Kerry willing to talk with Syria's Assad

Kerry had better be there to negotiate a step down of Assad. Assad has never been in a weaker position and is ripe for toppling.

Assad is totallly not in a weak position. If here were Kerry wouldn't be bothering to talk to him. This is jusyt the latest eveidence ojust how badly the US has screwed up in the Middle East.

Assad has never been in a weaker position and is ripe for toppling.

Assad is in a stronger position than both Kerry and Obama.

scripantheist:

" Kerry had better be there to negotiate a step down of Assad. Assad has never been in a weaker position and is ripe for toppling. "

To the contrary. Assad is not in a weak position, and Assad`s departure would make the situation in Syria infinitely worse. The civil war in Syria was not started by Assad, but by the Sunni islamists.... the same people who the US has been supporting for the last few years, in show of mind-boggling stupidity. With Assad in power, there would be no ISIS.

It doesn't look like Assad controls the entire country yet. Can't be doing that well.

http://cdn1.vox-cdn.com/assets/4425315/Syria_areas_of_control_March_2014.png

I think the last thing you want to do at this point is create a power vacuum in the leadership of Syria.

There is no option but to talk to Assad today.

He is stronger than ever, the pro-western opposition is in tatters and ISIS is taking full advantage.

The only credible leader who can take a fight to the ISIS is Assad backed by his mainly Shiite army. Kerry and company need to take a lesson from Iraq and understand the complicated sectarian loyalties in that region.

The Shiites and Kurds are the only ones who will fight ISIS to the end

Neither the Republicans or Democrats possess a coherent long-term solution or strategy to counter ISIL, only a long term military campaign that will require 'boots on the ground'' will come some way to stabilizing the region. And then there is no guarantees that ISIL will not just melt away and fall back on a comprehensive global terrorist agenda. I am afraid, Assad is the least of the two evils.

With Assad in power, there would be no ISIS.

You mean like how Papa Assad dealt with these issues, indiscriminate slaughter of suspected Islamists or anyone living near suspected Islamists?

Go look at the Hama massacre(s) for clear evidence of this. 10s of thousands murdered.

Wishing for a stronger Assad is just choosing one brutal, murderous group over another.

Pandabelle:

" You mean like how Papa Assad dealt with these issues, indiscriminate slaughter of suspected Islamists or anyone living near suspected Islamists? Go look at the Hama massacre(s) for clear evidence of this. 10s of thousands murdered. "

Yes, exactly. It takes a strong arm to deal with the muslim brotherhood. Modern Western touchy-feely sentiments do not work in the Middle East. You can see in ISIS-country now what would have happened if Assad Sr. would have left the playing field to the Muslim Brotherhood in Hama. And you can see in Syria what happened there in the same situation.

You are looking at all this and you STILL argue that secular dictators should be removed so that the Jihadis can take over and establish their 7th century Caliphates??

You are looking at all this and you STILL argue that secular dictators should be removed so that the Jihadis can take over and establish their 7th century Caliphates??

Yes. The Jihadis prove more palatable to bomb.

I'm sure their talks will be very productive and an agreement will come out of it that allows Assad to step down in favor of any one of the many secular, non-violent, pro-Western, pro-democracy forces that oppose him.

Panda

not choosing. Assad was already in power. we could have chosen to leave them all alone and let them sort out their own mess.

Kerry is useless. and the fact that he feels the need to talk to Assad shows a total failure of US policy in Syria (and the wider Middle East) and that the US doesn't believe Assad is going to be forced from power anytime soon.

Commodore Schmidlamp;

" 'm sure their talks will be very productive and an agreement will come out of it that allows Assad to step down in favor of any one of the many secular, non-violent, pro-Western, pro-democracy forces that oppose him. "

I just love the dripping sarcasm.

Yes, lets take a pick among those many wonderful modern-minded humanitarians who are battling it out in Syria and Western Iraq..... Jaba al Islamaya, Al Nusra, Hizb-Allah, ISIS.... ah choices, choices. Which one should replace Assad?

Israel tolerates Assad as the "devil they know". If Syria ended up with ISIS or their ilk in control, Israel would most probably invade, at least to create a big buffer security zone. There's no doubt that popular feeling is against Assad's regime in many places, but once the revolution was usurped by homicidal fanatics wanting to create a Sharia-law driven, head-choppers "paradise", you can hardly blame people for changing their minds. What a mess.

Captioned above photo ought to have its own article:

FILE - In this April 4, 2007 file photo, Syrian President Bashar Assad meets with U.S. House speaker Nancy Pelosi at Ash-Shaeb presidential palace in Damascus. Pelosi arrived as the highest ranking US official to visit Syria since 2003 for talks with the Syrian leadership on the strained relations between Syria and the U.S., to convey a peace message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to President Assad, and to discuss Iraq and other regional issues with Syria. Pelosi's visit was criticized by the US administration. American politicians like to pick and choose when they’ll abide by the storied notion that politics should stop at the water's edge, and when to give that idea a kick in the pants. (AP Photo Hussein Malla).

So the Obama administration is willing to negotiate with Assad. The same horrible mass murderer and user of chemical weapons to murder his own people. The very same illegitimate dictator that the US stated must leave or else. The man that crossed Obama's red line without consequence. Yes, that is the guy.