Syria is a very complex situation.

[kentuck]

Primarily, because we don't know who would replace Assad if he is disposed or defeated? And we don't know that he would not be defeated if his military and infrastructure is "degraded". It is a huge gamble.

It is not a gamble that one should take on his own, unilaterally. It was wise in that the President asked the Congress for their support. Even with Congressional support, he would not be legitimate in striking Syria with bombs.

However, if he could get international support, plus the support of Congress, then he would have the authority to strike Syria, in my opinion. Because war is not trivial. It should never be the decision of one man. It should not be easy to drop bombs. The standard should be set very high, unless we are under imminent threat, which we are not at the present time.

[NuclearDem]

1. Syria is very complex.

It's why I tend to react very strongly when people try to make comparisons between intervention there and intervention in Libya.

[Harmony Blue]

2. Libya, Iraq and Egypt are incredibly

unstable currently.

Libya has roaming militias that are not under a unified authority or oversight. Iraq is pretty much split up in three micro states (as Biden predicted) with Kurdistan, Northern Iraq and then Sunni/Shiite controlled areas. Egypt is under the boot of the Egyptian military currently..

[kentuck]

3. I think the rebels are the wildcard

That makes it totally unpredictable.

[Avalux]

4. Complicated by Iran and Russia as well....

Russia's last remaining military base outside of their country is in Syria, and they provide a lot of support to Assad. So does Iran, they have to go through Syria to get to the sea, and then there's the oil....

I don't support bombing Syria under the current set of circumstances. This whole thing may be a ploy to get Putin to blink, however. He has a great deal of influence on Assad.

[kentuck]

5. Putin is a big player in this discussion

I would agree.