While the US is still nominally fighting a war against ISIS, officials seem to have shifted their narrative more or less entirely to opposing the Syrian government since Russia joined the war on their side, and US officials seem a little too happy about ISIS killing a top Iranian general on Friday.
US officials are presenting the death of Gen. Hossein Hamedani as a “psychological blow” to the Syrian government and its supporters, suggesting that it is a major setback in the ongoing war, and a major step toward regime change, a US policy goal.
Russia’s involvement in the war appears to have shifted US priorities greatly on Syria, it seems, and officials seem more interested in seeing Russia fail, even if it means, by extension, increased ISIS power over a country they already control the majority of.
Officials and analysts suggested the general’s death was a step toward regime change, proving the “desperation” of the Syrian government several years into the civil war.
Gen. Hamedani was killed during ISIS’ recent offensives in Aleppo, where he was advising Syrian forces. ISIS has gained territory along the outskirts of Aleppo city itself in recent days, though a Russian airstrike destroyed a major ISIS weapons depot in the province.
This is a question that everyone has to contemplate, what gives the US the right to dictate who heads other nations. Its no business of the US and they should butt out. No one questions this illegal stance of bringing about regime change. Many people may disagree with Robert Mugabe (Zimbabwe) of even David Cameron (Britain). Would anyone accept public discourse on how to arm terrorist groups in Britain to overthrow his government, or active steps to train and arm personnel to bring about armed insurrection. WHat gives them the right to speak in this way about other countries. This "Asad must go" mantra is spoken so openly as if it is a perfectly normal and legal thing to do. WHy is the press so silent on this. The Syrians must sort out their own affairs, others must butt out. Those who advocate terrorism (USA, Britain, EU) really need to be charged before a court, and if none has jurisdiction, then one has to be formed to bring these terrorists to justice. This is a legal process that has to take place at international level. The current system has broken down and the "law" is now no longer respected, We need a change in how we apply a "rule of law"., or accept that this principle no longer applies and what we have is the dictim "might is right", the principle that usually applies when the most powerful has embraced "the dark side". The rule of law is meant to protect the weak against the powerful, never expect the powerful to willingly accept the imposition of any restraint upon itself. MAD (mutual assured destruction) is not the way to prevent wars and destruction, it is the elimination of all weapons other than those used for personal self defence that must be eliminated. That is how we bring about peace. People will stop fighting when they run out of weapons, not by providing them with more weapons.
I think what they may be referring to is more the extent of Iranian involvement. Everyone tended to assume that with the nuclear pact with the US still in the air, Iran would keep a low profile in Syria. That there was an Iranian general to kill in Syria at all is news in itself. Of course, the new president might have sent Revolutionary Guards into Syria precisely so as to get them out of Iran.
I can't understand how this would be considered a step toward regime change; if anything, it would result in bigger support of Iran's military presence in Syria between Iranians, which you can easily see in the news and reactions of Revolutionary Guards commanders.
Our leadership is pure evil.Backing the (alleged) terrorists who killed 3000 of our citizens,might be the most disgusting act ever.
It leads to just who was behind that day that changed everything,and which has benefited only one nation,our bane,Israel.
And this website (antiwar.com) believes 911 was not an inside job. Wow!
"And this website (antiwar.com) believes 911 was not an inside job."
Incorrect. Different people who work at Antiwar.com have different beliefs on the details of 911. Antiwar.com itself has no position on the matter.
As for myself, I'm perfectly willing to believe that 911 was an inside job if any evidence for the theory is ever presented.
This is going to be a long war.
The US has now gone back to sleeping with Al- Qaeda….
Afghanistan all over again.
At least this General Gen. Hamedani puts himself on the frontlines unlike our coward generals who sit in air condition offices counting down the days to retirement and hiring on with a merchant of death corporation.