Taking Down Assad Will Not Save Syria

Pages: 1 2

The modern state did not emerge overnight in Europe and while the colonization of the Middle East has left behind the facades of modern states which employ some of the ritual and custom of their colonizers, they are not modern states. Often they are not even states at all. They are clans operating in cities built for them by foreigners, using technology sold to them by foreigners and going through the motions of a republic built for them by foreigners.

Behind the facade, the clan trumps the state, religion trumps the state and the state exists mainly as a vehicle for the ambitions of influential families who run the whole thing for their own benefit while providing some subsidies to the rest of the country. Overthrow one family and another rises in its place. Some will be more horrid than others. Saddam was a monster even by the standards of the region. The Assads are worse than some, but better than others.

Taking down Assad will not save Syria. It will transfer power from the Alawites, a Shiite splinter sect, to the Sunnis and the Muslim Brotherhood. This won’t just be bad for the Alawites; it will be bad for the Christians and the other minorities still in Syria. In Egypt, the ethnic cleansing of the Copts has already begun, though the media won’t comment on it. In Syria there have already been some militia attacks. And it will only get worse.

Only one calculation should be used to determine whether we remove Assad from power and that is whether removing him from power will be good for us. It has been amply demonstrated to us that we cannot save Muslims from themselves. We cannot drag them a thousand years ahead in time just because they use cell phones and have prime ministers. Externally imposing progress does not work. Especially across cultures that have to make their own adaptations and their own journeys upwards.

The misbegotten crusade to save Muslims from themselves, to act as missionaries of democracy, has cost us more lives than September 11 and to no purpose. There was something noble about the belief that we could march our troops in, liberate a people from their tyrant, and their spirits would open up and a new world would be born. That belief, however, was rooted in a secularized religious ideal that was layered over with American exceptionalism. But the whole point of exceptionalism is that it is not universal. America is not the inevitable outcome. It is a series of accommodations and experiments that derive from a particular set of histories. It cannot be generalized or universally applied.

We cannot save Muslims from themselves. We can, however, save ourselves from their turmoil, their religiously influenced violence and their cultural instability. The more we try to reach out to them, the more we are at risk of importing their violence and instability.

The job of governments is not to sell our way of life to others. It is to protect that way of life from others. It is about time that we stopped being the world’s benefactor, psychiatrist and policeman, and began looking after our own interests first. That doesn’t mean isolationism. It doesn’t rule our friendships with other countries, but those friendships should be in our interest.

Like the homeowner who kicks out his family and fills his living room with drug addicts from the street, for too long the United States has pandered to the violent dysfunction of troubled countries and peoples, while neglecting its interests and allies. It has all but abandoned its traditional ties and become obsessed with fixing trouble spots. These bouts of social work have been expensive and they have not worked.

It’s time that we stopped trying to save people from themselves and began trying to save ourselves. While we have been teaching good government to others, our own government has become rotten. While we have spent money on others, we are running out of money. While we have taken in the huddled masses of the world yearning to take us for all we’ve got, our own lives and families are in danger.

A new age of terror is here. It’s time to face up to it. To stop saving Muslims from themselves and to work to save ourselves and our kin from them.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

Pages: 1 2

  • UCSPanther

    The only good thing about an Assad defeat, is that it may do much to weaken Iran. It was the game changer of the whole Arab spring, for it brought the ancient Shia vs. Sunni feud to the surface.

    • Alvaro

      Syria has 2 million Christians, and they are better off with Baathist Alawites in charge than the Sunnis of the Muslim Brotherhood. Destroying Baathism in Iraq was a disaster, where at least Christians could hold government positions. Now it is little more than a Sharia state. Destroying Baathism in Syria will have the same result.

      Secondly, the Alawites are Shias, and the Shias are the little minority (only 10% of the total number of Muslims) who make the Shia-Sunni sectarian violence possible. This is the split that is a gift to all non-Muslims.

      Destroy Iran and Syria, and you have destroyed all Shiite states on the planet. The more resources they waste on killing each other, the better for us.

      • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QpgiYe6LToc Roger

        That's a very, very weak nod for why they should be allowed to exist.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    First of all, the title of this article begs the question: Why should Syria even be saved? Especially when you consider the undeniable fact that all Muslims are the eternal mortal enemies of all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world.

