A lot of attention is being paid to the rising tensions between Russia and the U.S. over Syria, and for good reason.
A military confrontation between the two nuclear superpowers is not just stupid and immoral but completely insane. It's like playing Russian Roulette with every chamber loaded.

The New York Times reported that in 2012 General Martin E. Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, testified that imposing a no-fly zone in Syria “would require as many as 70,000 American servicemen to dismantle Syria’s sophisticated antiaircraft system and then impose a 24-hour watch over the country.”
And this was before Russia got involved.

While Global Nuclear Annihilation tends to get your attention, there is someone even more committed to the Assad regime than Russia that the American media seems to have forgotten about.
While some morons think we can bluff Russia into backing down, and that is possible, there is zero chance that Iran will back down.

At least six generals from the elite Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps have been killed in Syria since 2013, according to an official of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency, who requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue....
Experts say the deaths of so many senior officers in Syria underscore the Iranian commitment to preserving Assad’s government in a “rump” Syria that includes most of the country’s major cities and the coastal province of Latakia, the traditional center of Assad’s religious sect, the Alawites.
It also is a reflection of the difference between Iran’s fighting tactics and those of Western militaries, whose senior officers usually direct operations from heavily protected command centers far in the rear.

To understand Iran's depth of commitment in Syria, consider Aleppo. Our media is telling us about Russian bombs, but says little about the troops on the ground.

As deadly airstrikes pounded Aleppo, Syria over the weekend, a major foreign ground force was also converging on the region. As many as 3,000 Iranian-backed fighters have arrived in Aleppo supporting the Syrian regime in its fight to crush the rebellion, two U.S. officials confirm to Fox News.
There are an estimated 250,000 Syrian civilians trapped in Aleppo facing an onslaught of Russian and Syrian bombs, according to reports. The Iranian-backed Shiite militias include fighters from neighboring Iraq as well as Afghanistan, officials say. Many of those fighters had already been in Syria but recently descended on Aleppo.

Iran has lost hundreds of Qud soldiers, including generals, thousands of proxy soldiers from Lebanon and Iraq, and billions of dollars that they couldn't afford to spend in order to prop up the Assad regime.
Iran started sending thousands of their own soldiers to Syria to fight four years ago (in response to Washington arming the Sunni rebels), and they doubled down on their support this year.
Iran's commitment to Syria dwarfs Russia's.

Iran is ALL IN for Assad. They not only won't back down, they can't back down. The fate of the Iranian regime rests on the fate of Assad, and that means they will do whatever it takes to keep him in place, including risking war with us.

So while the politicians and news media focus on whether Moscow will back down or not, consider if Moscow does allow us to invade Syria. How will Iran react?

Velayati, who is an adviser to Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, said the US has suffered a defeat in military campaigns both in Afghanistan and Iraq and a third adventure, in Syria, would hand Washington its third defeat — a more stinging one.

“If the Americans take military action in Syria, it will be a suicidal action; and their third [military] defeat in the region after Afghanistan and Iraq will be a stronger defeat.”

To be fair, most Americans are not aware that we are losing in Afghanistan. Nor do Americans realize that we left Iraq in 2011 with our enemies unconquered.
Now think about what it would be like being in a ground war with a nation three times the size of Iraq.

Wait, you say. Who says it will be a ground war? Why can't we just bomb them?
The answer is simple: Obama deployed 5,000 American troops to Iraq. It already is a ground war.

Aha! You say. That's Iraq, not Iran or Syria.
The answer to that statement lies in the article above about the government forces advancing on Aleppo. "The Iranian-backed Shiite militias include fighters from neighboring Iraq".
Yes, those very same Shiite militias we are working with to defeat ISIS in Iraq, the exact same insurgent groups that killed hundreds of American soldiers during the occupation of Iraq, we would have to bomb in Syria.
How do you think they would feel about that in Iraq? Do you think they'll be forgiving and understanding?

Factions of Iraq's Popular Mobilization Units (PMU) are threatening to attack US troops that participate in the battle to liberate Mosul from the Islamic State (IS), but the Iraqi government hopes to smooth things over.
However, many are not convinced. Hassan al-Kaabi, a member of the PMU backing up the Iraqi government forces, rejects the presence of US troops in the battle for Mosul and believes they are not keen to help Iraqis fight terrorism.
“I will fight them wherever they are," he told Al-Monitor. "They are an occupation force that pretends to be assisting us."
Kaabi joined the PMU on June 14, 2014, one day after Shiite cleric Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani issued a fatwa calling for the PMU's formation. Kaabi said, “Iraqis are capable of liberating their cities on their own." He is but one of the thousands of PMU fighters who think the presence of US troops does not serve the interests of the Iraqi people.
Late last month, PMU leader Rayan al-Kaldani issued a threat, saying, “The PMU will be dealing with any illegitimate and foreign forces in Mosul the way it deals with the gangs of the Islamic State."

I sense a "Blackhawk Down" moment in our near future.