Quote Originally Posted by davidbfpo View Post
The respected academic commentator, Joshua Landis, has a FP column today under the title 'Stay Out of Syria: Foreign intervention to topple Bashar al-Assad's bloody regime risks a fiasco on par with Iraq and Afghanistan':http://www.foreignpolicy.com/article...yria?page=full
David maybe you can help decipher this Landis 'doublespeak'?

He said (as you quoted):

"The United States can play a role with aid, arms, and intelligence -- but it cannot and should not try to decide Syria's future and determine the victors of this conflict."

How does the Landis man produce a thought pattern where aiding, arming and providing intel to one side does not 'try to decide Syria's future'?

AM today the BBC Radio had John McCain advocating intervention, yes there is a clear moral case, but I concluded then 'Just say no' and this article confirms that judgement.
David the Landis article confirms nothing other than the US and European approach has been frozen in indecision and in fear of a face with Russia and China. Now (in the style of the classic coward) they can now wring their hands and claim that the situation is too advanced/complex/etc risk a physical involvement in Syria. This while their incompetence and failure to act decisively in the early stages has led to the current situation.