So thousands of people should be left to suffer and die, because the revolution isn't a unified and professional army?? His battalion, like most of the rebellion is made up of former shopkeepers, mechanics and IT technicians etc all in small militias.
It's amazing how quickly "ideals" go out the window when your people are being slaughtered in front of you. Considering the alternative to fighting is either death, torture or subjugation, people will go to any lengths to survive. If you were involved in a monstrous war, you'd become a monster too.
Funnily enough things costs money. He paid for the guns, food, water, transport etc... not hiring fighters.
And what exactly do you think the AQ backed militias and these 'rogue brigades' will do to the Alawites, Christians and Shi'ites if they are successful? If the rebels bit off more than they could chew then why is that our problem? Who are we to alter the course of a civil war when both sides deserve no support? There are no winners here and no good can come of individual nation states interference. Also I think your view of the rebellions composition is a little romaticised.
Both sides are guilty of atrocities, but the rebels have taken it a stage further, I think I have quoted enough examples of this in previous posts - as I have said, in any war there has to be a victor, the FSA took a risk, albeit with vague promises of support from the west, do you think it is going to end in a fairy tale for anyone involved? People are going to die, on one side or the other.It's amazing how quickly "ideals" go out the window when your people are being slaughtered in front of you. Considering the alternative to fighting is either death, torture or subjugation, people will go to any lengths to survive. If you were involved in a monstrous war, you'd become a monster too.
Admittedly my statement was a little disingenuous, doesn't change the fact that on face value Assad seems to be the lesser of two evils here. A fractured rebellion is no excuse for these blatant war crimes. Again, go back to my previous posts.Funnily enough things costs money. He paid for the guns, food, water, transport etc... not hiring fighters.
From a relatively stable country, that had no IMF world bank debts, to a destabilised crumbling wreck thanks to western inference and promises of support for the transition to 'democratic rule'.
A couple of years ago, I had a conversation long before the 'Arab spring' with an economist that I know, he categorically stated to me back then that Syria would see an 'incursion' of some sort to depose Assad. He said back then it was all part of a financial chess game, to get everyone in the grip of the World bank and break the ring of support for Iran. The World bank tried to coerce Syria into taking out a $21b loan, they declined. Suddenly the rebellion pops up with unfettering support from the unlikeliest of places... quelle suprise. With western politicians clambering to support the AQ backed rebels in an effort to take down Assad. By hook or by crook eh?
I always used to think that he was just a bit weird and a bit paranoid.....