@Kasz

Answer me one simple question -- people, forces, whoever who started war in Syria, or more generally Arab Srping -- this all is a good will to help Syrians to overthrew "shitty dictatorship", because Assad "has always been bad", right?

Not sure i'm understanding your english here.  Can you rephrase?

There're certain governments that are more or less unanimously support FSA financially and diplomatically, including the US, UK, France, Saudi Arabia, Qatar etc. What is their interest there?

Thought I already mentioned that, they think they can "get ahead" of the invitable revolution and shape try (and most likely fail) to shape it in the way that will most benefit them.

So they don't make the same "mistake" they made in Egypt getting involved too late.

I'm sure damaging Hezbolah's support is a bonus too, and although a bit out there.  It could give Israel further support to strike Iranian facilities based on support given to Syria.

No. They're basically Al Qaeda, they're basically lunatics, I'd take Assad over them any day.

In other words we don't have much of a disgareement here, US, UK, France, Saudis and Turkey are funding terrorism to "shape" Syria in the way they like it. Except you don't have problems with that.

If the rebels win, Syria will go thru the same shit Iraq went thru. Sunni Muslims and shiite muslims will start killing each other and innocent people.

So no I don't want the rebels to win.

Never said I didn't have a problem with it.  I simply that the rebels winning is unavoidable.  Therefore, the sonner the better.

I generally expect the rebels to win, play along enough to get western support until they stablize and then more or less immediatly go "rogue".   Sort of like Saddam Hussein. 

If that's all going to happen though, better sooner then later, so it can keep rolling over via other countries until it does become something vaguely representing the people.

Doubt it's so unavoidable, but that's discussion for another time. If you have problems with your government supporting terrorism, why make it seem like Assad is the problem. Would that help if it was Mother Teresa instead? Doubt it, otherwise the situation haven't been brought to a scale of a war, and for that you hold much of a responsibility along with Saudis.

Kinda reminiscent of Iraq post Desert Storm 1 in the 90s, with Saddam coming into power. Judging by what has been seen so far from the prominent rebel groups, they are not much better than the regime that Assad had in the past. I think it will be worse for the country, but Assad's selfish action and refusal to step down for the good of his people didn't really bide that well either. Provided rebel's win, a pro-radical muslim group will likely gain power, and another dictator will be installed, making this pointless conflict for the last 2 years into what it is - a pointless conflict.

I am not entirely sure as to what the Western countries stand to gain from supporting the Rebels to overthrow Assad, is there something to Syria that am not aware of? Natural resources, connections, reliability from other countries? The whole pretence of "shaping a democractic country" is getting boring and tiresome.