Residents walk past damaged buildings after what activists said were air strikes by forces loyal to Syria's President Bashar al-Assad in the Douma neighborhood of Damascus February 6, 2015. REUTERS/AMER ALMOHIBANY
Richard Cohen, Washington Post: The high cost of avoiding war in Syria
In the desperate fight against the Islamic State, the Pentagon has it all wrong. It has been using color coding to designate the eligibility of various Syrian rebel groups to receive U.S. aid. According to the Wall Street Journal, some groups were assigned green dots while others were given red and some yellow. This is where things went wrong. The last color should have been saved for the White House.
I do not accuse, in case you’re wondering, President Obama of personal cowardice. I do, however, accuse him of an excess of caution and not knowing what he is doing. A Turkish official summed it up for the Journal this way: “The Americans color-coded; the Russians invaded.”
WNU Editor: A brutal assessment on U.S. policy towards Syria. What's my take .... in all fairness to President Obama .... he did run his election campaign with the promise that he would drastically reduce the U.S. military presence in the Middle East .... and the American public supported him on this policy .... in fact they still do. Getting involved in another major war in Syria is something that the U.S. public simply does not want to face.
5 comments:
Agree but that being the case, the WH should have stayed clear of the issue and certainly should not be critical of Russia's involvement.
Eventually regardless of what any particular poll states, we are going to have to put a stop to the more hardcore groups like ISIS. Its going to fester until a 9/11 type event occurs again. I would just get it over with and deal with it, but hey that's just me.
The Russians are fully capable of dealing with ISIS. In fact the Russians are more capable than America is of dealing with this. As the most powerful fighting force in the world, Russia has capabilities America simply doesn't have.
When Russia and its allies ultimately defeat ISIS, the Shia/Iran backed Islamic terrorism of the "death to America" variety will still be standing and will be even stronger. Furthermore with the backing of Russia and China the most powerful countries on earth this makes this situation even more dire.
Additionally the dollar will lose its role as world reserve currency within the next two to three years maximum. At this point, there is nothing that can be done to prevent it. I've understood this inevitability since the early 2000s. Hopefully US leadership will realize this and begin to recognize this and start acting accordingly.
Perhaps they is some way we can reach an accommodation with Russia. I'd suggest the following. 1.)See if there is someway we can enter the coalition against Syria on the Russian side. As the more powerful country, Russia would take the lead. The US would enter this coalition as a "junior partner." this may well mean placing US forces under Russian command or perhaps even Iranian command. This is a BIF step but our willingness to do this may help to establish a degree of trust later. This only works IF there is something we can offer Russia in this situation. For now, I'm assuming there is. 2.)IMMEDIAELY announce and follow up with action that the US opposes ANY and ALL sanctions against Russia and will act with ALL of it's might and every ounce of it's strength and vigor to oppose them on all fronts. In other words, if the EU wishes to continue with this they will face EXTREME hostility from America. 3.)Support Russia's position on Ukraine offering to assist the Eastern Ukrainians and the "rebels" where and when possible should Russia request it. 4.) Set a speedy timetable for NATO.US withdrawl from Eastern Europe. The Russians feel they had an agreement that NATO would not expand to this region when the Cold War ended. I'm skeptical that such an agreement really existed but that is irrelevant at this point. This would include vigorously opposing Ukraine's entry into either NATO or the EU. 5.) In exchange for this assistance and change in stance, Russia will act to reign in Iran's "death to America" leadership making it clear that this unacceptable and will not be tolerated and they can help to ensure Iranian nuclear weapons are never used against America. Additionally I'd like to see the Iranian/American conflict move towards some type of UN trial to resolve any and all differences between our peoples and reparations paid by the parties as determined by a fair trial. At this point, I'm skeptical that America can get a fair trial or that the Iranian leadership really wants to resolve this conflict. With the change in Russian position as a result of changes to our policies perhaps this can be achieved.
Will any of this work? I'm not certain. What does seem clear is continuing to have hostile relations with the world's most powerful country is NOT sustainable and I simply cannot see how this can have a good ending. Frankly our options are few and becoming more limited literally by the day.
Finally, with regard to the end of the US dollar as world reserve currency. This is going to happen and cannot be prevented. As such, we should be negotiating in earnest with the world's top powers of Russia and China on the transition to ensure a so called "soft landing" for us and to ensure a smooth transition when it does happen. With the correct policy change here and elsewhere good outcomes for us may still be possible.
B. Poster,
You have my vote. Convincing people who have become accustomed to doing whatever they want, where ever they want, to whomever they want is a whole other thing.
They'll fight the decline (and speed up its pace) tooth and nail. Just watching the throngs of people gathering to watch Donald Trump blather about "making America strong again" shows how deep rooted the problem is.
There are those who would agree with you, but there are a whole mess of them spoiling for a Gotterdammerung. There's a lot if crazy with a lot of influence in the U.S. (and Canada) these days.
RRH,
You write: "Convincing people who have become accustomed to doing whatever they want, where they want, to whomever they want is a whole other thing." While I think we are in agreement that there needs to be a major change in US policy, I don't think this a matter of doing whatever, whenever, and to whomever they want by American leaders.
This is primarily a case of people viewing the world as they think it should be and in some cases as it should be. Unfortunately the world is not as it should be nor is it as we would like it to be. This ideological approach based upon a lack of real world experience with regards to many of these people often leads to poor decision making.
With regards to the to whomever, wherever, and whenever they want idea US leaders are typically no less nor any more evil than other leaders around the world. In fact, they probably tend to be less evil because the US and its leaders are always under a very large and often hostile media microscope that the leaders of countries like Russia and Iran typically don't face. It seems to me the leaders of countries like Russia and China are far more ruthless and cunning than those of America or the "west." Also, I would add, at least in the case of Russia, considerably more arrogant, however, being the most powerful country in the world the leadership carries it well so far.
I try to read the Pro-Russian news media. Their plan seems to be massive bombing followed by a ground invasion coordinated with allies to clean up afterward. This seems to be similar to the plan the Americans attempted. The Russians seem to have the following advantages over the US. 1.)Their alliances are stronger and more unified than anything America has ever been able to muster. 2.)They can bomb and attack in ways the Americans never could because they will never face the same kind of media scrutiny the Americans do. I've lost count over the number of times the media has gone absolutely bonkers over "civilian" casualties. 3.)There intelligence services are better than the US, 4.)The forces are better led, better trained, have higher morale, are more cunning and ruthless than the US can muster. Disadvantages: 1.)The Russians suffer from extreme arrogance. Whereas the Americans especially after Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya are going to be cautious, in fact being to cautious likely played a big role in the issues we've faced her. The Russians are not going to be so cautious. They may engage in this without thinking it through well enough.
We may well end up with a situation where ISIS is defeated and Iran "death to America: is free to operate with impunity. This would be VERY BAD. As such, by trying to help the Russians here we may be able to turn an enemy into a friend or at least they may be less hostile to us.
Post a Comment