Personally I have no faith in the UN it is unable to do anything because China, Russia and America, Britain cannot get along. Russia and China veto anything that America or Western Europe want and when Russia or China want something done often America will block it. The idea of all these countries working together for world peace is hilarious. None of them want real world peace they only want what benefits their own country.

Personally the UN has done many good things. But the leadership is screwy look at Rwanda where Canada stood almost entirely alone while all the other countries ordered their troops to retreat. Every time the UN intervenes its Nato forces which come in and clean up the mess or protect the peace, China and Russia rarely if ever contribute.

As for the solution to Syria. I think military intervention is required. However I think that the Arab League should be the ones putting boots on the ground. It is their region and a Nato force wouldn't be welcomed like a Islamic force from the Arab League. Nato should offer air support to the Arab League force making it a more international operation. I think Nato should be involved but not take the lead.

Also those suggesting Israel intervene, that would be like throwing gasoline on a fire. Israel needs to worry about Iran and Palestine they can't afford to worry about Syria. Israel entering Syria would be a death sentence.

In the end I believe either way Assad will be removed from power. Whether it is in a 20 year civil war or a 10 year armed incursion by AL troops. Unlike Libya Nato can't simply topple the Government and let the rebels take control and intervening would destablalize the region not to mention many Arab countries would be concerned with a Nato presence in Syria.

Its a Arab issue and while Nato should help the Arab League they need to take point and most of the responsability in this case. As for the UN Russia and China have to stop playing political games both countries know that Syria is in the wrong. Russia has stated several times recently that Assad needs to talk peace with the opposition and the armed actions need to cease. The only reason they aren't supporting sanctions is to oppose America, also the fact that Russia is selling Assad the weapons he is using on the Syrian civilians may also have a part to play in their lack of interest in sanctions.

Did you seriously just say Israel should intervene in Syria?

That would be fun to watch from a theoretical perspective, but damn, if they actually did that. No-one's really in any position geopolitically to take responsibility without mass repercussions. NATO could pull it off with the fewest repercussions, since Lebanon is rather accepting of peacekeeping forces and Israel is aligned with them and Turkey's a member and Iraq and Jordan at least shouldn't have many objections

The Arab League can't pull in because of Israel, and Israel can't go in because it would tear the region apart.

I dunno Jordan and Egypt both have peace deals with Israel. Also throw in the fact that many AL countries are allied with the United States I can understand some hesitation but I think Israel probably would prefer a AL intervention to no intervention. In the end Arab League fighting each other is not likely going to worry Israel as much as Syria collapsing.

Syria's Government was able to control its territory better then say Lebanon or Palestine. Israel will not want Syria to become a terror state an enemy that will actually control themselves is a lot better then a ton of random people launching rockets into your country and attacking at random. Also I suggested that AL troops are on the ground with Nato air support. I don't think Israel would object to that especially considering they very well might have to start an air war against Iran and another possible incursion into Gaza.

I just don't think it would do Israel much good if Syria fully implodes into a 20 year war. Israel would most definatly face attack from armed Syrian militia. Also when Assad finally falls who replaces him? If AL and Nato don't intervene who knows what kind of tyrant could replace him. Democracy is possible but it is also possible that a new dictator will arise or a theorocracy that is anti-Israel or anti-west.

Israel can defeat the Syrian armed forces with their hands tied behind their backs. But if Syria implodes and terrorist groups launch attacks from inside Syria. Israel will be fighting a ghost and be dragged into constant incursions. Of course Israel may never need to seed the golan heights now that Syria is falling apart.

I highly doubt Israel themselves would intervene they would be seen as occupiers and their presence would destabalize the region.

I'd also suggest maybe Turkish troops join the AL boots on the ground. It would be best if the military action was sanctioned by the UN but if not it would probably be the best option. It would also protect Turkish interests and further their influence in the region. The Arab League also wouldn't have to fear Iran all that much as Israel is likely going to knock them out as a threat.

Intervention by the AL, Turkey and Nato might be the best possible out come.

Remember Egypt peace with Israel is now in doubt.

I am saying that resolving the Syrian issue must be dealth with by Syria's neighbors, not leaders in far away countries. Yes, Israel should help deal with it - even if its not in a significant way.. I know we both know that Israel couldn't do too much, but I think it could do something to help.

Right now, Turkey and/or Saudi Arabia are about the only two notable regional powers that may have the ability to do anything from a size/clout perspective.

I think Saudi Arabia has the best chance. If they think civil war nearby would threaten the oil supply, they would find a way to do something and they have both the cash and the legitimacy. It isn't a religiously motivated war like Iraq/Afghanistan so they wouldn't be choosing sides.

Us Lebanese can barely deal with our own problems :P.  Anyways in general I disagree with most military interventions (especially NATO and Western interventions). To be honest it's a very complicated and sensitive situation, and Bashar has put it past the point where there could be a peaceful outcome unfortunately. TBH I don't know what needs to be done. Do you leave the Syria alone and see how things balance out? Or do you deal with it right now? 

Anyways as a Lebanese, I can honestly say that the Arab league right now are just absolutely disjointed. Qatar is by the far the biggest influence now, but you also feel they do have their alterior motives. That said, an Arab intervention would be the last thing that will happen, and Israel are quite happy to let things continue like that in Syria. Turkey is the only country I see that can actually do something if they commit to their cause.

And trust me guys, Saudi Arabia won't do shit! They'd just call for Western troops

Russia won't let you attack his best ally in the region. They have been way too tired by occident lies on Libya.

Syria is also not Libya, they actually have an army. Turkey is too weak to attack Syria alone and could face Iranian threats and PKK support by Syria.

The most likely outcome if Assad does not step down is that he will succeed in suppressing the revolt. He has already successfully stopped most of the protests. Now there are armed gangs vs him but they seem too weak and can't even defend a quarter more than one day.

This guerrilla thing looks like what happenned in the past in Syria with the army prevailing.

Turkey will not intervene Syria, let them sort out their own problems. The life of a Turkish soldiers is too important to be wasted for that cause.

yeah let us not forget if it was not for NATO, Gadaffi would have had defeated the rebels.