Syria swarming with foreign Islamic supremacists intent on waging jihad to establish Sharia state

You wrote: When it comes to Syria, Mr Spencer's good versus evil framework breaks down but he insists on continuing to apply it!

You're a clown!

Nobody at JW is saying Assad is good! But, for my part, I say that Islam is evil. And if the Sunni jihadists take over in Syria (and they are being encouraged by Egypt's Muslim Bro Morsi, by the way) then another firewall against the spread of Islam falls.

Then you add, rather naively: 'But they (the Sunni 'rebels') cannot stay indefinitely if the Syrian people refuse to give them sanctuary.'

Oh yea? D'ya think they'll bother to ask if they can stay?
Have they asked anyone else if they can stay?
Al Qur'an doesn't say to fight '..until all religion is for Allah, but only if the host country where you're bombing the place to blazes rolls out the welcome rug.'

You're a couple of light years behind the curve!

Buraq, it is you who is behind the curve. If the jihadists are not supported by the people they CANNOT stay. that's what happened in iraq in 2006. the sunni tribes withdrew their support and the jihadists had no choice but to leave. because they are outnumbered 10,000 to 1, how can stay?

Buraq wrote:

"if the Sunni jihadists take over in Syria (and they are being encouraged by Egypt's Muslim Bro Morsi, by the way) then another firewall against the spread of Islam falls."

and if the shiite jihadists take over? what happens then?

Indeed. That outfit of starry-eyed PC MC doctors should be renamed Dhimmis Without Borders. What an idiot -- an intelligent 71 year old likely highly cultured and informed-about-the-world physician who hadn't a clue what was going on in Syria, suddenly being surprised when he "overheard" the monsters he was stitching up blurt out their true designs. The doctor should be put out to pasture. The only good thing he ever did of worth in his long pathetic life was to relay that gem of information to Reuters.

LemonLime wrote:
"What planet is RR on? Since 2006 right up to the hot present, Sunnis continue to wage their 7th century Civil Jihad against the Shias.."

that's totally not true. in 2006 they were kicked out by the sunni tribes and the war stopped. then the shia made a power grab and the tribes welcomed the jihadists back to fight to shia. so it proves that without the support of the population the jihadists have no chance of holding territory. they are outnumbered 10,000 to 1 for heaven's sake!

i repeat my question: what if the shia jihadists, alawi baby killers and rapists, and death-to-america iran wins the syria war just like Robert Spencer wishes, what happens then?

I haven't picked up on this attitude you attribute to Robert. Are you imaging things for the sake of argument?

"What Is Best For The West In Syria?"

What is best for the West in Syria is that the Shias and Sunnis fight on to a bloody stalemate. Assad should win eventually. The Christians in Syria were protected under him - the longer the war the weaker will get Iran, Hezbollah etc. A weakened Syria will be no threat to anyone.

In a fight between your enemies its always better to support the smaller and weaker side.

As for Iran - that is a separate issue and a quick loss by Assad will do nothing to weaken their march to the bomb. That has to be settled separately.

And Buraq and Lemonline - I'll thank you to be polite. If someone voices a different opinion listen to him and answer politely.

"What Is Best For The West In Syria?"

What is best for the West in Syria is that the Shias and Sunnis fight on to a bloody stalemate. Assad should win eventually. The Christians in Syria were protected under him - the longer the war the weaker will get Iran, Hezbollah etc. A weakened Syria will be no threat to anyone.

In a fight between your enemies its always better to support the smaller and weaker side.

As for Iran - that is a separate issue and a quick loss by Assad will do nothing to weaken their march to the bomb. That has to be settled separately.

And Buraq and Lemonline - I'll thank you to be polite. If someone voices a different opinion listen to him and answer politely.

RR is partly right in that neither support deserves support in Syria. Essentially, the Assad regime is backed by Shia Jihadis i.e. Hizbullah, Iran and Iraq's Mahdi Army, while the Sunnis have backing from all over the place - from UK Pakis to Jihadis in Pakistan who are packing up to go to Syria.

