Arab League calls for an arab/UN peacekeeping force

[CaptainCrunch]

Things have reached a tipping point in Syria as the government continues to murder its civilians in massive numbers.

The Arab League is asking for a joint UN/Arab League Peacekeeping force. Of course Russia and China will veto any UN Peacekeeping action.


Personally I know that Canada will offer troops and probably transportation aircraft and move one of the Frigates into the area. I'd prefer that Canada not put any boots onto the ground, Its going to be a meat grinder for any western force as they get caught between the Government on one side the Civillians on the second side and radical groups on the third side.

I'd prefer that we offer logistical support and nothing else without assurances.

http://ca.reuters.com/article/topNew...8DB0BH20120213

[Manhattanboy]

Assad needs to be taken alive and put on trial for crimes against humanity.

Then round up Ahmadinejad and the leaders of Hezbollah, Hamas and Islamic Jihad.

It's time the axis of evil was put down once and for all.

[wookster]

I would be in favor of UN troops (including Canadian) on the ground if they were given the means and the support to do the job. Unfortunately, history has proven that this will likely not happen as there will be too much politics involved.

[FlameOn]

Isn't the death toll something like 8-9000 now? About time something is being done. Assad's been playing a stalling game from day one.

Mind you, the Chinese could still veto this. The Russians are apparently considering letting this pass. This way the Russians can happily keep selling weapons to the Syrians until the whole deal falls apart again after Assad stockpiles enough arms.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16969501

[tenyardrambo]

Originally Posted by wookster

I would be in favor of UN troops (including Canadian) on the ground if they were given the means and the support to do the job. Unfortunately, history has proven that this will likely not happen as there will be too much politics involved.

Peacekeeping in the Middle East is a joke. You can't do your job because the rules and laws have the peacekeepers hands tied behind your back. Just call in a security company so they can observe and report.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by wookster

I would be in favor of UN troops (including Canadian) on the ground if they were given the means and the support to do the job. Unfortunately, history has proven that this will likely not happen as there will be too much politics involved.

At this point, the UN is configured for a mission like Syria, the concept of peacekeeping where troops in Blue Berets stand bravely in the line of fire to protect civillians is foolish.

Make no mistake, if you put troops on the ground in Syria its an offensive mission to remove Assad's ability to make war on his people. You need massive amounts of ground forces, you need highly mobile armor units that can take the capital city, you need massive airpower to knock out Syrian armour and artillary sites.

Libya was a cake walk compared to what's happening here. Ghadaffi did not have a strong military at the time, and the opposition was fairly strong and benefitted from members of the military joining their cause in unit size. That's not happening in Syria where the opposition is on the verge of being exterminated.

And I can guarantee if the UN was to put the force on the ground that it need to do this mission, they're going to be viewed as conquerors rather then liberators and they're going to end up fighting not only the Assad government, but extremists on the other side.

Its more of a mission that is configured for a Nato force then a UN force.

I very much doubt that America wants to commit ground forces especially with the need to rest and rearm their military. I doubt that America wants to be caught in another 5 year tar baby engagement.

Canada just doesn't have anythng left to give, the Army needs a significant amount of time to rest retrain and repurchase equipment worn out in Afghanistan.

On top of that, if you look at the map Syria is bordered by Turkey, Iraq and Lebanon. Turkey might allow aircraft, but I doubt that they can politically allow UN troops to mass in Turkey for a cross border invasion. In Iraq your dealing with a new insurgency that started after America left, you'd probably get attacked and suicide bombed in Iraq, Lebanon is not a friendly nation especially with Hezbollah there. Plus Iran would squeal if 5000 Western troops for example were suddenly staged in the middle east.

I think your only option would be a sea bourne amphib assault, and the only nation capable of doing that in numbers would be the U.S. who would then have to bear the brunt on the early casualties to establish a beach head with supply lines for other UN countries to fly in troops and supplies.

And amphib assaults are always bloody, is the american public willing to watch their boys die in numbers again so quickly?

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

Isn't the death toll something like 8-9000 now? About time something is being done. Assad's been playing a stalling game from day one.

Mind you, the Chinese could still veto this. The Russians are apparently considering letting this pass. This way the Russians can happily keep selling weapons to the Syrians until the whole deal falls apart again after Assad stockpiles enough arms.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-16969501

In order for this to work, you'd literally have to shut down all avenues for Syria to get supplies and ammunition. you'd have to blockade the nation. How do you think China and Russia would feel if you started turning back planes, ships and trucks from heading over the border with Soviet or Chinese based supplies?

[Sliver]

There's nothing we can do to help that end of the world. ###### it.

[blankall]

Originally Posted by Sliver

There's nothing we can do to help that end of the world. ###### it.

It's really a damned if you do, damned if you don't scenario. Do nothing and Assad continues with his brutal crackdown. Remove Assad, and you risk another Iraq style long term occupation or takeover by the muslim brotherhood.

The only good I see coming from this is that the instability in Syria will result in them losing their influence over Lebanon. Hopefully, Lebanon will then be able to finally move forward without Iran, Syria, or Israel meddling in their affairs.

