Syria First

Syria is predominantly Sunni. But we know what you mean. (Given that we know what Alawite is.)

Wow. The Village is, like seriously, ditching Bush.

Wow. The Village is, like seriously, ditching Bush.
.
Would have been nice if they did this before Katrina. You know like in 2004 when organizations like the NY Times sat on information because it might affect the election. Jay, I predict we will soon hear that Bush drank through his whole presidency, but it was too inflammatory to bring up.

Yes, Syria is predominantly Sunni (but I don't believe by much, I could be wrong). More importantly, though, I understand that the Sunnis in Syria historically have not adhered to the nutcase Wahabbiism followed by bin Laden and sponsored by the Saudis.
.
The traditional knock on Syria has just been that it embraced torture and wasn't Democratic. The neocons also liked to pick on Syria because the lack of a serious military and significant oil reserves made it a relatively weak player in the region.
.
The irony of neocons beating up on Syria is that if the occupation of Iraq wasn't horribly mismanaged,the most realistic stable outcome would have been the imposition of a relatively undemocratic government that allowed the peaceful coexistence of both non-fanatical Sunnis and Shiites. More brutal than we would like. Less friendly towards Israel than we would like. But moderate for an Arab nation...Sort of like Syria.

sqr 1, Syria embraced torture and wasn't democratic? How is that different from the Bush administration?

But to get back to my point about Joe's ramblings and rejoicing about a new foreign policy, still waiting to see a rejection of the past 60 years foreign policy. Bipartisian foreign policy. Republican and Democratic alike. Look it up. The neocons just ratcheted it up one insane notch beyond what it has been anyway.

sqrl
Yes, Syria is predominantly Sunni (but I don't believe by much, I could be wrong).
I'm just curious. How could you write this and then continue on as if you were an expert?

Not that anything you wrote was wrong.

Interesting question, jose. My response is that I am not, in any way shape or form, an "expert" on Syria, or even Islam or Arab countries, generally.

Having said that, I think I am a fairly well-informed person who has generally paid attention to international affairs during the roughly 2 decades of my adult life. And while I can't spout statistics on Syrian religious demographics off the top of my head, I have a general knowledge of the religious makeup of the country and am aware that Syria isn't known for producing religious fanatics in the way that Saudi Arabia does. I'm not sure what part of my post you believe constituted an "expert" analysis.

In what sense are the Palestinians "dazed and confused"? Abbas is clearly for two states on the 1967 borders. Most Palestinians agree. Hamas has said they will accept such an agreement if the Palestinian people want it. Gaza is under siege, the settlers are burning olive groves and beating children, the Israeli government refuses to move forward on final status. So all is not well. But "dazed and confused"? No. "Starved and terrorized" would be closer.

The community of sane nations? Who would that be? Do they get special decoder rings?
.
On the flip side, how insane is Syria? More batsh!t insane than North Korea, or less batsh!t insane?