The reason to support Assad is not to prop up his regime or to ensure a continuous Shia crescent from Beirut to Teheran, but rather, to prevent the war from ending. As it is, Sunnis worldwide outnumber Shia 10:1, so the last thing one wants is the regime to simply fold, and Syria become a part of the Sunni empire. Instead, if the regime stays backed by Russia, China, Iran and others, it can remain a black hole for Jihadis - both Shia & Sunni - to pour in, and massacre each other. It was a lost opportunity in Iraq (or maybe not), but something that's a reality in Syria, and hopefully, other places like Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrein and elsewhere.

The whole idea here, as Hugh Fitzgerald used to point out, is to note that leaving Islam to its own devices and letting it cannibalize itself was the best thing to happen to it. Essentially, here, Sunnis would normally have an advantage due to both sheer numbers, and the fact that the bulk of the world's oil, except for Iran, Iraq & Syria's, are theirs. So do what's possible to ensure that their resources are all sucked into fighting the Shia, and currently, the most attractive bait for Sunni Jihadis is Syria, where the population is overwhelmingly Sunni, and where the possibility of seizing power is the greatest.

Just like Afghanistan in the 80s, let Syria serve that purpose in this decade - suck in Sunni Jihadis not only from Egypt, Hamas, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, but also Turkey, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Chechnya, et al. Even from the West, as this story indicates, Jihadis are leaving in droves to fight in Syria, which is nothing but a good thing. Imagine the number of Jihadis in France, UK, Germany, Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and other countries plummeting just b'cos they are all too busy pouring into Syria.

And guess what it does - it forces Shia Jihadis to respond in kind. If Syria falls, Hizbullah has everything to lose, since Syria has never recognized Lebanon as separate from it, and would do whatever is possible to destroy Shia dominance i.e. Hizbullah dominance of that country. So Hizbullah can ill afford to let Syria fall, and all its fighters, instead of being on the Israeli border to lob rockets into Galilee, can go fight in Aleppo and Homs. Similarly, from Iraq, Moqtada al Sadr can send his militias to join Assad, and similarly, Iran can send its Basij militias there. Essentially, none of them should have any militias left - they should all be in Syria.

As Debbie Schlussel has always described it, it's an Alien vs Predator scenario - we don't care who wins. And as Hugh put it, we do care that that war goes on. President Bush was only partly right when he said 'we want to fight them there so that we don't have to fight them over here'. Only thing he was wrong about - we don't want Infidel lives lost in battling them. Instead, they should battle each other so that a rest of the World, wilfully ignorant of Islam, is least endangered by developments.

So yeah, I'd like Hizbullah wiped out, but by the same token, I'd like Hamas and Ikhwan wiped out as well. It can't be done by Israel w/o a huge international outcry, but when Hamasniks & Hizbullahis battle in Allepo, Homs and other places in Syria, there is nothing 'the international community' can do to stop them. Which is just fantastic.

Agree completely.
......and, saying that gives me yet another opportunity to mention yet again my suggestion that containment and isolation of Central/West Asia is our only pragmatic approach.
We Americans simply don't have, and should not print, enough money to continue this massive military presence of ours inside this exhausting, spongiform Asian cauldron. Somehow, we can't see that casting bales upon bales of American cash and our young manpower against our Muslim enemy simply will not negate these Muslims who've been, and will continue applying the Soviet tactics of drawing the Nazi army deeper and deeper into their territory, straining their supply lines and spreading ever more thinly their increasingly worn soldiers over an ever expanding arena.

Compare our horrific logistics effort in supplying our forces halfway around this Earth either from the north via these mercurial Other-Istans....or.....from the south via Karachi Port and trucking along ambush-tempting and tribute-paying opportunities.

The Pakistani's are playing us for fools.

Sitting in my armchair,and constrained by my sole "sources" being th'Media, I simply cannot understand why we continue this way.

So, obviously.....there's a lot more going on than we commenters here can ever know unless we're bugging these closed door sessions.

But, on the surface, what we see and read doesn't justify the continuing sacrifice of our young American lives and their maimed bodies and minds.

You're welcome, World.