Bashar al-Assad and the Syrian government (Pro/For) or FSA and other opposition forces (Con/Against)

Pro has to either offer characteristics of the Syrian government that make it better than the FSA, or some reasonable benefits we can only have if Assad remained ruling. He has not done this so far.What he offered was an unsupported (possibly fabricated) survey stating that Bashar has more support than the FSA. After I traced Pro's source and its sources, I was astonished by the details which lead me to the conclusion that this all was highly likely to be a fabrication,1- Pro contradicts his own sources when he says the survey was "done by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (commonly known as NATO)." According to his source, the survery data was only relayed to the NATO.2- [From the original source of the survery, World Tribune] "The sources said no formal polling was taken in Syria... They said the data came from a range of activists and independent organizations that were working in Syria, particularly in relief efforts."So basically, the original source of the survery claims that "the sources" say that the polling was not formal, and that the data came from a range of unidentified activists and organizations, not a survey group. No numbers, no names, no citations, no details about the survey—nothing. Just a blog referring to another without any actual tenable data.3- Not reported by mainstream media, no mention of this report by NATO (I even tried searching library databases), actual NATO Data(if any exists) absent from the sources of the articles that mention it. I can conclude that this is just a fabrication that is not supported by any tenable evidenceMy Argument:A- Disadvantages of Bashar Al-Assad continuing his presidency1- Loss of economic and diplomatic ties between Syria and most of the countries in the world. This is namely because of the Syrian regime's human-rights abuses and the boycott of Bashar Al-Assad around the world.2- The continuation of the economic sanctions on Syria on the basis that it is an inhumane dictatorship.3- Many Syrian refugees would live under wretched conditions in Lebanon and other countries, given that they are mostly Sunnah who avoided the genocides in Syria(some of them are even wives and children of FSA members).4- The conflict between Syria's neighbour Turkey and Bashar Al-Assad, which puts Syria in another peril, given that Turkey supports the FSA and is against Assad's human-rights abuses. This means that if Bashar stayed in power, we might witness a war that would have harsh consequences on Syria.A1- Loss of economic and diplomatic ties between Syria and most of the countries in the world.Because of the inhumane practices of the Syrian government, it has lost many of its diplomatic relations with previous allies such as: Britain, Canada, France, Italy, Germany, Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, United States, Belgium, Spain, and the Gulf States[1]. It even has been excommunicated from the Arab League in 2011 and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation in 2012. This, of course, has negative effects on Syria's economy, because many of those states refuse to engage in any economic relations until Assad is overthrown. That clarified, Syria's economy is in a deplorable state and it needs all the help it can get from the rest of the world, provided that the Iranian support is not enough to keep the economy standing on its two feet. For instance, the Syrian government’s reserves decreased from $18 billion to $2 billion because of the conflict, according to a report released by the Syrian Centre for Policy Research in January 2013. According to that same report, $48 billion is currently required for the reconstruction of Syria with a predicted amount at $60-200 billion if the conflict continued. This all occurred even with a financial support from Iran, which means that Syria needs the support of Eastern and Western states which have boycotted the government because of Assad.[1] http://www.haaretz.com......A2- The continuation of economic sanctions on Syria.The economic sanctions had dreadful consequences on the Syrian Oil Production. For instance, the Syrian regime is unable to find buyers for around 140,000 barrels of crude oil per day, which forces the Syrian state treasury to loose about $5 billion dollars a year[2]. Moreover, the Arab League Economic Committee opposed Bashar Al-Assad by suspending flights from member states to Syria, ending transactions with the Syrian central bank and freezing all Syrian assets in Arab countries[3]. Syria is already in a deplorable state due to the accumulated effects of the civil war, so the removal of Bashar Al-Assad would remove those sanctions and help in enhancing the economic state.[2] http://www.guardian.co.uk......[3] http://www.aljazeera.com......A3- Many Syrian immigrants would remain to live as refugees under wretched conditions.The number of Syrian refugees in Lebanon alone is approximated to be 1.2 million[4]. This great influx of refugees is namely because of Sunnah escaping violence and oppression from the Alawite minority, and as the Syrian National TV and Pro-Assad media stated, the fact that the FSA members are sending their families to Lebanon to protect them from the Syrian regime[5]. If Assad continued to rule, there is no guarantee that those refugees would be allowed to return to their lands, which are mostly lands that have been destroyed and could be easily conquered by Alawite residents, who are already against the wide expansion of the Sunnah in Syria. Assad, in my opinion, would prefer them not to come back because of their infamous support of the FSA and the fact that they are mostly Sunnah; thus, a source of opposition to his regime. [4] http://www.yalibnan.com......[5] http://english.al-akhbar.com......A4- The conflict between Syria's neighbour Turkey and Bashar Al-Assad.The Syrian national army is not in a position to fight against a nation like Turkey, and Syria had enough bombings and battles. Provided that Bashar is despised by Turkey, it is advisable to remove him to restore diplomatic and economic ties between those two countries, at least to ensure that a conflict is not even possible. There many reasons to believe that such a war is possible. For example, Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan announced in October 5 2012 "We are not interested in war, but we're not far from it either," after the incident in October 3 when Turkish troops attacked Syria[6]. [6] http://www.guardian.co.uk......B- Advantages of having the FSAB1- Financial support from many rich countriesQatar and KSA have supported many Arab nations in critical situations such as Lebanon, and they are accused of financially supporting the FSA[7]. Hence, it is guaranteed that they would donate billions of dollars to help reconstruct Syria and support the FSA's leadership. Moreover, the majority of countries who opposed Assad are also expected to give out money for humanitarian purposes, which means that Syria's economy is better off with that financial support.[7] rt.com/news/arming-syria-rebels-saudi-913/B2- Democracy and political life in SyriaAssad wants to re-establish a dictatorship, while the rebels are seeking a democracy. Some of them want it based on Islamic principles and others on secular ones, but that at least creates a diversity and many political parties, instead of the traditional solo party that governs Syria.B3- Return of thinkers and activists who were shunned by the Syrian governmentThere are many thinkers who were shunned from Syria after years of persecution and censorship, and have been working with the rebels from abroad even with some objections to some of their violent acts. I'm going to list a few. Syrian lawyer and human rights activist Razan Zaitouneh(2012 Ibn Rushd Award winner), and Syrian author Samar Yazbek(Pen Pinter literary prize winner)[8]. They are expected to return and help reform the rebels if Assad is overthrown, given that his regime is the reason for their exile.[8] asafeworldforwomen.org/rights-defenders/rd-middle-east/3146-syrian-activists-awards.html