U.S. special forces soldiers scan the area at a front line outpost outside the northern Syrian city of Manbij. Mauricio Lima for The New York Times
New York Times: The U.S. Has Troops in Syria. So Do the Russians and Iranians. Here’s Where.
President Trump is threatening to launch missile strikes against Syria to punish President Bashar al-Assad’s government for a suspected April 7 chemical weapons attack on a Damascus suburb.
But Mr. Trump’s pick of targets is complicated by the presence of Russian troops and Iranian militias, who are supporting Mr. Assad’s forces in Syria’s seven-year civil war.
American forces in Syria have focused mainly on fighting the Islamic State in the country’s northeast.
More than 40 people were killed and dozens more sickened in the suspected attacks on the Damascus suburb of Douma over the weekend. Ever since, Mr. Trump has repeatedly promised to strike Syria — as he did last year following a deadly chemical attack in Idlib Province — and potentially pull the United States into the wider conflict.
Read more ....
WNU Editor: A lot of Iranians in Syria.
2 comments:
The US has a very strong military position to enforce its will in Syria. The US has secure lines of communication over the Med thru Israel into Jordanian bases. Very secure. The US is aligned with one of the best fighting forces in Syria, a big switch from past conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. The US has long range bombers much closer to the region than anyone.
So should the US wish to be a party to a settlement, Russia and its allies have no choice but to include them. I hope what we are seeing now is posturing before talks begin and perhaps this weeks waving of swords is designed to give cover to Russia to agree to talks?
"...posturing before talks begin..." I think you are correct here, actually. A big concern is there are some crazy fools in America who seem to be itching for war with Russia at pretty much any costs. Such people could mess the whole thing up. (Actually "mess" is to nice of a word for such people. The word I am really thinking of is much more vulgar but I am endeavoring not to cuss here.)
With Russia now in control of the area where the alleged chemical attacks happened and an agreement to get a UN team in to investigate the situation this should be more than sufficient. Normally it would be, however, with some itching to fight Russia this may not be.
Even if I don't share it, I like your optimism regarding America's position in Syria. Assuming you are right POTUS would surely know this to. After his heated rhetoric Russia has taken control of the area and agreed to allow UN inspectors in. Trump's supporters and perhaps Trump himself could say that his tough rhetoric spurred the Russians and others on to move in a more productive direction and, while I think it is unlikely, they could be right. In any event, everyone gets to save a little face, we avoid a military confrontation and the talks can begin.
Post a Comment