Syria, the next....

midcan5

liberal / progressive
Jun 4, 2007
12,753
3,526
260
America
Interesting piece on Syria and US involvement.

"No one, of course, can know what would happen then. My hunch is that Syria, like Afghanistan, would be torn apart not only into large chunks such as the Kurds in the northeast but even neighborhood by neighborhood as in the Iraqi cities. Muslims would take revenge on Alawis and Christians who would be fighting for their lives. More millions would be driven out of their homes. Food would be desperately short, and disease probably rampant. If we are worried about a haven for terrorists or drug traffickers, Syria would be hard to beat. And if we are concerned about a sinkhole for American treasure, Syria would compete well with Iraq and Afghanistan. It would probably be difficult or even impossible to avoid "boots on the ground" there. So we are talking about casualties, wounded people, and perhaps wastage of another several trillion dollars which we don't have to spend and which, if we had, we need to use in our own country for better heath, education, creation of jobs and rebuilding of our infrastructure.

Finally, if the missile attacks do succeed in "degrading" the Syrian government, it may read the signs as indicating that fighting the war is acceptable so long as chemical weapons are not employed. They may regard it as a sort of license to go ahead in this wasting war. Thus, the action will have accomplished little. Thus, as General Zinni points out, America will likely find itself saddled with another long-term, very expensive and perhaps unwinnable war. We need to remind ourselves what Afghanistan did - bankrupting the Soviet Union - and what Iraq cost us -- about 4,500 American dead, over 100,000 wounded, many of whom will never recover, and perhaps $6 trillion.
Can we afford to repeat those mistakes?" William R. Polk

The Philosopher's Stone: SYRIA


"We did the Cole and we wanted the United States to react. And if they reacted, they are going to invade Afghanistan and that’s what we want … . Then we will start holy war against the Americans, exactly like the Soviets." Mohammed Atef, military commander of Al Qaeda, in November of 2000
 
.

This is a region still largely existing within a 17th-Century mindset -- I guess theocracies will do that to you. If they were not sitting on a massive pool of oil, no one would give a tiny little flying fuck about them, other than viewing them with a morbid curiosity. But no, we've chosen to make these simplistic, violent zealots fabulously wealthy instead.

Of course, since we're unwilling to fully tap our own oil and natural gas reserves, we're tied at the hip to these primitive people indefinitely.

Once again, our problems are a self-inflicted wound.

.
 
It is an interesting (if poorly written and formatted article) however while the author does a good job of fleshing out the tactical particulars of the Syrian civil war he fails to consider the larger strategic picture from the standpoint of the principle external antagonists, the most important of which is IRAN.

IMHO If you stop and think about it, the situation in Syria is a no-lose proposition (or at worst a very low risk one) from the standpoint of the Iranian Regime:

1. If Assad prevails and retains power, the Iranians have their Syrian ally intact (status quo)
2. If the radical elements (aka "the rebels") in Syria prevail, the Iranians have yet another cauldron of Islamic Radicalism to distract and harry the West and Israel with.
3. If the United States gets involved militarily the Iranians benefit not only from the distraction but also the weakening of American blood & treasure and the potential for backlash from the Muslim World.
4. If the United States fails to act militarily , the Iranians have a clear indication that they have little to fear from the United States when it comes to the use of force with respect to Iranian nuclear weapons programs.
5. No matter what the outcome the Russian-Chinese-Iranian ties are strengthened
6. There is the potential rift in the American-Israeli alliance developing over the question of Syria due to the direct threat to the Israeli's that a destabilized Syria represents
7. Thanks to the recent move by British Parliament the Iranians got a bonus since there is now a potential wedge in British-American alliance.

The potential of a fractured Syria doesn't really present a problem for the Iranians since the likely scenarios don't really pose a significant cross border threat to them in the short term. It does however pose of significant destabilization threat to Jordan, Lebanon and Iraq, any/all of which provide prospects that the Iranians can exploit to their advantage.

The President has painted the United States into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game, not a checkers game and developing a strategy where the United States could have advanced it's own interests by doing what the Iranians have been doing, namely playing it's opposition against one another and keeping an eye on the big strategic picture. The goal all along should have been to utilize the situation in Syria to drive a wedge between the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians and to suck in as much Russian and Iranian blood and treasure into the Syrian conflict as possible.

"in the midst of war and crisis nothing is as clear or as certain as it appears in hindsight" -- Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August
 
The President has painted the United States into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game, not a checkers game and developing a strategy where the United States could have advanced it's own interests by doing what the Iranians have been doing, namely playing it's opposition against one another and keeping an eye on the big strategic picture. The goal all along should have been to utilize the situation in Syria to drive a wedge between the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians and to suck in as much Russian and Iranian blood and treasure into the Syrian conflict as possible.

"in the midst of war and crisis nothing is as clear or as certain as it appears in hindsight" -- Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August


Obama has put the ball (and the responsibility for this complex decision) in Congress' court.

Not his problem.

Watch the media help him out.

.
 
The President has painted the United States into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game, not a checkers game and developing a strategy where the United States could have advanced it's own interests by doing what the Iranians have been doing, namely playing it's opposition against one another and keeping an eye on the big strategic picture. The goal all along should have been to utilize the situation in Syria to drive a wedge between the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians and to suck in as much Russian and Iranian blood and treasure into the Syrian conflict as possible.

"in the midst of war and crisis nothing is as clear or as certain as it appears in hindsight" -- Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August


Obama has put the ball (and the responsibility for this complex decision) in Congress' court.

Not his problem.

Watch the media help him out.

.

That's just a cynical political move Mac, doesn't change the geometry of the situation in Syria with respect to who benefits and who loses. If I had to guess no matter what Congress says the President will utilize military force in Syria, IMHO that's why he hedged his bets when he announced his decision to seek Congressional Approval by indicating he felt he didn't need Congressional Approval to use force. His (and OUR) problem is that while he's shown he has some talent for politics, he doesn't appear to have ANY faculties when it comes to the nuances of foreign policy, this should be alarming to Americans because it's exactly the situation we had with the Johnson Administration that led to the escalation in Vietnam.
 
The President has painted the United States into a corner by his saber rattling when what he should have been doing was recognizing that this is a chess game, not a checkers game and developing a strategy where the United States could have advanced it's own interests by doing what the Iranians have been doing, namely playing it's opposition against one another and keeping an eye on the big strategic picture. The goal all along should have been to utilize the situation in Syria to drive a wedge between the Russians, the Chinese and the Iranians and to suck in as much Russian and Iranian blood and treasure into the Syrian conflict as possible.

"in the midst of war and crisis nothing is as clear or as certain as it appears in hindsight" -- Barbara Tuchman, The Guns of August


Obama has put the ball (and the responsibility for this complex decision) in Congress' court.

Not his problem.

Watch the media help him out.

.


I agree. My worry is that Syria has been a political football all along. Very sad. Very sad.
 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4cf4O-hUg78]Bugs Bunny (Crossing the Line) - YouTube[/ame]
 

Forum List

Back
Top