This is a civil war where the winner takes all and the loser faces a bleak future or no future at all.
It is a dog fight to the end with both sides fighting for their lives.
This war is no different to any other war in that it degrades people’s humanity and atrocities are happening on both sides.
Approx 100,000 lives have already been lost yet Western governments only seems to think the situation is intolerable and outrageous when one side allegedly uses chemical weapons as a method of killing.
All I have observed is the world's involved governments picking a dog in the fight rather than trying to break it up. The West is generally backing the Rebels despite some links to various hard line Sunni Islamist groups while Russia and Iran are backing a Shia and Hezbollah friendly Assad regime.
Initially it seemed to me that the West was backing Assad as it had no interest in backing rebel Sunni Islamist's but as links to the very anti-Israeal Hezbollah emerged the West which is generally pro-Israel switched sides.
It is a fact that a self destructing and weakened Syria is a positive for the security of Israel but in reality an unstable region with an increased influx of weaponry that may find its way into the hands of Hezbollah or a hard line Islamic regime is not. Result? The war rages on as the world either turns a blind eye or hopes its dog wins.
How many world governments have insisted on peace? Anyone watching the Syrian war unfold can only be appalled at the lack of real intervention by the world's politicians.
Assad's regime was far from perfect. It can be assumed that some elements within the regime were not of the highest moral standing and the regimes failure to address this led to the unrest that finally boiled over.
Assad was then faced with a difficult choice, quell the unrest or offer real change by providing democracy?
His problem was that his minority Alawite sect which is approx 16% of the population would have no chance of succeeding in free elections. How was he to offer democracy when it would be like turkey's voting for Christmas? The outside world was not offering Assad's regime cast iron guarantees to ensure they had some sort of a safe future as the involved world governments are broadly speaking only interested in their own self interests which also extend to their positions on Israel and the surrounding Islamist's.
Assad's regime knew that democracy would lead to the tables being turned and possible long term persecution by some hard line Islamists. The fact that people from all religions live in peace when their current religious leaders are not hell bent on destroying the opposition will be of little comfort to the Assad regime.
One can only be disappointed that the worlds governments do not seem to see the urgency of the situation not just in terms of deaths but on the side effects of the future of Syrian society.
The tragedy is the longer the war lasts the more will die and the harder true reconciliation will be.
True reconciliation is a fundamental to the peaceful coexistence of the various sects that make up Syrian society and it becomes more distant as each day of war passes.
The problem is most politicians are obsessed with their own political agendas and self interests and not with the wider moral issues such as peace. It is a fact that the war could have been nipped in the bud but it suited too many world politicians to look away or just watch hoping their dog got the upper hand.
For the sake of clarity I take no sides in the conflict as both sides are guilty of atrocities. Taking sides is pointless when so many innocent people from both sides have died and the crux of any solution is looking forwards and not backwards.
My thoughts are if the world politicians were united in a common goal of peace and intervened at Aleppo a deal could have been struck that satisfied both parties and saved the bloodshed.
The solution was simple, establish the positions of the battle lines then tell both sides to cease fire and all soldiers are to retreat backward x miles while something agreeable and binding to both sides is worked out to create a lasting peace, any side not retreating or caught moving towards the battle lines will be hit with UN air strikes.
That may sound like a simplification but if the world powers wanted to desperately stop this war they could.
The problem is they do not.
A world political system with an agenda of self interest that allows fellow humans to remain in a dogfight to the death is something that has to change.
Note, this is the first article I have finished to be published on the iXDemocracy website and as you can see my writing is far from perfect nor do I put myself up as an expert on the Syrian civil war.
For a better analysis of the details you can look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syrian_civil_war
and for a typical politicians view take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23983036 , I did not listen to that interview but I do not see a mention for the need for immediate peace but a need of more deaths to ensure Iranian influence is removed from Syria which I assume is mentioned as Iran becomes more of a problem for Israel if Iran can establish more influence near or at Israel's border.
Also note that iXDemocracy has no opinion bar its constitution and commitment to peace and the removal of undemocratic and corruptible practices i.e. this is just one personal opinion based on my observations that remains open to debate.
Debate is welcome and necessary as honest debate is the reason why I created the forums in the hope that any and all sides in opposition can go into great detail about any situation hopefully starting to understand each others perspectives as well as acknowledging and apologizing if mistakes were made as well as having the ultimate goal of arriving at a fair and equitable lasting agreement and solution.
The debate for articles does not take place on this page but in the News section of the forum.