[GirlySports]

Why does it have to be a UN action? Why does it need to be a war?

Isn't this what marines and snipers are for?

An American sniper takes out Asaad, what's Russia and China really going to do about it?

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Why does it have to be a UN action? Why does it need to be a war?

Isn't this what marines and snipers are for?

An American sniper takes out Asaad, what's Russia and China really going to do about it?

Problem is any intervention has to be multilateral (consensus across multiple countries. ie. UN based). If you send in marines and snipers, it'll be viewed as a western assassination by the Arab countries and there will be wide ranging diplomatic consequences across the middle east, especially on issues like Israel.

[FlameOn]

Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch

In order for this to work, you'd literally have to shut down all avenues for Syria to get supplies and ammunition. you'd have to blockade the nation. How do you think China and Russia would feel if you started turning back planes, ships and trucks from heading over the border with Soviet or Chinese based supplies?

See, a blockade is something I can see the Russians and Chinese never agreeing to. They will likely force any resolution to have such mild language that it'll be completely ineffective. So how can a UN peacekeeping mission be successful in stopping the killing when the Russians and the Chinese will continue to provide arms and find ways to provide arms to whomever they please?

UN is broken, but I'm not sure what other solution will work either.

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Why does it have to be a UN action? Why does it need to be a war?

Isn't this what marines and snipers are for?

An American sniper takes out Asaad, what's Russia and China really going to do about it?

The Marines would get cut to pieces by the time they got anywhere near Assad.

I doubt that he's put himself in any position where a Sniper gets a clean shot at him.

and so what if they do kill him, the government won't fall, someone else will step in and continue the killing to consolidate power.

Also Flameon is absolutely right, having the Marines, or a Marine recon sniper doing the killing will lead to more anti-americanism in the region, especially if its not a UN or Arab League mandated mission, and the Arab League has made it fairly clear that this has to be a UN Mission.

Besides, if I remember my UN missions. (and no I wasn't a sniper, but I'm basing it on past experience)

You're sitting in a tower, you have Assad in your sites with no wind. Of course you need UN approval to take the shot. You radio your commander, he tells you to hold 5, and then goes to the phone, dials in the UN Security command center. The phone picks up, he opens his mouth to speak and hears

"You've reached the UN emergency command center. For approval of peacekeeping operations press 1. To cry about genocide caused by UN indecisiveness press 2, to phone in a hostage demand press 3, for all other enquiries press 0 to reach a receptionist"

"Boop" (presses one)

"You have reached the UN emergency command center approval and strategic decisiions hot line. Our hours are from 9:30 am to 3:30 pm and we are closed from 11:30 am to 2:30 pm GMT for lunch. Our offices are now closed, please try again later."

Commander calls back the sniper

"Yeah, you're going to have to hold tight until 10:00 tommorrow morning I can't get clearance for you to shoot the #######"

[CaptainCrunch]

Originally Posted by FlameOn

See, a blockade is something I can see the Russians and Chinese never agreeing to. They will likely force any resolution to have such mild language that it'll be completely ineffective. So how can a UN peacekeeping mission be successful in stopping the killing when the Russians and the Chinese will continue to provide arms and find ways to provide arms to whomever they please?

UN is broken, but I'm not sure what other solution will work either.

Of course they won't approve a blockade, weapons sales are a source of hard currency for both China and Russia, plus they don't want to get caught red handed shipping in weapons that are killing civillians.

It was a lucky stroke that the rebels found Chinese Weapons getting shippeed into Libya.

But to be honest, there's no point in running a UN operation without a blockade to starve the enemy of weapons.

I have no doubt that no matter what happens any resolution will be blocked.

[FlameOn]

Documents have been leaked to the press proving Assad was behind the orders and plan that ended up killing thousands of civilians. I wonder how the Russians and Chinese will continue to justify propping up the regime.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...073517388.html

Fighting has also broken out in the capital.
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/middle...724565894.html

[Azure]

I say they should look after their own problems. Why do we always have to send our troops over there to clean up their mess?

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by Azure

I say they should look after their own problems. Why do we always have to send our troops over there to clean up their mess?

Axworthy Doctrine!

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by Azure

I say they should look after their own problems. Why do we always have to send our troops over there to clean up their mess?

That's a similar attitude towards Poland and Czechoslovakia in the 1930's.

[nik-]

Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame

That's a similar attitude towards Poland and Czechoslovakia in the 1930's.

lol what?

That region basically ####s on the western world constantly, on a citizen level as opposed to a government level, and is now asking for help. Us putting troops in the region is a recruitment checkbox for terrorist organizations. Let them deal with it.

[Ozy_Flame]

Originally Posted by nik-

lol what?

That region basically ####s on the western world constantly, on a citizen level as opposed to a government level, and is now asking for help. Us putting troops in the region is a recruitment checkbox for terrorist organizations. Let them deal with it.

Policy of appeasement. Pretty much ignore the problem and it will go away. History proved that that was a failed policy.

And I don't think the people #### on the West; I think the government and hardcore supporters do, which the American media especially loves to spin as the only sentiment coming from places like Syria.