[Eleutheria5]

Of course, that could all never happen in Egypt, Jordan or Turkey. It's only Syria we have to worry about, and Assad is of course the best thing to happen to Israel since they had to throw seltzer bottles out of biplanes for air support. Somebody's getting awful desperate to make this ludicrous argument.

[VRWCmember]

Assad’s Cousin Says an Unstable Syria Bad for Israel

Yeah, well a stable Syria pretty much sucks too.

[Always A Marine]

I agree with Makhlouf, given the options available. Like most despots, Baathist dictators are fairly rational and ultimately bent on survival. They might need putting in their place from time to time, but each butt-kicking seems to buy decades of relative peace.

On the other hand, Muslim zealots are irrational and unpredictable, never satisfied, and bent toward martyrdom. Since each of their butt-kickings only guarantees a new generation of vengeful enemies, the only remedy is their perpetual extermination.

Given the choices, Israel certainly prefers the late devil's son and former London ophthalmologist, Bashar al-Assad. As they say, better the devil you know...

[SJackson]

Give him back the Golan, he’ll love you