Should NATO create a Free Syrian Army from the refugees?

Well we are a member.... ;)

What is the old saying, insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Where are the 90 or so we trained so far to the tune of around a million dollars per unit. Hire some competent mercenaries and save some money.

NATO should do it, UN should do it. Yep, usually means The US should do it.

MAJ Ken Landgren - No one wanted to hear the answer to that question.

I've never experienced airstrikes in my neighborhood. I suppose my ideology at that point would be- don't get blown up.

The last time we stood up an army it was carved up like a Turkey.

The Syrian problem is much more complex than just dealing with ISIS. The US could play right in their hand and attack ISIS at Dabiq. I really believe the majority of their force would be available for that battle. They're going nuts to face the Americans there because it goes along with their theology. The US could stomp out the fighting spirit of ISIS and leave it as a barely operable spider organization. Unless God rained fire upon the infidels, which is what they expect, I've read. Jesus. What a crazy time to be in the armed forces.

The US disbanded the legit Iraqi military during the 03 invasion. Most of those cats disappeared into the ether only to reappear as the combatants the current Iraqi military is facing. Imagine that.

I have no doubt that it could be don, LCDR (Join to see) - it would not be difficult for the French to form a 1er Régiment Arabe de la Légion Étrangère, followed by a 2e Régiment Arabe and maybe even a 3e Régiment Arabe, which could march into battle as an effective fighting force

But the alliance as a whole do it? They'd still be working out the command-rotation sequence when the black flag gets raised in Damascus.

1LT William Clardy very true. One nation doing this would be far for effective and efficient than the UN as a whole.

Not just any nation can do it, LCDR (Join to see). I named the French for a reason: they are the most unapologetic of the European nations about retaining control over their not-really-former colonies, and whoever wants to stand up an effective fighting force will have to provide the command element. Sending freshly trained troops in without experienced and competent commanders is sentencing the troops to pointless slaughter.

(Anybody who thinks la Belle France let go of her empire should check out all the places the Foreign Legion is posted to -- it's very illuminating, especially for those who don't remember how recently it was troops from the Légion Étrangère which pushed the Libyan Army out of northern Chad and who cut short an attempted coup in Madagascar.)

1LT William Clardy - very true and I wasn't advocating any specific nation but you're right the French are optimal.

People are so, so off-base about this. It's not a singular ground force coming in, going house to house and subjugating these people. If it's not a coalition airstrike, an Assad airstrike or some ISIS rockets, mortars or SAF... how do you fight all that? I guess the noble thing to do would be to step out as the aircraft screech overhead and fire your AK at it. Theyve been fighting a civil was for a long time. It's a different map now.

Doesnt matter if you're a good guy, bad guy, just a working guy.... and it doesn't matter what plane drops the bomb. That's what people are running from.

SFC Jason Babb, the Kurds don't seem to be running.

Those Kurds... those men are doing it. I have nothing but respect for the Kurds.