Assad’s Position Strengthens In Syria With Renewed Russian And Iranian Support
On Wednesday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan made a one-day visit to Russia to attend the unveiling of the new Cathedral Mosque in Moscow, described as one of the largest Muslim prayer halls in Europe. He also met with his Russian counterpart, President Vladimir Putin, and announced the lofty goal of reaching $100 billion in trade between their two countries by 2023.
Russia's importance to Turkey's economy particularly its energy sector perhaps shadowed the comments Erdogan made on his return. When asked about a solution to Syria's brutal civil war, the Turkish president gestured to a long-mooted, potential "process" of political transition. He spoke directly for the first time of the possible role that could be played by the embattled Syrian President Bashar al-Assad.
[How Turkey's Erdogan and Russia's Putin were made for each other.]
"The process could possibly be without Assad, or the transitional process could be with him," Erdogan told reporters after Eid prayers in Istanbul.
Erdogan, perhaps more than any major world leader, has been consistent and adamant about the need for Assad to step down before anything else is settled in Syria.
"A Syria without Assad has been a slogan for a number of Western governments," notes Murat Yetkin, editor of Hurriyet Daily News, an Istanbul-based English newspaper, "but Turkey has insisted that the timing of Assads removal should come at the beginning of the 'transition' period, not at the end of it."
MORE...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/worldviews/wp/2015/09/25/assads-position-strengthens-in-syria-with-renewed-russian-and-iranian-support/
Midnight Writer
(21,794 posts)The worst case scenario is a Syria that is ruled by anarchy. Of course, Assad is an evil dictator, but did we see millions of Syrians fleeing the country when he had control? Did we see massacres on this scale and wholesale rape of cities? Did we see war for as far as the eye can see? If there is a realistic alternative for a better life for the Syrian people, please describe it for me. I stress the word "realistic".
We have seen this played out before. Lebanon, Iraq, Libya. All hellholes ruled by evil dictators, but now non-government states in which the people are subject to endless war and strife by any psychotic warlord with weapons and fanatic followers.
The US is not helping here. We are supplying advanced armaments to a primitive tribal society that have been feuding for centuries. We have spent trillions (that's trillions with a T) and lost thousands of our soldiers in our Middle East adventures, and received absolutely nothing in return. Please explain our "national interest" here.
Meanwhile, these countries burn and their people suffer to the point that they are fleeing in the millions.
We as a nation need to back the hell out of there and tend to our own affairs. We should be open to diplomacy and aid to resolve a humanitarian crisis, but this US as war machine mentality has to stop.