The Al Qaeda attacks in Syria may be good news… whilst I am far from calling for significantly making common cause with the ghastly (& Ba’athist) regime in Damascus, there is much to be said for dealing with the bad guys one at a time and also for getting sundry vile ideologies to shoot it out with each other on their own time and dime.
And to that effect, if the Syrian state sees stamping on Al Qaeda and other Islamists as a ‘survival issue’, then that can only be a good thing. It needs to be remembered that whilst Syria is a primary threat to Israel, it is far from looming that large on the list of Things To Be Dealt With for the US, Britain or the Western World generally. Their time will come but that need not be right now.
So let us encourage as many people of whatever cloth as possible to stomp on the Islamists, and once that problem recedes to manageable proportions, well, no need to shed too many tears if Ba’athism’s last outpost comes in for a bit of serious stick from the US, Israel or whoever, as it is not like we need mistake them for being in any way admirable just because we might have once shared a common enemy.
“So let us encourage as many people of whatever cloth as possible to stomp on the Islamists”
You assume too much. You assume the Syrian Baathists will “stomp on the Islamists”. They will do nothing of the kind. They just say they are with America and against Al Qaeda, as it suits them to say so, at the same time they send terrorists to Iraq and Israel, and supply them with bases in Syria.
Still it’s ok with me for whoever wishes to blow up whatever he wishes in Syria or Saudi Arabia. I’d rather they did it there than anywhere else. If it helps destabilize those regimes it’s a good thing.
Jacob: I could not care less what the Syrian state says it is going to do or not do. However if Al Qaeda starts shooting at Syrian policemen and embarrassing the Syrian state by trying to blow things up in Damascus, the Syrians will indeed start stomping on the Islamists with their customary ferocity, ruthlessness and savagery. They will not look at the actions of Al Qaeda and think “What drove them to do this?” but rather “We don’t like that! Who can we kill to stop that happening again? And just to be on the safe side, let’s kill their families too.”
They will not do that in order to appease the US or anyone else, but rather they will do that to assert that, in Syria, only the Syrian state is permitted to murder people. That is what the Syrian state is all about and the only thing it is actually any good at. Thus I am simply looking forward to the Syrian state acting in accordance with its long established nature.
Perry,
Your scenario is plausible, but others are possible too.
You underestimate the cunning of these people. If the terrorists aren’t some weak group that is directly endangering the regime, but a group supported by Iran or Saudi Arabia, and if those powerful sponsors tell Assad that their aim isn’t his regime (as long as he plays along) but the infidels – then Assad will play along and accomodate his pals. Or he will make some deal whereby he increases his support for the terrorists as long as they stay within some tolerable limits.
Then there’s the question of his capabilities.
Finally, I hope that your prediction proves right and mine wrong.
Jacob – face is important in that part of the world, as you know. I think Perry had some strong points. I may be terribly ill-informed, but I do not go for this sophisticated Arab subtlety deal. They do not play a long game. They react, and they react with violence, to cure the problem right there. They don’t lay elegant traps for their enemies and then sit back, cigarette smoke curling upward across the velvet black desert night towards a crescent moon, waiting. They send the suicide bombers in.
Susan, where are you?
Personally, I dont’ much mind who’s killing terrorists where, and prefer it not to be us, here.
But then, I’m still pretty much thinking they’re breathing my air and need to stop it.
I suspect the “attacks” in Damascus were, shall we say, convenient street theatre concocted to try to deflect pressure from the US against Assad’s government.
if so, all the speculation is moot …
I’ll agree with rkb. Already the reports sound fishy. the reaction of the Syrian government to this is just off note.
It’s not just “convenient street theatre,” it’s bad street theatre.
I tend to agree with the “theatre” theory. Especially given the reports that the Syrian government invited the public to view the building, which many did; generally, locations such as this are closed for weeksz pending investigations.
Plus how often do terrorists of this type blow up empty cars in front of vacant buildings that just happened to have once been occupied by the UN?
Sounds a bit dodgey.
I tend to agree with the “theatre” theory. Especially given the reports that the Syrian government invited the public to view the building, which many did; generally, locations such as this are closed for weeks pending investigations.
Plus how often do terrorists of this type blow up empty cars in front of vacant buildings that just happened to have once been occupied by the UN?
Sounds a bit dodgey.
It is hard to tell with these people when they are in league and when they are cheating each other, as Tolkien said..
Here is another thought:
Now that the UN has been hit they’ll get mad as hell and “stomp on the Islamists” too !
Too much fog.
IMO the current Al-queda is loosely : Parts of Saudi Royals, Pakistani ISI & radicals, Iranian Revolutionary Guard, Heezbollah and associates in Lebanon and all muslim brotherood from US to Europe and Middle east.
We all know that many Jihadis that go to Iraq came from Syria and the recent Chemical attack foiled in Jordan came from Syria,
: Syria is not known to be a disctatorship with many players like Pakistan, heavy centralized . Things change? yes
Was this a internal show off to deflect internal protests because Syria will have to “cooperate” with “Satan”?
Was this mainly an external show off for US consumption? Was this a sign of Syrian internal fights? (remember recent Kurd uprising), also must have been stress inside regime because some will want to support Iraq insurgents and others will want to stay quiet.
Or was this Al-queda like Perry says?
Dificult to say.
Attack or street theatre,either way there will have to be arrests and confessions.Somebody will end up having the soles of their feet beaten.
A third possibility is to provide an excuse to eliminate political opposition or plain score settling.
Why would Islamist terrorists attack long-empty buildings?
There is an assumption that the attack was real, was performed by terrorist and/or AQ sympathizers. Excuse me while I have my doubts. Syria has been funneling arms and terrorists into Iraq, and helping Saddam whenever possible. Baby Assad seems an AQ dream. So why would they bite one of the last remaining hands the feed it?
More importantly, why would AQ attack an empty building, at night, in a operation that seemed almost designed to minimize casualties? It don’t smell right.