[quote]In a closed-door meeting, two senators say, the Secretary of State admitted to them that he no longer believes the administration’s approach to the crisis in Syria is working. Peace talks have failed, he conceded, and now it's time to arm the moderate opposition—before local al Qaeda fighters try to attack the United States. Secretary of State John Kerry has lost faith in his own administration’s Syria policy, he told fifteen U.S. Congressmen in a private, off-the-record meeting, according to two of the senators who were in the room. Kerry also said he believes the regime of Bashar al Assad is failing to uphold its promise to give up its chemical weapons according to schedule; that the Russians are not being helpful in solving the Syrian civil war; and that the Geneva 2 peace talks that he helped organize are not succeeding. But according to the senators, Kerry now wants to arm Syria's rebels—in part, to block the local al Qaeda affiliates who have designs on attacking the U.S. (Kerry's spokesperson denied that he raised the issue of supplying weapons, but did not dispute the overall tenor of the conversation.)[/quote] Personally, I agree with McCain, Graham, and now what appears to be John Kerry. What we're doing is not enough to end the bloodshed (and widespread human rights violations done by the Assad regime), not enough to ensure the chemical weapons are secure, and not enough to contain the raging al-Qaeda threat inside Syria. We know that al-Qaeda forces inside Syria [i][b]do[/i][/b] pose a direct threat to us ([url=http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/clapper-syrian-al-qaida-attack-us-22283284]source[/url]), so something must be done to contain that threat. As for what, I have previously outlined arming opposition forces as a viable route, and that route was discussed in the main linked article. On the other two concerns, we do have a legal basis for intervention (R2P--or Responsibility to Protect--comes to mind. This UN-mandated policy states that sovereignty is not a right and it is the duty of governments to protect their citizens); the problem is that China and Russia would never agree to a UNSC-approved intervention. We could always bypass the UN, of course. However, I dunno what that would do to the justification at hand. As for the chemical weapons fiasco, sadly there isn't much we can do short of destroying the weapons ourselves. We can only "push" Russia to "push" Assad's regime to work faster. What are your thoughts on this? Do you think the international community, including the U.S or even led by the U.S, should finally start doing something about the chaos in Syria? Do you think that we should take a lesser role? If you believe the latter, how do you feel about Russia's, Iran's and Hezbollah's involvement in the civil war?