In backing the rebels in the early part of the Syrian Civil War, the US was rather cynically engaging in a proxy war against Russia, angling for regime change in Russia’s main Mediterranean ally, and the host of their lone Mediterranean base.
Syria’s been a source of tension ever since between the two countries, but as America’s direct ground involvement in Syria increasingly involves attacking government targets, the risk of direct military conflict between the US and Russia, with Syria as the backdrop, is growing precipitously.
US military involvement in Syria long was limited to attacks against ISIS targets, with the occasional attack against al-Qaeda forces in the Syrian northwest. Despite US assurances that strikes a few months ago against a Shi’ite militia in the country’s southeast were a one-time deal, those strikes have grown increasingly common.
It’s not just the Shi’ite militias, which are allied with the Syrian government, being targeted anymore. Twice in recent weeks US warplanes have shot down a pair of drones, which are believed to be of Iranian manufacture, and over the weekend, shot down a Syrian Su-22 bomber within Syrian airspace.
The US is presenting the shoot-down of the Syrian plane as “collective self-defense” to protect the Kurds, but the pretext under which the Pentagon justifies such an attack is very much beside the point. Attacking a Syrian military target inside Syria eliminated the disconnect between forces the US is targeting, and forces Russia’s military are directly allied with.
That’s a big problem, and Russia felt obliged, the day after that incident, to warn that US warplanes operating in much of Syria would be treated as hostile military targets by their substantial air defense units inside Syria.
That warning appears to have been ignored by the US, which shot down another drone in the area Russia warned them against entering. The US appears to believe they are calling Russia’s bluff, but every such incident raises the risk of Russia retaliating, and with the US having already directly targeted Syria’s military once, another move against them especially would risk provoking a Russian reaction, which could quickly spiral out of control.
The most dangerous of all this and the worst for Syria is the US building a base there, which I assume is utterly illegal without the invitation of Syria.
Illegality is what emperor Trump and his unelected National Security State says it is. Of course it is absolutely illegal under international law let alone U.S. laws and Assad has every right to either verbally order the U.S. to vacate his country or physically remove them. Either way the U.S. is wrong and Assad has the legal backing.
The base was there before Trump was there. This is not about Trump. It is about our war run wild. Hillary meant to do the same, per her intended SecDef.
The site of the US base is just barely west of the Euphrates in Tabqah near Lake Assad. If the US says this is where they will partition Syria, Syria is getting smaller than we thought. http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/government/war/syria_-_libya/news.php?q=1498058892
america is a rogue psychopath with every characteristic of a psychopath on steroids,armed to the teeth…
“Attacking a Syrian military target inside Syria” was done because the US now has a base inside Syria, and forces spread over much of Syria. That they are special forces instead of battalions of infantry does not change the basic fact.
““collective self-defense” to protect the Kurds”
What a load of tripe. The Shiites and the Kurds have only had a handful of minor squabbles in Syria and have collaborated more often than not. The US Army is using the Kurds as human shields in a game of world war chicken that could easily take a turn for the apocalyptic. The Kurds should frag their Yankee handlers before they get us all killed.
The Kurds made a deal with Assad early on in the war. It was autonomy for keeping the rebels out.
Did the US promise more? Did the Kurds believe that?
That’s an excellent question. I wish I knew the answer. The Kurds definitely had reason to be skeptical of Assad’s promises or at least his ability to follow through with them with an American target on his head. But, as I’ve said here before, they have even less reason to trust Uncle Sam and no reason not to trust Russia.
It goes to show that Russia is not as trigger happy as the Americans. Russia acts responsibly in an extremely restraint way. But Russia has to act sometime to US continued provocations unless it looses face to their allies.
Did Mr. Ditz overlook the AIPAC role in US intervention in Syria?
I think Russia has bent over backwards to be on the right and friendly side in Ukraine and now Syria . I don’t think Putin is bluffing with the kind of equipment he sent to Syria . United States ran a test today to see if they could shoot down one of our own missiles . We failed to get it today . We need to invite Russia to fire one of their best missiles to see if we can shoot their missiles down too . Just a friendly little test so that we might know what we could be going up against before we shoot down to many more of Syria’s planes down `. Putin will have to respond or loose face if he doesn’t try to stop us . I really don’t see how the United States thinks they have a right to shoot Syria’s planes flying over Syria . Trump said he thought it was good Russia was fighting terrorists in Syria and he thought he would be friends with Putin .So why does he listen to Putin’s warning .