Before people get all giddy about the fall of Assad. . .

 we should keep in mind that, while reprehensible, he was not an Islamist.  

The group that seems to have come out on top. . .for right now, basically is.

And some rebel group is already fighting the Kurds.

Assad was a Baathist, which is to say a fascist.  Fascism is reprehensible, but it is a Western secular idea.  That doesn't make it great, but it also isn't a sectarian Islamic band of jihadist.

Some Syrian rebels are democrats.

Not all by any means.  Some are Sunni jihadists.  Some, Al Queda, are very extreme jihadist.  And in Syria, some are Kurdish nationalist.

We back the Kurds.

The Turks are backing the group that has the Sunni jihadist in it, perhaps because they oppose the Kurds.

Iran was backing the government, as was Russia, which is in no small part why Assad fell.  In its murderous desire to attack Israel, Hamas caused a war that brought Hezbollah in, with both backed by Iran, and they got utterly pounded.

Ukraine has done the pounding on Russia.

So now what?

Well, strong multinational efforts, including frankly a very strong UN peacekeeping force, are in order.  

But of course Donald Trump has already declared for doing nothing.

Doing nothing, is doing something, and that something won't be good for Syria in general, or the Kurds in particular.

Some additional observations on the Hamas v. Israel War

1.  "Was this an American intelligence failure?"

Why does the press keep asking this really stupid question?  Hamas didn't attack the U.S.  Why would U.S. intelligence be obligated to pick up an intended attack against another country?  If there was an intelligence failure, it was an Israeli one, not an American one.

2.  Second Amendment.

FWIW, Israel, contrary to what some imagine, has relatively strict gun control laws, but a sort of semi moderate license provision.  The U.S. Department of Justice notes:

In Israel guns are strictly regulated yet widely available to law-abiding citizens who hold gun permits; gun control and tough punishment have made it difficult for criminals to acquire guns.

Abstract

There is no clear right to carry a gun in Israel. Nothing similar to the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution exists. In theory, the policy is very strict. No one may own or carry a gun without showing a reason to do so. A special permit by the Interior Ministry is then required. The permit must have the approval of the police and includes information about the owner and the gun type. It is easy for a law-abiding citizen (with no criminal record) to get a permit for a handgun. There is no distinction between carrying a gun and possessing it. People who have a permit to own a handgun or other weapon are allowed to carry it with them. The police and the court take seriously the felony of possessing a firearm without a permit, which almost always means that the gun is stolen. People with previous criminal records caught with firearms are generally sentenced to a year or two in prison. The "gun density" in Israel is very high, despite the laws. The strict limitation of gun ownership to law-abiding citizens combined with strict enforcement against those who have guns without a permit apparently works well in Israel to keep the homicide rate low; there are 40-60 murders a year in a population of four and one-half million.

Whatever the U.S. Department of Justice thinks about things, Israel feels compelled to loosen the system up and Israeli Minister of National Security Itamar Ben-Gvir declared last Sunday; “Today I directed the Firearms Licensing Division to go on an emergency operation in order to allow as many citizens as possible to arm themselves. The plan will take effect within 24 hours.”

It's easy to go all molṑn labé on this, but here's a true instance where something like the 2nd Amendment as originally conceived, or perhaps as conceived of in the pages of the American Rifleman, may have made an actual difference.

If I lived in Israel, I wouldn't go anywhere without a handgun.

3.  What's up, NPR?

Meet the Press, This Week, and Face the Nation all featured this event on their weekend show but as of this morning, NPR's Politics hasn't touched it.

Eh?

That's just weird.  What's up NPR?

4.  And the difference would be what?

Matt Gaetz is supporting funding for Israel in the wake of this crisis, as he should.

There's an imperfect democracy that's fighting for its life against a foreign invasion by forces that claim its land, led by a Jewish Prime Minister.

Israel?

No, Ukraine.

Funding Israel but not Ukraine makes no sense whatsoever, unless of course you have a lot of Jewish constituents in your district and your decision is purely political.

Hmmm. . . 

By the way, even Marjorie Taylor Greene is criticizing Gaetz for leaving the government weakened due to his leading the charge to take out Kevin McCarthy as Speaker.

5. Wouldn't you like to visit?

I've been asked that question by a certain friend of mine for years.  I have never had a desire to visit Israel.  My mother, however, went on a Church sponsored trip there.  A lot of Americans and Canadians who go there do so as they are religious tourists, pilgrims really.

Well, I'm Catholic, obviously, and I have no desire at all to go there.

I'd like to see Rome, but not to the degree that I'm sufficiently motivated to actually go there.

I guess its the lack of an ancestral connection.  Christ brought salvation to everyone and while, as we know "salvation is from the Jews", my ancestors weren't from the region and, while perhaps it speaks ill of me, I don't feel any reason to visit there.