Shifting Realities in Syria

Repeating common untruths, the New York Times comes out for working with Assad. No it would not take direct US intervention to unseat Assad, but allowing the Free Syrian Army the anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons necessary to stop his depredations. The US and Assad ostensibly share a common enemy in ISIS, but in reality it is in Assad's interests for ISIS to dominate the areas liberated from his rule, as the only legitimacy he has left is that he is (debateably) better than they are. It's unclear how plausible is any Russian-backed deal that keeps Assad murdering and torturing, but we can state with certainty that the idea of such as John McCain that moderate Syrians can overthrow Assad is a fantasy. Because we don't know a lot about Syrians, but what we can be certain of is that they aren't moderates.
"A recent study by the RAND Corporation, which does research for the government, says the collapse of the Assad regime, while unlikely now, would be the “worst possible outcome” for American interests — depriving Syria of its remaining state institutions and creating more space for the Islamic State and other extremists to spread mayhem."