meanwhile.....keeping one's eye on the ball.......that nuclear threshold that Iran must not cross gets ever more near, daily.... (THAT is the center of this game).....and is absolutely bound to drag all into the inevitable maelstrom.
The American connection might heat up. Recall the anguish about Tulsi Gabbard being nominated as DNI is a meeting she had with Assad back in 2017? Is there a more recent issue that those against Gabbard's nomination may use to deny her appointment? And if she does get appointed one of her immediate duties is to prepare the daily President's intel brief. Will she influence Trump one way or the other? This could all get interesting.
My starting date is 9/11 not 02/24 or 10/07 and I can say with some confidence that no one predicted the world of 2024/5 while we were counting hanging chads and butterfly ballots in Florida in 2000.
At that time, very serious people were talking about the end of history and the triumph of capitalism and liberal democracy under the aegis of a Pax Americana. Future presidencies would alternate between the Bush and Clinton families.
Unfortunately, bin Laden, Putin, Xi and others didn't see things our way.
So, what is to be done before we reach that moment when there is no turning back like the day the Austrians began shelling Belgrade in 1914? (That kind of moment could happen at any time.)
I suggest a meeting between Trump, Putin and Xi to lay out each nation's interests and reach an accommodation. (My model is the meeting between Disraeli and Bismarck in 1878 in Berlin.)
We ought to begin by recognizing that we no longer have the economic or military might to impose our will on the entire world and that our own house is in disarray.
Please don't respond to me by shouting Chamberlain, Munich, appeasement, etc. Instead, I'd like to hear your suggestions.
I think Europe of 1815 is a better analogy with the Great Powers working out some new framework. Unfortunately, I don't think that's possible without some type of horrific war preceding it (e.g. The Napoleonic Wars). The question is who plays the role of Napoleonic France in this scenario.
If what you are calling "accommodation" includes abandonment of Ukraine, then Munich is your model. The US has no business negotiating with Putin's regime, then imposing Putin's solution to war on Ukraine, which Putin invaded almost 3 years ago for this round, which is nothing but an extension of 2014.
What do you suggest? More of the same? Fight to the last Ukrainian on money borrowed from China only to be humiliated again as we were in Saigon and Kabul?
Jesʻ thinninʻ. Far too many times, politicians are focused on the short term at the expense of deep strategic thinking. Sun Tsu advised knowing yourself and your enemy. Iʻm not sure any of the players know either of those. Not even the famously patient Chinese (PRC) have a deep knowledge of the long term. Of course, itʻs harder to grasp the long term than the short term, but it should be possible to bound the likely scenarios. My friend that late CAPT Ed Smith said, "The US has the advantage of knowing that somewhere in our 300 million people, someone knows the necessary information. Itʻs finding that person that is hard. Itʻs knowledge mobilization."
I seriously don't know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are in Syria. But with Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the US involved on the ground it could become an interesting military affair.
Well, this is an example where the "intel 101" approach of "listen to what they say, watch what they do, and follow the money" appears inadequate to task. Nobody said nothing (for a long time), people suddenly launched offensives (without saying nothing), and the money streams are clear in only a few cases (see Turkey, Kurds, Russia, Alawaite). I might ask why us, Russia and Turkey I get...guess I don't know nothing...
"Iraqi Shia militia have already crossed from Iraq in to Syria with some reports that the USA has engaged them because, of course."
'Secret' Wars are Stupid...
And definitely -NOT- 'Secret'...well.. With one exception generally.
They are no secret to the combatants.
They are no secret to the host nation governments.
They are no secret to the local populace.
They are no secret to other Governments.
The only people who are kept in the dark are those who are paying for them with blood and treasure...
We. The People.
Its way past time to roll back the War Powers Act to some sane boundaries.
If the National Command Authority deems it necessary to deploy troops somewhere, Congress needs to quit hiding, and make these deliberations and decisions PUBLIC.
Oh yeah. "But the host country government doesn't want it public!" is a bullsh!te excuse.
Again, the citizens of that country very certainly know whats going on, and thats a government that is destined to fail.
Also, remaining unsaid is all those D'aesh patches on HTS fighter vests. Be ironic if the IDF is indirectly responsible for a new ISIS Caliphate in Aleppo.
CDR Salamander's description in the text of the mosaic of conflicts is much better than the borrowed graphic which is completely ISIS/ISIL-centric. The "map" of participants is incomplete and does not include the attack lines that aren't directed at ISIL. I've long called this a "multi-war" to try and capture the complexity rather than call it just a "civil war".
