I am completely opposed to any outside Western involvement in Syria's civil war.
I do not think that arming one Islamist group against another in a sectarian war that has nothing to do with the protection of our values or way of life, is worth one of our soldier's lives. To risk a massive conflagration involving the entire Middle East and all the world's main powers, for the sake of the Syrian opposition is not a just war - it is a pointless, needless waste of human life and a criminal escalation of an already obscene beast that has robbed 92,000 innocent Syrians of their lives.
Nevertheless, I hold Russia and Iran accountable for being the first to get involved in the civil war when it became apparent that Assad was losing. Had they not got involved and simply let the conflict among Syrians naturally proceed as it should have and run its course as a normal civil war without outside involvement, and with simple humanitarian aid and refugee help being given to the innocent victims of the war, Assad would have fallen and the opposition would have formed a new, rag-tag government out of liberal secularists and Islamists that would probably have resulted in another Muslim brotherhood state. That would have been bad but at least we would have had peace in the region. Iran, however, couldn't allow this because losing Syria would mean losing its foothold to hegemony in the region and a key border through which to one day strike at Israel. Russia, likewise, held a grudge against the West for its involvement in Libya and desired a "one-up-manship" show of manpower and muscle, trying to re-assert Russia's worldwide influence after decades of decline.
Now, thanks to Iran illicitly sending its forces into the country, along with its client Hezbollah, and Russia shipping arms to Assad, the conflict has become a protracted, Shia-Sunni war of annihilation, that could engulf the entire region and even - dare I say it - the world, if it remains uncontained, with the superpowers facing off against each other in a new and completely unnecessary cold war through proxies.
As a result of this, the US has seen that the conflict has become "unequal". One side had the full support of foreign ground troops and international aid from Russia, whilst the other was left weak, divided and with no foreign aid.
The USA, desirous to make it an equal fight and fearful of Iran dominating Syria, as well as a newly aggressive Russia under Putin which wants to influence Middle East affairs (as a result of Obama re-focusing America away from the Middle East to the Pacific in his famous "east Asia pivot"), is therefore now sending arms to help the beleaguered opposition.
There is no good outcome here but I utterly oppose us sending aid to the rebels, despite the despicable unfair advantage now being given to Assad and mindful of the Spanish Civil War in the 30s when the West did not intervene but allowed Nazi Germany to do so for Franco, leading to him winning the war. I am sorry, deeply, that Iran and Russia have decided to turn a civil war into a regional conflict. I am sorry that Assad is committing a genocide against his own people. I am sorry that the rebels are also committing atrocities, particularly against Christians with their Islamist factions. My heart goes out to every innocent victim of this war but for crying out loud, we don't need to escalate it further!
Let us send humanitarian aid but let us not help escalate this beast any further. Syria is not our war. It is a bloody, horrid crime against humanity but we are not helping the situation by surrendering our neutrality and choosing a side.
