A temporary ceasefire of sorts is in place in Syria, but the general trend of the civil war in the nation is toward escalation, sectarian violence and spillover into neighboring countries.
It was a war the Obama Administration seemed to be itching for, egging on the various rebel factions from the beginning. Now, as it escalates, the situation seems to be dramatically deleterious for US interests in the region.
Rebel defectors from Syria’s military are one thing, but increasingly the rebellion is filled with al-Qaeda-styled Islamists, which are getting stronger and better armed all the time. Fighting has spread into Turkey, Lebanon, and Jordan, threatening to destabilize US allies.
The spillover is now threatening the whole region, with the US-backed goal of “safe zones” for the rebels in northern Syria threatening to turn into safe-havens for terrorists, and a regime change that the administration was once salivating over now threatens to turn Syria into a Salafist theocracy.
The Islamization of the world is the us agenda, if you think for a moment that Obama or Hillary Clinton think about a functioning democracy,,, think again, and if you think that Islam will bring a social functioning democracy to any societies, then think again. This administration is defending tyranny and dictatorial regimes and whatever then a social justice or a functioning social economic and political system working for people, the latest, is turkey, a new apartheid regime, a religious NATO bounded and salve to Saudi and Germany in Middle East.
Why can't Islam exist within a functioning democracy?
Democracy is as wide as universe, Religious in its from and shape is a framed idea based on rule of religious laws, religious laws are based on delusion which, sooner pr later, will be against democracy and peoples rights, look at Libya, Look at Saudi Arabia and other religious new formed systems whom are replaced by the West and for the West wanting to dominate the world economy. However, religious can exist within a Functioning Democracy only when is not involved in social political or social economic terms of a Functioning Democracy, now by religious having all that economical influence both in EU and US is the opposite of the matter, which answers the question why. Look, Saudis own England and some other European countries, so is Vatican economic influence. Saudis Kingdom in US they have doubled their influence since Obama took office, in Europe the entities of religious terrorism crawling all over and in Germany the Turkish airline, among other, importing them to Istanbul and then to Syria. Syria is one of those countries in Middle east wants to continue to stand as independent, so is Iran and some other.., if thats not answer your question then let the argument be.
And who says that this is not precisely what was intended. Having "safe" allies like Jordan shaken up a bit, is not a bad thing. They have become too accustomed to fat US contracts during the "war" in Iraq. Letting them know that they cannot sit comfy on the sideline, and forcing them to have some "skin" in the game.
Destabilizing Lebanon? Anything that would make it possible to accuse Hezbollah for, is more then desirable. As for Turkey, how quickly we forget. Turkey was not that long time ago described as a country turned to the East, and not playing according to NATO rules. NATO has moved into Turkey for the sake of "helping" and "leading from behind", making Turkey suffer the losses from the influx of refugees. loss to the economy and restive Kurds. So what if IN THE LONG RUN this may be very bad for US? The kind of people in charge think only of themselves. Their motto is, in the long run, we will all be dead!
This is a silly comment. Only fools believe the overwhelmingly Christian, officially secular US seeks to "Islamize" anything. The "US agenda" in this case is to use Sunnis against Shiites, especially if we are talking about a Shiite run, albeit secular, government that is allied to Iran. The Assads are Alawites, which is a branch of Shia Islam. This policy started with the so-called "surge" in Iraq, in reality a surge of money paid to Iraqi Sunni rebels, including some Al Qaeda affiliates. When the so-called "Arab Spring" brought down secular regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, it was determined by the State Dept. and various intelligence agencies, to do a "Sunni turn," even if that meant allying themselves with Salafists to do so. Libya was the first victim, as well as the first scene of unintended "blowback" from this policy. The only place US policy is helping to "Islamize" are those parts of the world that are already Islamic, and not for Islamic purposes.
"with the US-backed goal of “safe zones” for the rebels in northern Syria threatening to turn into safe-havens for terrorists, and a regime change that the administration was once salivating over now threatens to turn Syria into a Salafist theocracy."
That is not new or unexpected. The "safe zones" were always sanctuaries for US backed rebels, those rebels always used and were intended to use terrorist methods, and the alternative to secular Baathists was always understood to be sectarian, and we turned to the same guys who funded and ran the Taliban to do this.
It's the people who sacrifice their children for religion against the people who sacrifice their children for money. And we should take sides?
The U.S. should be running courses at Harvard in 'Achieving 'Foreign Policy Stuff Ups'.
The U.S. is a world leader in this area, bar none!
The shot callers in the US couldn't care less about whether "Al Qaeda" is involved in Syria. Maybe the lower level grunts do, but they aren't important to US war aims. Does anyone really believe that the shot callers didn't know that Islamists would rush to take part in the Syrian insurgency from Day One? Really? So why should we believe they care now?
Obama is merely waiting for the election to be over to resume egging on the insurgency and eventually starting a bombing campaign against Syria, so that Israel can use that chaos to "justify" attacking Hizballah in Lebanon. Once both Syria and Hizballah have been degraded sufficiently to remove them as effective actors in an Iran war, Obama (or Romney, it doesn't matter, they both take their orders from the same place) will begin the final push for an Iran war.