I love it how people like this are all for U.S. military intervention–that is what he is saying because an unhappy letter from the U.N. or Hillary won’t do it–and then never have day one of military service under their belt. I’ll say it. I don’t care what happens in Syria. We have real nation-building to do at home. And I don’t want a no-nothing career politician trying to add to the work of Team America: WORLD POLICE.
If you know people like this and are tired of this kind of behavior, just point the person to the nearest military recruiter and see if they are willing to do their part. Chances are, they will have an excuse of some kind.
Advertisement
You are completely correct, Eric. These endless cabinet wars are nothing but a net loss for the United States.
Perhaps I will bring the subject up at the local Republican Party meeting next week. I can already foresee the reaction I will get!
I was all for the war in 2001 and 2003, even though I knew it might well take decades of occupational imprinting to make a sovereign free people out of the Iraqis. You don’t take beaten and socially introverted people from a near ghetto state and raise them up to righteousness without -generations- of decompression.
Yet, ultimately, those aren’t the people you want to impress for, from our perspective, the best way to let the Islamist parties know they had overstepped their bounds was to let the other populations of the region go from snickering enemies to watching, with envy, as the U.S. BY OWNING IRAQ, dragged them, kicking and screaming, into the 21st century. You know the drill: water that runs clear and regularly, working electric and piped rather than bottled gas etc. Oh, and no death squads taking care of sectarian business in the canals and backalleys.
What I got instead was a refusal to use U.S. Forces fully to capture UBL and mount his head on a stake as the -first step-. And a ruthless pursuit of him, ‘whereever he might go’, into Pakistan or Western China to ensure it.
I also got no overt (broadcast as standards of conduct) and with-prejudice transition to a LAW ENFORCEMENT position of punishing Iraqis for terrorism as a civil crime in their homelands and not even the authorized means to lock the country down as boots on the ground and mass UAV/UGS and a national ID system _for them_, not U.S..
And Iraq and AfG were nations whose governmental toppling was in the -direct- economic and national interests of our country.
I do not see a similar vested interest in the Syrians. Yes, they act as logistics staging agents and provide some degree of technical expertise to the various ‘freedom fighter’ groups in their territories. But that is an Israeli problem, not ours.
And the Israelis have already shown an ability to act with unilateral determinism against the Syrian reactor program. So too should they be able (through standoff PGMs) handle affairs at Syrian military depots for every attack by Hebollah on their territory or people.
Okay, so it’s not in our direct interests, what about the regional powers? I also do not see a ‘global’ or even regional commitment to repudiating or even containing the Syrians, most particularly not the Arabs, because they would do exactly the same thing (See house Saudi’s response to the seizure of the Grand Mosque- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Mosque_Seizure).
They know how to take and hold power and they -do not- want a(nother) ‘liberated’ neighbor country going fundamentalist on them. As we have most assuredly whiskey delta’d our way into making Iraq.
The best we could do here (via the diplomatic severing of ties and ‘harsh glare’ approach of further diplomatic pressure) is lose engagement with those Syrians who are allowed to have backdoor contact with us. So that when we dial the phone, there is no longer anyone there to pick up. The worst we can do here is get commited to a protracted air and ground war which looks like it is (again) supporting Israeli interests and this on the eve of U.S. currency collapse, political leadership change and uncertain oil production variables from Arab states liable to be hostile to our once again interfering. This time from a much weaker dollar position to compensate.
The worst that could happen is a deliberate extension of the profiteerism of extended, global, warfare. Which is -intended- to so bankrupt this nation that it is forced to implement severe debt sharing (you -will- buy long term T-Bills!) and taxation policies to stay liquid and in the strategic geopolitical game.
Not for Arabs/Assyrians/Persians/Pashtuns. Not with my money.
Militarily, I don’t see a ground attack as being practical without sacrificing all our precious basing rights in Qatar and Kuwait and Jordan (i.e. through Lebanon or out of Israel, from the sea…). Even then, regime change is liable to be messy and fought against as much as with ‘open’ (small) arms. From all sides.
If you go strictly air, your options are limited. The best way to employ precision airpower at low collateral risk is to isolate and starve given areas by denial of services and transport. Unfortunately, this will -harm- the local civilian communities, long before it hurts the Syrian military. Try UAVing it on a ‘truck by truck basis’ and you have basing mode issues as well as total coverage (without sacrificing orbits elsewhere)
As for the sanctions mentioned….ainh. Syrian elites have most of their funds stashed in multinationals, just like the rest of them. They want their cash to be ‘beyond reproach’ as an untouchable, portable, wealth base. And those are the people who will whisper in Assad’s ear: Go or Stay.
If their conditional approval follows that of the Baathists in Iraq, in the 90s, you will see a situation where the loyalists are -very- well taken care of in their little gated communities with massive overseas accounts to rely on and steady jobs/perks in Syrian government and services (infrastructure) to guarantee their national identity. Look how that turned out, ten years late, for U.S..
If you aren’t in it to win it, _and have a reason to do so_, don’t lead with your testicles.
Back in 1997-99, I was among a handful of people who warned that if we didn’t finish the fight or leave ONW/OSW before our hosts got too anxious, we would be in a helluva lot of trouble and it would probably be ‘far vs. near’ threat, in our backyard. Since then, we’ve had a decade of open borders and multiple, known, contacts between ME terrorists and Mexican drug gangs. I also don’t believe that the Iranian schedule for atomic weapons is fully known. Or even necessarily in-country trackable. Germany’s wasn’t.
And I’ve never worn a uniform.