Outgoing CIA Deputy Leader Michael Morrell raised more than a few eyebrows this weekend when in an interview he declared Syria to be the “top current threat to US national security,” a spot usually reserved for someplace the US is directly militarily involved in.
The declaration is even more significant the deeper you get into Morrell’s comments, as he makes clear exactly what about Syria the CIA sees as a threat, saying the risk is that the Assad government “collapses and the country becomes al-Qaeda’s new haven.”
That’s a problematic admission for a US official to make, even one that is heading into retirement, because the US has made the collapse of the Assad government it’s stated goal since the nation’s civil war began.
Indeed, US policy toward Syria is centering on making the threat even greater, as the administration is poised to start arming rebel fighters who are openly cooperating with al-Qaeda to further their goal of ousting Assad, and setting up the exact Sunni-dominated Islamist government the CIA fears.
Morrell warned that a collapse of the Assad government had a similar risk for weapons proliferation as the NATO-imposed regime change in Libya did, and that violence was likely to spill-over into Lebanon, Jordan and Iraq. Of course the war is already spilling over to some extent in each of these cases, but it seems clear it will only get worse.
US government ideas in orchestrating-starting a war, creating a proxy war, being directly involved in a war never meant to resulting in peace or democracy, look at Iraq, look at Afghanistan, look at Libya. they will make it worse but never better, the only way for USA government to make it better is by not participating and conducting a third party wars, as in Libya or Syria which was and is Saudis, UAE, Turkey, Jihadists, the barbarians the savages wars. Hence, US has an economic and militaristic-geopolitical interests. 1-to protect Saudis and UAE from Arabian peninsula to North Africa. 2-to safeguard Israel and to surround Russia from where ever they can, to protect their "interests," US government actually get paid to create wars, in that regard the US war machinery is the one that get paid when they sale their product to Saudis and UAE by billions of dollars.
Apostrophes , Jason.
I find that the US is remarkably slow in delivering arms to the rebels. It could be that they're dragging their feet. That maybe they want to keep their ties to the rebels intact but don't really want to give them too much. I think the big decision now is not whether they want to remove Assad. That plan has been abandoned. The question now is to what extent they want to feed the conflict alive and keep Assad tied down. Even if Assad doesn't fall that doesn't stop the instability from spreading. Problem with that kind of decisions is, you feel you can always postpone them.
I think, slowly, very slowly, they are getting it!
And it shows that you at antiwar.com and me were right all the time,
W9
The alarmists always make it sound like "rogue countries" are crawling up our legs caterpillar style trying to steal, or mangle our privates any minute, now.
USG doesn't care about the people of these countries. It just wants to create a scenario where it has the chance to bring about an obedient proxy regime so the US can control Mid East resources.
If the USG cared about people, why would it be best friends with Saudi and Bahrain dictators?
The US policies in the middle east is always to make things worse so as to please the Saudis and Israel.Why is this general about to retire telling us now what we already know?
What is this double talk? The CIA created al Qaeda and still control it. They can stop it tomorrow – just stop the money. But the reality is that the US needs a credible opposition to the legitimate (socialist) Syrian govt. And there's always the old story: arms corporations' continuing profits.
Trite, tawdry, banal statements from cowards masquerading as officials of authority.
Civil war? 1. French exFM Roland Dumas recently stated Brit Intel told them 4 years ago they were starting the the move to get rid of Dr Assad. 2. Approx 90% are foreign fighters and come from 29 nations. 3. Qatar has already spent 3B$ for the invasion. Plan is/was to put a pipeline under Syria to take gas to Europe. 4. 70% support Dr Assad, 20% dunno, 10% oppose, (nato stats).
Very weak essay. Sorry.
Prolonging the conflict also serves US interests. Holding Iraq became so much easier as the fighters there are going in droves to be culled in Syria. Once both sides tire and are reduced a decetrilized Syria seems to be the outcome. In recent days the Kurds have expressed their desire and today the Druze, both, incidently with the rebel Sunnis atrocitities perpetrated on them serving as the catalyst. Might be a signal from the US that their dogs is reaching expiry.
The president is not listening to CIA. The last time this happened in a big way we went to Iraq.and it cost trillions.
I guess presidents think they know more than profesionals