The Real Reason Behind the Attack on Syria
To be sure, we don't really know all the reasons why the US military spent over $150 million to damage three buildings in Syria. What we are learning is some of the latest phony justifications and the evolving story-line behind the continuing US presence in Syria.
The US will not pull its troops out of Syria until Washington's goals are accomplished, Nikki Haley, the US ambassador to the UN, said.
According to Haley, the three aims for the US are ensuring chemical weapons are not used in any way that poses a risk to US interests; Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL, also known as ISIS) is defeated; and there is a good vantage point to watch what Iran is doing.
Watching the reasons for US involvement shift faster than desert sands in a stiff breeze is sickeningly fascinating. Let's sanity check those claimed reasons:
- If Assad is indeed using chemical weapons against civilians (odd that no rebels were harmed in the latest alleged devastating chemical weapons attack), why are dead Syrian children suddenly a vital US interest? What about the dead children in Iraq, Yemen, Libya, etc?
- IS wasn't defeated because we don't want to defeat them. We gave them safe passage to northern Syria so we could keep the head-choppers on our payroll for further use as needed.
- Syria isn't the best place to watch Iran from -- Iraq and Afghanistan are. But we're on the path to losing our foothold in both of those countries
There's also a fourth reason we're staying in Syria: The French made us do it.
Also on Sunday, French President Emmanuel Macron said he had convinced Trump to maintain troops in Syria.
"We convinced him it was necessary to remain there. We have complete international legitimacy to act in this framework," Macron said in an interview broadcast by BFM TV, RMC radio and Mediapart online news.
What a crazy world we live in.