The US has put itself in a difficult position, having for days hyped the idea that they need to expand the current Iraq air war into neighboring Syria, but now facing the difficulty of Syria’s government having a mind of its own.
The Assad government, which only a year ago the US was preparing to invade Syria to remove, has said they welcome any coordination with the US on their ongoing war with ISIS.
The problem is, they want that coordination to all be on the up-and-up, and the foreign ministry has said they would not accept unilateral US attacks outside of a coordination deal, and would view them as an act of aggression.
That’s the standard the US has set for its intervention in Iraq, portraying the support of the Maliki government as proof they aren’t the aggressors in the war. Making a public spectacle of themselves with a rapprochement with Assad, however, isn’t something officials are prepared to do.
The US faced this problem on a smaller scale going into Iraq this time, as Iran was already backing the Iraqi government, and the US has refused to coordinate with Iran, even though they both have the exact same agenda, simply on the grounds that Iran is an official “enemy.”
The problem in Syria is dramatically bigger, as the US expansion of the war into Syria is going to inevitably require a reckoning with the Assad government, and even though rapprochement would give the US everything it wants, including an Iraq-style pretext to intervene in aid of the existing government, the embarrassment that would come from changing their official tone on Syria means they’re going to need to find another excuse.
In the meantime, the US will continue to secretly send targeting intelligence to the Assad government to aid it in the ISIS war, and continue to do everything in making itself an Assad ally, short of publicly admitting it.
"The US is trapped in the mistakes of its own policy" according to the guest writer today at Democracy Now.
For USG is no longer easy to do anything, USG is no longer functioning as a government united by a principals in democracy or otherwise. USGoverning system by lacking a ideology has created a problem beyond their imagination, in one hand they have created the stat of ISIS using them for changing regimes of their choice, in the other their new enemy is Saudis and UAE, those who pays, supports and are the enemy of any kind of democracy which therefore they support ISIS. They also give money to Palestinians while cooperating with Israel in other issues like ISIS, assuring Israel that ISIS is only for changing the Syrian and dividing Iraq according to Joe bide theory.
Saudis/UAE, They have learned from USG and EU modernized version of introducing their falsified democracy's, where in one hand they are worried about losing their economical interests in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Iran and etc, but in the other they are helping Israel to murder more of Palestinians.
There is no other way for USG and EU but to recognize their biggest mistake, a politics of idiocy presented by those, from WH to state department and etc, wanting to change Syrian, Iraqi, Iranian, Lebanese governing systems, what they should be engaging themselves is to cooperate in full to destroy the enemy of mankind, the ISIS.
This puts Obama in another pickle: either he cooperates with Assad, thus undermining the effort to overthrow Assad, or he doesn't, risking war with Syria. Of course, if Obama INTENDS to have a war with Syria – as I've been saying all along – then it's a no-brainer: ignore Assad and do unilateral airstrikes.
The question then is: will Assad challenge the US in the air? I suspect not since he's been ignoring Israel's air strikes for the same reason: not to give the US or Israel a reason to attack in force.
So that puts Assad in the same pickle as Obama…challenge the US in the air and go to war with the US, or ignore the unilateral airstrikes and lose face in Syria as well as allowing the US to do whatever they want in his airspace.
Bottom line: This is still a deliberate effort by Obama to get a Syria war started, so Israel can then cross Syrian territory to attack Hizballah in the Bekaa Valley without worrying about the Syrian military in their rear. All of which is the prelude to Israel starting a war with Iran.
> ignore Assad and do unilateral airstrikes
An interesting problem, as these were classed under "verboten" the last time Congress was asked.
Or am I mistaken.
THE PRETZEL OF MY POLICY, THIS WOUND IT WILL NOT HEAL!
Do you really think this will stop the warmongers in DC and Is ra hell?
If it wasn't for "religious differences" and "saving face politics" there would've been little need for many the wars that have occurred over the aeons. If ISIS is such the big bad boogeyman as the USG has portrayed lately – and they've been pushing this boogeyman meme very hard indeed – then who gives a fark about past Syrian relations. Oh, wait…Jerusalem doesn't want rapprochement with Assad to happen…sorry, nevermind.
Damn right, if Obama decided to coordinate a deal with Assad, by God he is going to have to explain to Benjamin Netanyahu and AIPAC his reasons for doing so…..I think he is going in without the approval of Assad.
Hahhaahahahahaha
But the USA doesn’t align with “brutal dictators”! This will be the first time in history!
Somewhat agreed-on humanitarian convoy into Ukraine = Aggression!!
Not agreed-on airstrikes into Syria = Not Aggression!!
The rainbow-colored light is shining out of Obama's ass.
"Oh what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."
Lots of ongoing deception, and our web gets tangly-er and tangly-er.
This entire conflict/shuffle in the Middle East reminds me of a Kid's game where each player is convinced that he or she is winning, and along comes the family dog, and flips the board over. Good Boy, Duke !