Skip to comments.Syria: America Sidelined
Posted on 06/21/2013 12:38:41 PM PDT by nikos1121
The war in Syria, started by locals, is now a regional conflict, the meeting ground of two warring blocs. On one side, the radical Shiite bloc led by Iran, which overflies Iraq to supply Bashar Assad and sends Hezbollah to fight for him. Behind them lies Russia, which has stationed ships offshore, provided the regime with tons of weaponry, and essentially claimed Syria as a Russian protectorate.
And on the other side are the Sunni Gulf states terrified of Iranian hegemony (territorial and soon nuclear); non-Arab Turkey, now convulsed by an internal uprising; and fragile Jordan, dragged in by geography.
And behind them? No one. Its the Spanish Civil War except that only one side the fascists showed up. The natural ally of what began as a spontaneous, secular, liberationist uprising in Syria was the United States. For two years, it did nothing.
President Obamas dodge was his chemical-weapons red line. In a conflict requiring serious statecraft, Obama chose to practice forensics instead, earnestly agonizing over whether reported poison-gas attacks reached the evidentiary standards of CSI: Miami.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
For us now it's a catch up, with our marbles put in Jordan. Obama refused to get us more involved in Syria, when it was simple and easy to do and the rebels were winning...probably out of cowardess and incompetence, or maybe just maybe he wants to see the region eventually fall into an all out war, with Israel having to defend itself.
I'm betting that it's the worst of all, i.e. that once again we see the man's incompetence and lack of any knowledge of history of America's importance.
We're seeing a very unstable situation developing before our eyes. Within two weeks, I suspect he will be backed into defending Jordan with our precious airmen who will be going up against a more formadible foe in Putin.
I'm saying we missed out chance...and it's too late to intercede without gettnig our noses bloodied.
These are the most dangerous of times since Jimmy Carter was in office.
Not since ‘wag a dog’ have we seen such outrageous behaviour by those entrusted with our nation’s fortune and direction.
The 4th Term of the Clintinoid Administration is certainly worthy of being called the most corrupt ever.. most of the same operatives are still there, somewhere, eating away at the very core principles of this land’s foundation.
The Russians....the Iranians.....the Turks.....the Syrians.....the terrorists.....the Jordanians.....the French.....the British.....the Lebanese.....the Egyptians....the Qataris......the United States.....
There are too damn many teams on the field. I recommend we keep our team off the field until we know for sure where the goal is and who is on our side.
It’s rampant. Hillary Clinton. SOS? What actually does she bring to the table in comparison to people who have spent their lives studying history and the realities of superpowers.
Krauthammer is right. Russia and Iran were probably stupified to learn that Obama was going to do nothing. He sat fat dumb and happy thinking that the rebels were going to win without our intervention. Not going to happen now.
So what are we going to do?
1. Allow the war to flow into Jordan?
2. Create a No-Fly Zone in Syria? How?
3. Put troops on the ground?
I see Obama getting slapped down quickly by Putin. It will be the first time in my lifetime where a US president will be running with his tail dragging.
I think the point is, we were on the field. We won that war. Our presence assured stability. We’re off the field. The chance is lost. Now we regroup in Jordan? Scary times.
After WWII, we put troops in Germany and Japan. They are still there. We didn't want those nations to slip back into bad behavior, and we wanted forward positioning in case other countries (Russia, China) started to misbehave. This worked well. Perhaps, after 65+ years we could pull back, but it's been a success.
Iran? Afghanistan? We've runa way from those places as fast as we can. They are not stable. They are still in danger of slipping into bad behavior. And we now have limited ability to pressure nearby regimes (Syria, Iran) if they misbehave.
WWII was a big success story. We have tried very hard NOT to learn from it.
Clinton did as well, when we were defeated in Somalia in 1993.
Hasn’t the author learned any lessons from Afghanistan? You arm these people at your own risk. There are no “good guys” there. Arming the “rebels” is arming al-queda, is he kidding us?
In terms of his point about Russian hegemony, Syria is already was part of the Russian and Iranian sphere. I don’t know that the US has any stretegic interests at stake here beyond a containment policy.
His point about Iraq and the US not being in a position to interdict Iranians is valid, but this assumes the “rebels” were/are somehow trustworthy and WORTH supporting. Even if we had armed the Syrians earlier, when mostly composed of Syrian army defectors, al-queda, Iran and Russia would still be there today. We’d still be in the same position.
What is in US interests is containment, and supporting our long-term allies in the area; Israel, Turkey and Jordan. In those terms, it is probably better for the Russians to win since Assad is a known quantity and would be critically wounded.
What left a void was the removal of Saddam Hussein which Krauthammer was all for.
So were most of us. The void is in the White House.
[Zero]s dodge was his chemical-weapons red line. In a conflict requiring serious statecraft, Obama chose to practice forensics instead, earnestly agonizing over whether reported poison-gas attacks reached the evidentiary standards of CSI: Miami.