    Not to mention also that opposing our enemy Assad would entail supporting our enemies the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sunnis, and then if we make the unhinged mistake of doing that once again, the Christians and all other non-Muslim unbelievers unfortunate enough to live in Syria already as less than second-class citizens, will be ruthlessly and violently oppressed and systematically persecuted, when not outright being slaughter altogether.

    It seems to me that the proper course of action is to leave Syria the heck alone and concentrate only on ousting the ruling Mullah regime of Iran and destroying their nuclear weapons program at the same time. Indeed, with the ruling Mullah regime out of commission, not only would the nuclear threat to the world be eliminated, but Assad would lose his poodle as well. Thus, the USA could move in and become Assad's new poodle, in order to keep a lid on the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sunnis and also to stop them from inevitably massacring the Christians and other non-Muslim unbelievers.

    After September 11, the reasonable thing to do would have been to take steps to save ourselves from Islamic terror.

    Mistake number one is conflating jihad with being terrorism. Indeed, look at the definition of terrorism, which is the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims, and compare it to the definition of jihad, which is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme and employs total warfare.

    Meanwhile, total warfare involves both violent and non-violent means, whereas terrorism, on the other hand, as its name implies only involves violence. In other words, terrorism and jihad are two entirely different manifestations altogether. As a matter of fact, terrorism in the Islamic world is an abomination that constitutes blasphemy, which is a capital offense in Islam.

    Not to mention as well that the use of the term terrorism as opposed to the use of the correct term jihad automatically gives Islam a free pass, as terrorism isn't automatically associated with Islam, while jihad, on the other hand, automatically is associated with Islam, and that is precisely why the PC multicultural universe today prefers the word terrorism as opposed to the correct word jihad. In order to camouflage the true intent of jihad and at the same time hide the fact that jihad is holy fighting in the cause of Allah against non-Muslim unbelievers to make Islam supreme, because if that information became widely disseminated and understood by people, they would automatically demand that mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage be banned and reversed ASAP.

    In the meantime, at the same time since jihad, which is total warfare, is always conflated with being terrorism, which is always only violent, the many different varieties of deceptive and covert non-violent jihad takes place today throughout the West totally under the radar and completely uncontested and unopposed, because if it isn't construed as being violent, then it isn't construed as being terrorism, and if it isn't construed as being terrorism, then it isn't contested and opposed.

    It's also the reason why our federal government today is lying to the American people about jihad by falsely claiming that jihad is an internal personal struggle for Muslims to become better Muslims, which is utterly absurd and also proof positive that our government has been hijacked, co-opted, and usurped by the Left.

    Folks we can't depend on the Republican Party to take back our government, as under GWB the Republican Party was morphed into the second coming of the Dhimmicrat Party. Thus, today both parties, the Republican Party and the Dhimmicrat Party, for all intents and purposes, are two sides of the same leftwing coin.

    Indeed, look at all the Republicans today falsely claiming that Iraq is a victory instead of a major strategic blunder and advocating at the same time continuing our fantasy based nation-building mission in Afghanistan that is about as insane and counterproductive as the US lifting up Hitler and the Nazis after WWII. Meanwhile, they are also backing the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt, Libya, and Tunisia.

    In the meantime, how many Republicans have called for rolling back all of GWB's massive expansion in the size, scope, and power of the federal government that has inevitably put us on the fast track to financial ruin by first outlawing Islam and banning and reversing mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage in order to roll back all that unnecessary expansion? Indeed, since mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage is really deceptive and covert non-violent jihad for the purpose of infiltration and stealth demographic conquest to make Islam supreme, it should be banned and reversed ASAP. As zero Muslim jihadists living in America as a fifth column would not only virtually eliminate the threat of violent jihad attacks on the homeland altogether, but would also eliminate the much greater long-term threat stemming from infiltration and stealth demographic conquest at the same time.

    –continued below

    • NorthStar

      Jihad includes terrorism. Terrorism is a form of Jihad.

      Terrorism denial puts you in the same category as the left.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Between 10:03 PM and 10:22 PM tonight you hit me up with 11 replies all of them insulting and derogatory as part of you and your leftist moronic buddies stupid campaign of cyber stalking me because first of all, you want to attempt to intimidate and harass me, and second because you want to marginalize me as being an Islamophobe in order to apologize and sympathize with the Muslims in which you idolize and in order to help them like gullible useful idiots to cover up their covert and deceptive non-violent jihad.

