Can War work?

[Violet]

So... why not annex syria?

If the people rebel, remove the people.

[Anomalocaris]

Define "work".

I am unfortunatly unable to answere.

No matter who wins in Syria, the new regime will certainly be anti western. The only question remaining is if it will be a suni puppet state of Saudi Arabia or a shia puppet state of Iran.

The only hope there is for democracy is if Turkey takes it`s time to invest recources in it`s neighbour. But that is unlikely.

I think if "work" is defined as a achieving a regime that does not strengthen any independent, non-western oriented pole of power in the Middleeast, then the west has irretrievably lost this struggle when it failed to realize 2 years ago that the least anti-west independent regime plusible in Syria was the pre-conflict Assad regime. Now, the Assad regime is strongly beholden to Russia.

What you ask Turkey, a smallish power, to do is to work on behalf of the west against the close and long standing interest of Russia,which is still a much greater power. Secular Turkey will likely lose badly against Russia in this a regional political struggle, and Turkey will certainly not be compensated for her troubles by the west. If anything, the west will be delighted if Turkey is hobbled in the long run while acting in the interest of the west, and will not hesitate to criticize Turkey for employing necessary methods to achieve fundamentally western ends. Turkey knows this perfectly well and probably won't fall into the trap.

I think the real reason for Western intervention is to check the rise of Russia's influence in Syria. This actually could "work", provided the west is willing to accept a regime that is anti-west at the same time as it is anti-Russia. This does mean creating a regime in Syria beholden to Saudi-Arabia.

[CapnAwesome]

I agree with the people that it depends on the definition of 'work'.

Although considering our 1000+ year history of intervening in the Middle East; 'No' seems to be an equally acceptable answer.

[paulpablo]

In my opinion America has a choice of Muslims either blaming America because they didn't help, or because they bombed a country and killed Muslims again. The first option is less likely to result in a terrorist revenge attack.
Plus America has a fairly bad reputation of accidentally and purposefully killing civilians and allies which probably will happen in Syria too.

[Nine]

So... why not annex syria?

If the people rebel, remove the people.

Works fine for me in Rome TW + Civ 5.

[Jackalope]

So... why not annex syria?

If the people rebel, remove the people.

Works fine for me in Rome TW + Civ 5.

You know, that's a strategy I haven't tried in Civ starting with Civ 1. City goes into revolt, raze the city.

Somehow I think it might not work so well.

[Minimalist]

In the case of the US and EU, I think it's Damned if they do and Damned if they don't.

In that case why don't we do what is best for us.....for a change.

[StuW]

In the case of the US and EU, I think it's Damned if they do and Damned if they don't.

In that case why don't we do what is best for us.....for a change.

I don't even think those in power know what that is! and if they do it's us as in "me"

[Nine]

You know, that's a strategy I haven't tried in Civ starting with Civ 1. City goes into revolt, raze the city.

Somehow I think it might not work so well.

I don't like my people complaining. If they piss me off I'll raise the city. Even if I need it.

[Minimalist]

Here's an example of not being able to win.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/26/world/...=5043&_r=0

When the conversation turns to politics, the predominant topic is a surprise to American ears: the conspiracy between the United States and the Muslim Brotherhood to destroy Egypt.

However crackpot that view may sound, it is widespread among supporters of the military, which ousted the Muslim Brotherhood’s elected president, Mohamed Morsi, last month.

There is really no hope for these crazy bastards.