Are we about to start a proxy war against Iran in Syria?

bases.png

When I wrote this essay a few days ago, I was honestly puzzled why we had bombed the Iranian militias.
Today's news cleared up that mystery.

Donald Trump has blamed Iran for supporting and aiding "unspeakable crimes" in Syria under its leader Bashar al-Assad.
Mr Trump, during his speech on combating violent extremism in Saudi Arabia, did not mention Syria's alliance with Russia to carry out air strikes.
Near the end of his speech in Riyadh about forging peace, he argued that Iran had provided Syria with "safe harbour, financial backing and the social standing needed for recruitment [of terrorists]".
"From Lebanon to Iraq and Yemen, Iran funds, arms and trains terrorists, militias and other extremist groups that spread destruction and chaos across the region," he continued.
"For decades Iran has fuelled the fires of sectarian conflict and terror; it’s a government that speaks openly of mass murder, vowing the destruction of Israel, death to America, and ruin for many leaders and nations in this very room.

Germany chimed in with a similar message.
And just in case you weren't seeing a pattern, the Democratic Party mouthpiece, Washington Post, says it's time for a proxy war against Iran.

If successful, the Iranian campaign would drastically reshape the regional security situation, harm the fight against the Islamic State in the nearby city of Deir al-Zour and directly undermine U.S. efforts to train and equip an indigenous Sunni Arab fighting force, which is essential to establishing long-term stability.
In short, it’s a fight that the United States cannot and should not avoid. It’s also an opportunity for Trump to accomplish what his administration says it wants to do in the Middle East: Push back against Iranian aggression and expansionism.
...
Two Syrian rebel groups opened up a front against the Iranian-backed forces about two weeks ago, in response to the Iranian campaign, the rebel leader said. One of them is working directly with the U.S. military. The other is supported by the military operations center led by the CIA and allies in Jordan.
Even absent public acknowledgment from Washington, the rebel groups believe they have tacit support from the United States to prevent Iran and the regime from taking over the area. That belief is uniting rebel groups on the ground, who have long wanted to fight Iran and the regime, in addition to the Islamic State.
Those who support the Syrian opposition in Washington are also noticing a shift in the U.S. approach toward confronting Iran in Syria...
“The United States has two major adversaries in Syria, that is Iran and ISIS. Both represent huge risks to U.S. national security and interests in the region,” said Mouaz Moustafa, executive director of the Syrian Emergency Task Force.
The battle for Syria’s south is on, and the Trump team must decide if the United States will play a decisive role. Trump could fulfill his promises to thwart Iran and bring greater stability to Syria — if he acts fast.

Just to be clear:
If it wasn't for Iran, ISIS would have conquered Iraq, and al-Qaeda/ISIS would have taken Syria.

iran.jpg

Tags: 
Share
up
0 users have voted.

Comments

dervish's picture

in DC to continue with the original plan, that is, to sponsor Sunni terrorist groups to oppose and possibly overthrow Assad and his allies. The excesses of ISIS and Nusra were setbacks, and DC has to at least pretend to oppose and fight ISIS, but in the larger picture, both groups are being re-packaged as something new and improved.

Nothing has changed.

Meanwhile here are photos of starving children in Yemen, the result of Saudi Arabia's ruthless blockade. They say Iran is the terrorist? Apparently the fundamental crime that these children are guilty of is being born into the wrong sect of Islam.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

Let's help KSA against Iran.

up
0 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

citing a Pentagon press briefing thinks the al-Tanf bombing was most likely a mistake:

The recent unprovoked and illegal U.S. air attack on a Syrian Army contingent moving towards the al-Tanf border station with Iraq was probably a local decision taken by an over-eager U.S. commander on the ground. Dunford said:

Our commanders on the ground felt like they were threatened at that point. And their rules of engagement allow them to do that.

We've gone back and -- and -- and had a conversation at every level now to ensure that those kinds of incidents don't take place again. Last night, I -- I made a commitment that they wouldn't happen again if our forces weren't threatened. And everybody understands what the rules are. So, that's what's going to prevent it in the future.

As I understand this Dunford means: "Our people on the ground screwed up and were emphatically told not to do such again."

Food for thought.

Note: originally posted on previous thread as well. Meant to post here.

up
0 users have voted.

The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?

TheOtherMaven's picture

@Not Henry Kissinger
Sounds JUST like our trigger-happy over-militarized cops, doesn't it? "I felt threatened by the suspect, so--" BLAM BLAM BLAM!

Couldn't be the overall system and mind-set that's at fault, could it? Naaaah.... /snark

up
0 users have voted.

There is no justice. There can be no peace.

@Not Henry Kissinger I read Sun Tzu and his commentators decades before he became some seer for corporate politics. There is a story of an over-eager front line soldier who disregarded orders and attacked prematurely and killed dozens upon dozens of the enemy. He returned thinking it would be to great acclaim, and instead was executed for disobeying orders.

It is bad enough that both the Pentagon and CIA are determining foreign policy, and now some individual general takes it upon hiself own to implement his own foreign policy....

up
0 users have voted.
Not Henry Kissinger's picture

@MrWebster now some individual general takes it upon hiself own to implement his own foreign policy....

to condemn the whole program because of a single slip up.

up
0 users have voted.

The current working assumption appears to be that our Shroedinger's Cat system is still alive. But what if we all suspect it's not, and the real problem is we just can't bring ourselves to open the box?

dervish's picture

@MrWebster because it was mentioned in a book by James Clavell, years ago.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

@dervish I took up studying Chinese martial arts (it was rare in those days), and was told that Sun Tzu was supposedly influential on several martial styles, particularly on Eagle Claw's founder. It was of course more legend than true, but looked him up and found his only English translation with about an inch of dust on the book. Supposedly North Vietnamese generals were very versed in his teachings.

up
0 users have voted.
dervish's picture

@MrWebster

Supposedly North Vietnamese generals were very versed in his teachings.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

CB's picture

up
0 users have voted.

A published State policy paper published under Clinton pretty much gave away the reason for destroying Syria and Assad: to disrupt the linkage of Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. Known as the Shia Crescent. All for the protection of Israel. With Russia entering the fray, Syria was prevented from falling into the hands of Sunni ISIS, and Assad is more entrenched with the help of Hezbollah and Iran forces.

For the neocons, something must be done. And who knows what options from hell they will think of. US invades under excuse of rooting out ISIS, and then moving onto Damascus? Given Trump's showman's personality for the big event, maybe attacking Iran directly? Actually use some ill fated invasion force of Sunni NATO?

Whatever happens, something will happen, and it will be for no good and a lot of innocent people will die.

up
0 users have voted.
dervish's picture

@MrWebster anyhow. They have given periodic aid to Gazans and other Palestinians, and they ate the IDF's lunch in the 2006 Israeli invasion of Lebanon. That's about the extent of their crimes.

ISIS is about 4 orders of magnitude worse.

up
0 users have voted.

"Obama promised transparency, but Assange is the one who brought it."

Thank you so very, very much for this must-read essay!

up
0 users have voted.

Psychopathy is not a political position, whether labeled 'conservatism', 'centrism' or 'left'.

A tin labeled 'coffee' may be a can of worms or pathology identified by a lack of empathy/willingness to harm others to achieve personal desires.