        In other words, you spent an average of 1 minute and 43 seconds per posts, which includes locating 11 posts, reading 11 posts (and my posts are painfully long), composing 11 insulting and derogatory replies to them, and finally hitting the submit button. Hell, you couldn't have come close to finding all of them, let alone reading them, much less responding to all 11 of them in 19 minutes, and that irrefutably proves that all of your posts are part of that same childish cyber stalking campaign you and your moonbat buddies have been pursuing against me for months now. As this same pattern of cyber stalking has been repeated numerous times by you and your other unhinged cyber stalker buddies.

        Of course, I had the audacity to respond earlier this morning to a stupid comment made from one of your favorite cyber stalker buddies, which no doubt incited your 11 insulting and derogatory replies tonight.

        Meanwhile, I'm just so proud that little ole me can rankle up the emotions of all you leftwing cyber stalkers so badly. So let me thank you useful idiot loons from the bottom of my heart for being such loyal and generous fans. I truly appreciate it, because without my fans, I would be nothing. Your cyber stalking campaign gives me a deep seated feeling of fulfillment because you picked me out of everyone else to repeatedly cyber stalk, and for that I'm very gracious. Thanks a lot buddies. I'm glad you and your fellow moonbats enjoy my posts so much.

        Indeed, I'd give you my twitter account, but then again you'd not only find out who I am, but you would also join my long list of followers as well so you moonbats could spam my twitter account and it would then take me hours retweeting all your spam.

        • NorthStar

          I didn't call you an Islamophobe.

          So you're a liar, a coward, and a spamming troll.

  • ObamaYoMoma

    To understand the problem with Syria, one only need look at neighboring Lebanon where every attempt at coalition building between different religious and ethnic groups has gone badly over and over again.

    Mistake number two is despite all the evidence to the contrary, continuing to assume that Islam is a religion. It's not a religion, it's a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that masquerades as being a religion. Indeed, out of the 57 Islamic states that altogether comprise the OIC today, how many of them are legit democracies in practice where freedom, liberty, and human rights are intrinsic? The answer is zero. Hence, stop conflating and morally equating Islam with religion because it is not.

    • NorthStar

      Islam is a religion. That's like saying Nazi Germany wasn't a country, it was a supremacist theo-political totalitarian ideology that masqueraded as a country.

      Deciding to unilaterally change definitions is a leftist fetish.

  • maghrebchristians

    Today in the Syria Christians are truly suffering for their faith, lift them up today in your prayers that God will guide and help them in their suffering today.


  • Amused

    The only purpose of this article is to criticize the present Administration . Face it , Assad staying or going at this point is really a no-brainer . He's killed too many of his countrymen for any thoughts of reversing the present juggernaut . His downfall is simply not "if " , but "when " .And unfortunastely , OBAMA_YO_MAMA , you know as well as I that in the face of such overt and blatant slaughters of civilians , the world will react and the US is infact part of that world . So get realistic , although you and I would find agreement in the notion to "stand back and let them kill each other " we both know that just ain't gonna happen , no matter WHO the President is , no matter WHAT party is in control .

    • ObamaYoMoma

      And unfortunastely , OBAMA_YO_MAMA , you know as well as I that in the face of such overt and blatant slaughters of civilians

      The Islamic world considers all Jewish unbelievers in Israel to be fair game whether they are civilians or not, because jihad consist of total warfare. In fact, on 9/11/2001 it didn't consider the American victims to be civilians either.

      Not to mention that all Muslims are jihadists and if they aren't jihadists, then they are blasphemous apostates that per the dictates of mainstream orthodox Islam must be executed. Hence, technically Muslims are not civilians, and no one knows this better than Assad. Indeed, Assad isn't doing anything different that his Sunni Muslim Brotherhood adversaries wouldn't do to him and his Alawite supporters should they gain the upper hand.

      As a matter of fact, I advocate the same foreign policy that President Reagan employed during the Iran – Iraq War, that is acting to facilitate the jihad in Syria to last as long as possible, as Muslim on Muslim violence is good for the Dar al Harb (us) and bad for the Dar al Islam (them). Indeed, the US should seek out other cracks and fissures within the Islamic world to exploit.

      although you and I would find agreement in the notion to "stand back and let them kill each other " we both know that just ain't gonna happen , no matter WHO the President is , no matter WHAT party is in control .