Keeping all that "frozen" if there was hope it would just go away was folly. Letting jihadis retain a sanctuary in Idlib just let them rebuild strength.
I'll add that the ethnicity/religion map highlights that Assad can't allow the coast to be cut off from Damascus. His base of power is in that Alawite heartland. If Assad had to, he'd abandon everything south of and east of Damascus to hold the coast-to-Damascus heart of his regime: the capital for the UN seat legitimacy. The coast of supporters and Russian bases to sustain his rule. And the lines of communication between the coast and the capital. And perhaps an outpost in the east to keep his claims to that region and oil resources active.
It will be interesting (not to be callous about the suffering this implies) to see if Iran has any gas in the tank to sustain Assad after spending more than a year supporting its proxies fighting Israel. Not to mention whatever Russia has leftover to spare. The next administration will be in a better position to sanction Iran and see effects more rapidly.
I'm glad we're in the far east of the country with more limited objectives that don't require entering the fray in the west.
Where are the rebels getting ammunition from? Iran and Russia are supplying Assad and Hezbollah. Israel and the USA may or may not be supplying the Kurds, Yazids, Druse and other tribes. Turkey might be supplying some of the Sunni militias, but who is supplying ISIS and Al Qaida? You can loot food, water and medical supplies, but someobe has to provide the ammunition.
meanwhile.....keeping one's eye on the ball.......that nuclear threshold that Iran must not cross gets ever more near, daily.... (THAT is the center of this game).....and is absolutely bound to drag all into the inevitable maelstrom.
get your gas mask ready. Assad won't go to the wall without opening the VX warehouse again first.
The BBC had a report about 10 years ago about the anti-Assad forces posting a video of trying out nerve gas. Western Front in the sun!
Where's Qatar in the mix? Are they still backing the anti-Assad Islamic militants?
I wonder how much of the Wagner group is still in Syria? Can’t be much, considering Ukraine and Africa.
The only thing for sure is there are less of them now than last week.
The American connection might heat up. Recall the anguish about Tulsi Gabbard being nominated as DNI is a meeting she had with Assad back in 2017? Is there a more recent issue that those against Gabbard's nomination may use to deny her appointment? And if she does get appointed one of her immediate duties is to prepare the daily President's intel brief. Will she influence Trump one way or the other? This could all get interesting.
Only Nixon could go to China. Maybe only Tulsi could go to Damascus.
What is Turkey's angle in this? I understand their anti-Kurdish position but this move seems more than that.
Video of the rebels show them fairly well kitted out. Who is paying for that and why?
The key to this affair is that Russian Naval base. Take away the Naval base and Russia is done there. Take away the Russians and Assad is done.
The Turks would not be opposed to a Damascus Eyalet returning to their sphere of influence.
Your tax dollars at work.
Are they tax dollars at this point or an obligation to be paid later?
Cannot answer, the pentagon is 60% of discretionary outlays and can’t account for most of it.
they view northern Syria as their natural territory
The tomb of Suleyman Shah is located (or was) inside Syria's borders, but is considered a part of Turkey.
My starting date is 9/11 not 02/24 or 10/07 and I can say with some confidence that no one predicted the world of 2024/5 while we were counting hanging chads and butterfly ballots in Florida in 2000.
At that time, very serious people were talking about the end of history and the triumph of capitalism and liberal democracy under the aegis of a Pax Americana. Future presidencies would alternate between the Bush and Clinton families.
Unfortunately, bin Laden, Putin, Xi and others didn't see things our way.
So, what is to be done before we reach that moment when there is no turning back like the day the Austrians began shelling Belgrade in 1914? (That kind of moment could happen at any time.)
I suggest a meeting between Trump, Putin and Xi to lay out each nation's interests and reach an accommodation. (My model is the meeting between Disraeli and Bismarck in 1878 in Berlin.)
We ought to begin by recognizing that we no longer have the economic or military might to impose our will on the entire world and that our own house is in disarray.
Please don't respond to me by shouting Chamberlain, Munich, appeasement, etc. Instead, I'd like to hear your suggestions.
I think Europe of 1815 is a better analogy with the Great Powers working out some new framework. Unfortunately, I don't think that's possible without some type of horrific war preceding it (e.g. The Napoleonic Wars). The question is who plays the role of Napoleonic France in this scenario.
That type of congress is for after the war when the continent has been wrecked.
If what you are calling "accommodation" includes abandonment of Ukraine, then Munich is your model. The US has no business negotiating with Putin's regime, then imposing Putin's solution to war on Ukraine, which Putin invaded almost 3 years ago for this round, which is nothing but an extension of 2014.
