It will spend most of its time concentrating on the enforcement of religious morals. There will be no change in this regime for the foreseeable future. It amounts to a different type of dictatorship, one more agreeable to the American-Saudi-Israeli coalition, and one intended to forestall any real improvement.
The Syrian government, like any other government, has the right to put down an insurrection within its borders. Contrary to the pile of lies we've been receiving from the Jew-controlled media, the Syrian government has been remarkably restrained in its reactions to a foreign-financed and foreign-armed group of (mostly) radical Islamists carrying out a violent revolution. I have no doubt that there are well-meaning people amongst the rebels, but do they really have the interests of the Syrian people in mind? Unfortunately, the usual sectarian interests cloud the issue.
It seems to me that the supporters of the Syrian revolution have missed the massive effects of the American-Saudi-Israeli counterrevolution. Ignorance is no excuse. You have only to look at Libya to see the process in action. Tunisia and Egypt - Egypt maybe, with a lot more work by the protesters - only sneaked through as they had the element of surprise. Syria won't be so lucky. I'm in complete agreement that dictatorships need to be replaced with democracies (and supported the Libyan revolution until it was subverted by NATO). The facts on the ground have changed. The only way to improve the situation in Syria is for gradual reforms by the government. The alternative is mass civilian slaughter through foreign carpet bombing, the devolution into complete civil war, and the installation of what is in effect a Saudi-Zionist ultra-religious puppet government.
Some assorted links:
- "Syria, Nir Rosen And Ignoring Ideologies"
- "Joshua Landis and Nadim Shehadi on Syria"
- "“Syria’s Assad regime is doomed, but the battle will be long and bloody,” by Joshua Landis"
- "The Angry Arab is very angry – The Dangers of Compromise"
- "“Syria’s Opposition Must Find a Different Way,” By Ehsani"