Yakabuski never examines how realistic any approach to the Syrian conflict is viable other than to leave Assad in power. The "West's" record in the region is that it is batting zero. Saddam's ouster created chaos and death in Iraq and led to the rise of ISIS. The removal of Gadhafi destabilised Libya and allowed extremists to terrorise that country. The US attempts to arm and support rebel groups in Syria ended up helping ISIS install itself comfortably there too! Assad, like Saddam and Gadhafi, is awful but what are the viable alternatives? The Russians, also ruthless admittedly, saw that Assad was the only option to stabilise the country which was relatively advanced in some areas before this mess started. Russia also is a long time supporter of Stria along with Iran. If the US wants regime change in Syria, it puts itself in direct conflict, potentially militarily, with Russia and Iran. We also have the question of just how chummy are Trump and Putin?