      Well that's only because thanks to GWB, the Republican Party was morphed into the second-coming of the Dhimmicrat Party, so both political parties, the Republican Party and the Dhimmicrat Party today, are in essence two sides of the same leftwing coin.

      However, fortunately for me I'm not a Republican, I'm a conservative instead, and the way I see it is the more Muslims kill each other via Muslim on Muslim violence the better. After all, I don't suffer from PC multicultural blindness. Thus, I'm acutely aware of the stealth global jihad being waged against all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world primarily through deceptive and covert non-violent jihad, such as mass Muslim immigration to the West for the purpose of infiltration and stealth demographic conquest. Hence, I may sound cruel and heartless, but that's better than being stupid.

      As a matter of fact, I wouldn't have touched Libya with a 10 foot poll as the inevitable outcome in the long run will be a situation that will be far worse than a neutered Gaddafi.

      Moreover, every time the US intervenes in the Islamic world, whether it is in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Hamastan, or wherever we always end up shooting ourselves in the foot.

      Although no one wants to hear it, there is only one long-term solution and that is after the most immediate threats have been eliminated, i.e., Iran's quest for nukes and that Saudi owned Pakistani nuclear weapons arsenal, the Mideast oilfields are going to have to be seized and occupied and the enormous unearned oil wealth of the Saudis and the Gulf State Emirates confiscated, not out of greed mind you, but in self-defense. As those resources and assets are already being used to fund and finance a stealth global jihad against all non-Muslim unbelievers in the world to make Islam supreme, per the dictates of Islam. It's either we act to put them out of business or otherwise they will put us out of business.

      People must understand, sometimes war is a very necessary evil.

    • Big Red

      Amused, Hafez Assad killed far more of his countrymen than his son he killed over 40000 in Hom alone and stayed in power until his death, sp it is no sure thing no matter what Sec State Clinton or Obamma says that the assad regime will fall.

      The whole problem in Syria is that this is a stright proxie war between the Shia and Suni and they will kill one another until there is no one left. It would be in the best untrusts of the USG to provide arms to the Syrian Sunnis as to damage or largest enemy in the Region Iran. Destablizeing Syria also will destablize Lebanon
      and help our onlytrue ally in the Region Isreal. The USG should use all means to keep syria in turmoil to keep Iran from gaining Hegomon in the area. The only Humanatrian thing I think we should do is evacuate the wounded to hospitals in the The Kingdoom and the Emeriates I thing doing this would buy a small amount of good will. You can only rent an arab never have one as an ally as they have a complete diffrent mindset than western gvernments,

      • Amused

        I agree big Red , I 'm simply saying that criticizin the present Admin. , is simply another exercise in partisan politics . The US is in fact a member of the International community , even if we just give lip service against the obvious slaughter going on . Indeed Assad senior killed more than 40000 , and in much less time .The world was different back then , communication was by no means nearly as instantanious as is today , pictures were extremely rare whereas today a simple device owned by millions -the cell phone can simultaneousy record and transmit images in real time ,virtually eliminating any credible defense of Assad's actions based in doubtfull reporting or misinformation . I agree totally with your last paragraph .
        Byod condemnation and humanitarian aid , we should do nothing else ….exactly what the present Admin . is doing .

  • davarino

    From now on we should just send the illegals home, let em kill each other (cause you know that what they want to do anyway), then bomb the hell out of strategic sites that keep those back woods retards in the 4th century (like they want). Oh and drill our own oil so we dont need theirs then mine the Straits of Hormuz so they cant sell theirs. Is that crazy? : )

  • mcwrath

    Obama yo moma is right on the button. If amused is so worried about the number of civilians killed by assad's
    forces he/she should take a look at the continuing slaughter that is occurring in sudan and ask why not intervene there. – this by a guy who was designated to broker peace in syria- . There is no thanks comming from these islamic 'rebels' and much less coverage from the press in observing the brutality and oppression that is occurring in the wake of these regime change forces. Where are the those so vocal 'humanist ' middle east experts on the blatently racists attacks now in lybia… Forget syria and go for that true and horrendous threat of nuclear armed iran.

