In a dramatic change in policy that has gone largely unappreciated, the Obama Administration has recently come out in favor of both the UN effort to negotiate a ceasefire in Aleppo and the Russian effort to resume peace talks between Syria and secular rebels.
Giving support to either measure is a shift, as the US has long spurned diplomatic efforts in Syria on the grounds that only a full-scale regime change was acceptable to them. They have long pressed the pro-US rebels not to join such talks.
But getting behind the Russian talks as well is nothing short of shocking, as the US often spurns Russian peace overtures, even if they are nominally reflective of US policy, just to spite Russia.
Though Secretary of State John Kerry presented the move as a call for Assad to “put people first,” the shift really suggests the US is abandoning the idea, at least in the near-term, of ousting the Assad government militarily. With ISIS holding a growing portion of the country, they are now the priority, and the administration is clearly keen to get various other rebel factions to focus on ISIS instead of on Assad.
And yet we see Israel wiping out a convey of Hezbollah's top anti-ISIS combat leadership. Amazing, but all too predictable.
The Israelis were forced to attack; they heard a rumor that peace might break out.
The Mideast — and to a lesser extent the entire Muslim world — is on fire. The IS is the result, and I suspect, here to stay. The US won't put "boots on the ground" in significant numbers until there is a Republican president, and even then the outcome will be the same as Afghanistan 1 and Iraq 2: defeat and humiliation spun as "victory", and fooling no one.
The Sunnis, evicted by GB from their dominant position in Iraq, found themselves utterly disenfranchised and squeezed between a Shia-dominated Alawite Syria and a newly-Shia-dominated Iraq. This was clearly an intolerable situation for the Sunnis after four hundred years of dominance. The US presence tamped down their immediate resistance, but once the US bailed, the Sunnis were back in the insurgency business, the IS being the result.
The Zionists/Israelis are short-term smart and in conventional militarily terms quite capable. Long-term however they are immensely stupid. Witness the Jews' five-thousand year record of the same mistake repeated again and again resulting in the same catastrophic consequences from the Egyptian holocaust to the N*zi holocaust. They managed to prevail in 1948 because post-Holocaust they had the world's sympathy and the Arab leadership was neither prepared nor willing to pay the price to defeat them. But now the Holocaust is "ancient history", and Zionist barbarism towards the Palestinians has exhausted any Holocaust sympathy and turned the world against them, with the exception of those Western countries dominated by Jewish influence. In that context, siding with the IS against Hezbollah is nothing short of suicidal.
The IS may choose to establish their caliphate by going after the corrupt house of Saud — witness the proposed but as yet un-built new and ridiculous Saudi Maginot Line. Alternatively, they may choose to go after Israel first, their "heroism" garnering the enthusiastic support of the billion and a half strong Muslim world, while the rest of the world turns its back. Then the "Israel problem" will come to an end, and diaspora Jewry will recommence with their contribution to the progress of civilization.
Interesting times indeed.
For a person who obviously has been paying attention, I find it baffling to hear you say that holocaust sympathy has been exhausted. That would be a very positive development which we haven't seen yet in the US and are sadly not likely to see for a long time.
I stand corrected. I overstated. And no doubt a bit of wishful thinking. That said, distance in time from the event means that newer generations won't/don't relate to "ancient history" as strongly as older generations. Plus Israeli/Zionist brutality, intransigence toward the legitimate rights of the Palestinians, Zionist subversive influence worldwide — especially AIPAC in the US, and clear indifference to world opinion, and the breaking by the internet of the Zionist propaganda dominance tend to counterbalance if not overwhelm what remains of Holocaust sympathy.
And of course Holocaust sympathy varies from place to place and culture to culture.
I wonder how long it will take McCrazy and Grahamcrackers to come unglued? I mean, the USG willingly consorting with the perceived (by them) worst enemy the US has.
Kick morality into the equation — And see how things become clear as day
For the Islamic State is less brutal then Israel, Saudi Arabia and all the other Western backed dictatorships that we support. So what if the Islamic state prevents women from using legalized pornography to enslave men, so what if the deadly force of divorce court is abolished preventing a matriarch ruled society from having full force and effect?
I mean, before we call a nation criminal, should it not be guilty of more then just reducing our sensuous pleasure?