What do you suggest? More of the same? Fight to the last Ukrainian on money borrowed from China only to be humiliated again as we were in Saigon and Kabul?
Jesʻ thinninʻ. Far too many times, politicians are focused on the short term at the expense of deep strategic thinking. Sun Tsu advised knowing yourself and your enemy. Iʻm not sure any of the players know either of those. Not even the famously patient Chinese (PRC) have a deep knowledge of the long term. Of course, itʻs harder to grasp the long term than the short term, but it should be possible to bound the likely scenarios. My friend that late CAPT Ed Smith said, "The US has the advantage of knowing that somewhere in our 300 million people, someone knows the necessary information. Itʻs finding that person that is hard. Itʻs knowledge mobilization."
Good use of imagery Sal, yeah, IDF beat the living crap out of Hezbollah and here come all those 2nd, 3rd, and nth order effects.
I seriously don't know who the good guys are and who the bad guys are in Syria. But with Russia, Iran, Turkey, and the US involved on the ground it could become an interesting military affair.
Good guys? If you rank them in the order of how awful they are you could probably say the least awful two are the ‘good guys’. I guess.
Well, this is an example where the "intel 101" approach of "listen to what they say, watch what they do, and follow the money" appears inadequate to task. Nobody said nothing (for a long time), people suddenly launched offensives (without saying nothing), and the money streams are clear in only a few cases (see Turkey, Kurds, Russia, Alawaite). I might ask why us, Russia and Turkey I get...guess I don't know nothing...
"Iraqi Shia militia have already crossed from Iraq in to Syria with some reports that the USA has engaged them because, of course."
'Secret' Wars are Stupid...
And definitely -NOT- 'Secret'...well.. With one exception generally.
They are no secret to the combatants.
They are no secret to the host nation governments.
They are no secret to the local populace.
They are no secret to other Governments.
The only people who are kept in the dark are those who are paying for them with blood and treasure...
We. The People.
Its way past time to roll back the War Powers Act to some sane boundaries.
If the National Command Authority deems it necessary to deploy troops somewhere, Congress needs to quit hiding, and make these deliberations and decisions PUBLIC.
Oh yeah. "But the host country government doesn't want it public!" is a bullsh!te excuse.
Again, the citizens of that country very certainly know whats going on, and thats a government that is destined to fail.
Lastly, the whole concept is obsolete...
All the supposed advantages as summarized here:
https://www.hudson.org/foreign-policy/secret-wars-covert-conflict-in-international-politics
Have been rendered irrelevant by social media.
Time for the transparent facade put up to avoid accountability to end.
Also, remaining unsaid is all those D'aesh patches on HTS fighter vests. Be ironic if the IDF is indirectly responsible for a new ISIS Caliphate in Aleppo.
CDR Salamander's description in the text of the mosaic of conflicts is much better than the borrowed graphic which is completely ISIS/ISIL-centric. The "map" of participants is incomplete and does not include the attack lines that aren't directed at ISIL. I've long called this a "multi-war" to try and capture the complexity rather than call it just a "civil war".
Keeping all that "frozen" if there was hope it would just go away was folly. Letting jihadis retain a sanctuary in Idlib just let them rebuild strength.
I'll add that the ethnicity/religion map highlights that Assad can't allow the coast to be cut off from Damascus. His base of power is in that Alawite heartland. If Assad had to, he'd abandon everything south of and east of Damascus to hold the coast-to-Damascus heart of his regime: the capital for the UN seat legitimacy. The coast of supporters and Russian bases to sustain his rule. And the lines of communication between the coast and the capital. And perhaps an outpost in the east to keep his claims to that region and oil resources active.
It will be interesting (not to be callous about the suffering this implies) to see if Iran has any gas in the tank to sustain Assad after spending more than a year supporting its proxies fighting Israel. Not to mention whatever Russia has leftover to spare. The next administration will be in a better position to sanction Iran and see effects more rapidly.
I'm glad we're in the far east of the country with more limited objectives that don't require entering the fray in the west.
Where are the rebels getting ammunition from? Iran and Russia are supplying Assad and Hezbollah. Israel and the USA may or may not be supplying the Kurds, Yazids, Druse and other tribes. Turkey might be supplying some of the Sunni militias, but who is supplying ISIS and Al Qaida? You can loot food, water and medical supplies, but someobe has to provide the ammunition.
C I A
Meanwhile, the Chinese spider stays out of the fray and continues to spin its webs.