Monday, October 3, 2016

Are These The Only Four Military Options For President Obama On Syria

AFP Photo/Nicholas Kamm

Kristina Wong, The Hill: Four military options for Obama in Syria

Lawmakers are pressing for a U.S. military option to help end the Syrian civil war, a so-called "Plan B," as the Obama administration's last-ditch diplomatic effort with Russia flounders.

Frustration on Capitol Hill is mounting after a temporary ceasefire negotiated Sept. 9 between the U.S. and Russia crumbled just a week later. The Syrian regime — backed by Russian air forces — then began a new onslaught on the city of Aleppo that has left hundreds of civilians dead.

“I do think we should be looking at what other options we might have to take action in Syria that would change the dynamic and force Russia to recognize that it’s important for them to reengage in a resolution in Syria,” Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who sits on the Senate Armed Services and Foreign Relations Committees, told The Hill on Tuesday.

The administration says the strategy remains to end the war through diplomatic means, but insists it is keeping military options on the table.

Here are four possible options the administration could be weighing.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: None of these options will de-escalate the conflict in Syria .... in my opinion it would only escalate and expand it. As to what is the best option .... I would stick to the current White House policy .... stay out as much as possible from the war, criticise publicly the war and Assad, help the Kurds and try to deter Turkey from crushing them, and keep on targeting the Islamic State.


B.Poster said...

All four of these options are colossally bad for the reasons the critics mention in response to these options, however, the critics are far to sanguine in their critiques of these. Any one of these options, if implemented, would likely lead to war with Russia, a nuclear armed power with tremendous military capability who could do us immeasurable harm.

Furthermore the options being presented are based upon an unrealistic assumption. This assumption is that Bashar Assad can be removed from power by the US, it's "allies", or some combination of the US and its "allies." Maybe his removal is desirable, maybe it isn't. (Wining the lottery is "desirable" but its not going to happen.) Desirable or not Assad is not going to be removed unless the Russians approve which they are not going to do so. I pointed this out from the very beginning of the so called Syrian civil War. Had US policy been based upon realistic assumptions at the start we'd be in a better position today.

In light of reality, I present two more options. 1.)Remove all US military and intelligence assets from Syria suspending all US aid to the rebels or to anyone who might provide the rebels with weapons. By doing this we help minimize the risk to us of blowback once the Russian backed Assad government gains complete control of the country and vanquishes the rebels. They are going to want retribution against those who opposed them and are going to demand "a pound of flesh" from those who did so. By getting out now we minimize our costs. As I was told long, long ago, "when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you do is STOP DIGGING!!" We need to stop digging a deeper hole for ourselves here.

2.) Place US military assets under the command and control of Russia and go after ISIS together. Such a policy might well speed up ISIS defeat help us improve relations with Russia and Iran the main backers of the Syrian government. We are going to need to have cordial relations with these nations, especially Russia the coming years in order to be able to properly address a number of issues that are going to need to be addressed in the coming years.

I personally prefer option 1. I think there are to many trust issues and cultural differences that would need to be worked through to make option 1 viable in the short to mid term and I'm not sure there is anything we can offer that would make option 2 worthwhile for Russia or its allies to consider.

If I'm POTUS and am presented with these ridiculous 4 options, I'm 1.) telling these "advisors" to go back and try again or 2.)firing each and every one of them forthwith. I think this is why Mr. Trump has the establishment rattled. They strongly suspect that for better or worse should he be elected there is going to be a thorough housecleaning at all levels of government or at least there could be.

Anonymous said...

Lol BPoster. .do they pay you well? No one is actually reading your stuff