  • ziontruth

    "To the extent that Western multiculturalism works, it does so because Europeans and their descendants have agreed to cede some power and privileges to minority groups while maintaining confidence in the rule of law to protect equal rights for everyone."

    Hmph. It's not correct to say Western multiculturalism works; you must have meant to say that it hasn't broken down so disastrously as in Lebanon. That would be damning with faint praise.

    The Cultural Enrichment Archive, a running feature on the Gates of Vienna blog, makes it quite clear the rule of law isn't protecting equal rights for everyone; the indigenous Europeans have effectively become stateless in their own states. It is because of the European example that I repudiate multiculturalism so strongly. Lebanon could still somehow be brushed aside as part of the Middle Eastern kind of turmoil, but the effects of multiculturalism on the previously clean slate, baggage-free European scene* is testimony to the destructive nature of MC.

    The State As Its Nation's Castle. Ethnos first, State in its service. Making it the other way round is a recipe for either stifling tyranny or bloody anarchy. Therefore, my disbelief in any peace "solution" that says the Jewish nation is to live side-by-side with another nation within the Jewish State.

    *I'm not talking about the two World Wars, which in the European context were internecine.

    • Alvaro

      Correct: Multiculturalism is a disaster created by politicians without consulting the people. But even top politicians are now waking up, only to see they have created a disaster.

      British PM says multiculturalism has failed: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41444364/ns/world_new

      German Chancellor Angela Merkel says that German multicultural society has failed: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11559451

      French President Nicholas Sarkozy says multiculturalism has failed: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/

    • Daniel Greenfield

      To the extent that it works means that it hasn't produced the complete state of horror that it would in much of the world. Consider what happened in Zimbabwe or Sri Lanka.

  • umustbkidding

    Let Jesus do the saving.

    These people, meaning Muslims, entrench themselves in hate, pain, masochism, oppression. All the negatives that life has to offer. How can anyone help those who, by the masses, are so deeply entrenched in such a way of life?

  • mcwrath

    And obama yo moma is so right in defining the the terms of the threat as jihad as opposed to simply being defined through violent acts of terror. One will often hear islamists weasel out by declaring terrorist act as unIslamic ( notwithstanding the muhammad declared how terror was what brought him power or how all major islamic expansion was achieved by the sword… indeed it is today the latent threat of terror that has europe in a dimmi status) Jihad in islam cannot be denied by the islamist. And the aims are clearly a real threat to the world.

    • NorthStar

      Obama yo moma is a clown who doesn't understand that one thing can also be another.

  • koran kid

    How about just going for the jugular? That would be the sliders and quitters on your own side. Then sit down and make a new plan. You can't win at anything if half your own team are busy playing for the opposition. You'll never win until you flush out and away the cowards on your own side. Until then, pontificate on, Danny boy!

  • AntiSharia

    It's highly unlikely that truly democratic government can come to a Muslim country, unless it is imposed by an outside force. One of the main reasons that the Muslim world falls so far behind in freedom is lack of education. Must Muslims are illiterate, especially the women, and even the ones who know how to read and write only know Koranic memorization and the latest anti western nonsense. They know nothing of real history, or science, so it is impossible that they can be educated enough to have a stake in governing their own countries.

  • dave

    We need to find an alternative to oil fast, or simply use our own vast reserves while we create or invent something else for future generations. This is the only way to beat Islam. We can't invade the entire middle east and confiscate their money and oil as there would be rioting on an unimaginable scale in our countries – and when elections come, whoever says they will pull out will be voted in. We would have to have our very own dictator for that to work.
    Failing that, we could embrace Islam, personally I wouldn't mind 5 wives!!

    • Daniel Greenfield

      We have some alternatives to oil. We're just not pursuing them. The things we are pursuing are unserious.

  • dave

    Basically my point is that western scientists need to create a greener, cheaper and safe alternative to oil, so that oil production becomes confined to the past and not used anywhere in the world. The Islamic world would be broke.

  • http://www.themostalive.com Ash

    The bottom line is that the people making the decisions surrounding international diplomatic policy on places as complex as Syria, have never been there or had any real experience understanding the culture or the people on the ground. Syria was full of westerners making a difference through teaching/nursing etc as is outlined well in http://themostalive.com/8-things-you-should-know-
    These are the people that need to be consulted…