Agree with this apart from your support for bombing - which I don't understand anyway, as surely you're making the issue into an abstract question again. Presume you mean in certain, very particular circumstances?
For the record I think bombing Syria is moronic.
And it's been totally mis-sold. Three fucking years of bombing? That suggests that all this talk of the precision effectiveness of UK weapons is, well, a big fucking lie.
I can see the point about support for Kurdish ground forces, but in that case why isn't the UK (at least not publicly) demanding that Turkey stop its embargo on Kurdish Syria, and stop indirectly/directly supporting Isis?
As for a credible Sunni Arab group - well, that seems to be pie in the sky at the moment. And on that note, what diplomacy work is going on with Saudi Arabia to stop them propping up fundamentalist, Salafist (if that's the right word) interpretations of Sunni Islam? Well, as Droid says, probably none because it would upset 'our' weapons contracts.
60 000 sorties? where's the info on that, cos if even half true, that's nuts
It depends on what your goals are. For example Craner is very concerned with Islam as an existential threat to Western Civ, and more mundanely, the containment of Iran and the security of Israel. Woebot is largely concerned with energy security.
I can't see what is to be gained by a bit of aimless bomb lobbing. That's why I think it's moronic. Im also broadly opposed to killing people.
Does the Free Syrian Army exist in any real sense?
like the 2001 campaign in Afghanistan did to al-Qaeda (at least temporarily).
Does the Free Syrian Army exist in any real sense? The name is being dredged up again now.
Yes, it does. It existed all along.
Regardless of the conflict as a whole do you think that the recapture of the Kobani canton was 1) a good thing and 2) in part thanks to air support?