Lies, Damnable Lies, and Syria, by Robert Gore
Vladimir Putin has deftly illuminated the dissembling behind US policy in Syria. He is sending military advisers and weaponry to help Assad fight ISIS, and he has offered to work with the US. It would be sensible to make common cause with Russia against ISIS (“Putin: Friend or Foe in Syria?” by Patrick Buchanan, SLL, 9/18/15), but such an alliance would severely diminish the likelihood of realizing the neoconservative dream: deposing Assad, installing a puppet more to the liking of the US, the Sunni states, and Israel, and loosening Russia’s grip on Europe’s natural gas supply with the Qatari pipeline through Syria. So the neocons are left muttering about Russia’s dark designs in the Middle East, although Russia, unlike the US, learned its lesson in Afghanistan and has shown no desire to get stuck on the Middle East tar baby. Further mutterings about the dark designs of Assad ally Iran are thrown in for good measure, usually in the same breath as condemnation of the nuclear agreement.
This is an excerpt. For the rest of the article, please click the link above.
This is an excerpt. For the rest of the article, please click the link above.
"The looming danger is that one of these tough guys or gals, upon election, puts up rather than shuts up, for putting up could lead to world war. Then there would be no winners and a lot more dead three-year-olds."
It usually involves setting up the target and that's easiest when administrations are changing but not always. False signals to Iraq from the US Ambassador for one thing.
Wars aren't fought world wide anymore except on the nightly news. The coalitions for one side or another agree on a fairly confined battleground. WWI and WWII cured the world of world wars.
The fear now is the nuclear deterrent is gone and nothing has replaced it. Mutally Assured Destruction. the next version when it returns will be Unilaterally Assured Destruction.
USA being primarily a warlike nation and culture and population - the latter as long as it's fast and similar on TV to a video game and if they don't lose too much sleep or buying power or find their tickets to the game were cancelled - which is to say personally inconvenienced. Will be to wrapped up in booming economies and a few other red herrings.
Just like always.
I'm already in favor of Unilateral Assured Destruction from a pure military standpoint. MAD was lunatic but it kept the peace for forty or so years.
Since under the present system we're going to have some more wars anyway why not get something out of it instead of winning then finding out we lost once again.
And if the Jihadis attack anyway? Make the appointment for them. We gave peace a chance. It didn't work.
Since I 've got my blocks back in place as I recall the Kurds ran that whole area back during the Crusades Their traditional area fits that plan perfectly. Just think of it as peace by diaspora. Now to solve the problem of arming the other side in advance.
On the face of it and barring further research it's way ahead of whatever second place finish the State Department is planning for us.
There is no one in the entire administration that comes close to Straight Line Logic. And so far as I can see at present, no one in the line of suitors to power either. Perhaps a few who have some potential, but much will be told between now and November.
Assad won't be a threat in his lifetime again, even if he retains power and defeats ISIS, his country was destroyed by the fighting. I say six in one, half-dozen in the other, provide some aid to the Kurds and Turks, ship some weapons, and let them figure it out.
The Iraqi military, after a decade of training and arming at our expense can't find its ass with both hands.