General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDelusional US 'Group Think' on Syria
"Don't do stupid shit" is still a solid base for foreign policy.
http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/27105-delusional-us-group-think-on-syria-ukraine
The likely result of the U.S. military destroying Assads defenses would be a victory by Islamic extremists with their black flags flying over Damascus. That, in turn, would probably force the United States and its European allies to undertake a major invasion of Syria with hundreds of thousands of troops at the cost of hundreds of billions of dollars and no reasonable prospect for success.
Despite the craziness of this we-must-take-out-Assad thinking, it has become the group think of Official Washington. If only Assad were forcibly removed, this thinking goes, then the supposed moderate opposition would take over, transform Syria into a model democracy and everything would work out just fine. That this scenario is reminiscent of the dreamy neocon predictions about Iraq before the U.S. invasion in 2003 and would be even less likely in Syria seems to bother no one.
So, the Washington Posts editors write in reaction to Obamas negative reply on ousting Assad: That message will be greeted with cheers by the Assad clique and its supporters in Iran; it will encourage the regime to believe it can continue its barrel bomb and chlorine gas attacks with impunity. It will also probably ensure that the rift between the United States and its allies against the Islamic State continues to widen.
Then, the Posts editors glibly suggest that Obama should introduce U.S. ground forces, presumably into Syria as well as Iraq: Mr. Obama appears to recognize the severity of the threat posed by the Islamic State and appears to be focused on the job of leading the fight against it. But if he continues to allow his ideological resistance to steps such as the deployment of ground forces to constrain the campaign, he will ensure its failure.
The Posts casual attitude toward dispatching the U.S. military into foreign countries, even without the approval of a sovereign government and thus in defiance of international law, is typical of the neocon arrogance that launched the Iraq War, which, in turn, gave rise to both Al-Qaedas presence in the region and the Islamic State, which fought the U.S. occupation of Iraq under the name Al-Qaeda in Iraq.
In other words, it was the neocon disregard for international law that touched off this bloody mess in the first place, but the neocons are now popping up to give more advice on how Obama must handle the situation now. But their recommendations amount to war and more war.
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)And any US war to overthrow the Syrian government would be illegal. It's not a threat to us, it's not attacking us, there is no UN resolution, nothing.
I don't trust Obama's national security advisers.