The saying has been thrown out several times recently, "If you break, you need to fix it." This is in reference to Iraq and other nations where leaders are overthrown by military action. We have seen the consequences of bad "fixes". First it was Afghanistan. Then Iraq.

 

Finally, for all the bashing of Obama and his foreign policy, the worst one for me under Obama was Libya. As bad as Qaddafi may have been in some ways, Libya was actually a stable and prospering nation under his rule. Since we helped get him removed, Libya has plummeted into chaos.

 

The question now at hand - is Syria our next blunder? What will happen in Syria after Assad? Are there lessons learned from the past that will help us make Syria different than Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya?

You don't remove Assad - you keep him in a box. Removing Assad would just result in ISIS expanding its influence and installing Theocracy in Syria. Part of keeping Assad in a box could involve one of his family members having a bad accident.

You can't remove him and just abandon the country like we did in Iraq. Had we just left Germany after Hitler, Germany would now be a part of the Russian Federation. Germany now has a stable government. When we encouraged the downfall of Qaddafi in Libya we had no plan for what happened after and chaos ensued. You can question the morality of interfering in the affairs of another country but once you do you MUST stay the course. That takes years, not months.

I would think the CIA has a succession plan.

I would think the CIA has a succession plan.

 

How did that work out in Libya?

How did that work out in Libya?

 

Terribly. But in my understand the CIS or intelligence community has multiple options, scenarios or choices for the president to choose from. Then the president weighs the options and chopses.