Sunday, September 21, 2014

Middle East Turmoil: U.S. to the Rescue (Again) — Hang on Tight

Always Cut the Red Wire. Wait, or the Green. Damn, maybe the Yellow...
(From Lesson Plan: How to disarm the ME)

Let's Ask An Expert, Shall We???
(About U.S. trying it again)

The U.S. has already resumed bombing campaign across Northern Iraq, with an eye now to Northern Syria. First, let's review the Syrian mess:

In January 2011, following the Arab Spring where protests against ruling regimes erupted in a number of Middle East countries, protesters in Syria came out demanding that President Bashar al-Assad and his government step down. In response, Assad sent in troops with some cities and regions being besieged for weeks and months.

Both pro and anti-government protest gatherings have at times been large.  Criticism of Syria’s crackdown has been quite widespread. The Arab League has responded by suspending Syria’s membership. Syria claims that it is fighting an insurgency that is terrorist-driven by nature and claimed al-Qaeda is involved. It has not been possible to verify that claim so many see it as a cynical excuse.

The ruling regime is a sect of Shia, so has support from Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah. The opposition is largely Sunni, thus receiving support from other Middle East countries, such as Saudi Arabia and others. Ten of thousands have been killed and displaced (like into Turkey and northern Iraq) — both civilians and armed combatants. Some have been asking the West for a military intervention like there was in Libya, but the U.S. in particular is not keen on another military intervention even though they have been openly hostile and critical of the Syrian ruling regime for many years.

China and Russia also have close ties with Syria and to date have not been keen on any action condemning Syria and have even vetoed some actions. Some papers have reported Iran and others helping Syria with weapons, while others also mentioned the opposition being armed by the West.

And, so here we are today: the U.S. is eyeing a campaign (at least bombing) in Syria in and to find, locate and destroy ISIS/ISIL who is so bad that even al-Qaeda kicked them. The rest as they say is history in the making.

Our Congress voted to allow President Obama to take action, just short of actually declaring war – against who would be the question… but another war resolution, or clarification of any existing war resolutions are in the works, but only after the midterm elections … I guess war is on hold pending a vote for a new of sustained same Congress, right? Sure seems so. So, who will run against any new action and who will not? Will that make any difference at the ballot box? We are about to find out.

It always comes down to the “why (get and stop ISIS/ISIL)” and then the “how (U.S. basically alone with a token coalition of ME countries, or the U.S. supporting them for the heavy lifting?”

Most of the public is reluctant to get any major combat unit (the so-called boots on the ground) reengaged in Iraq and a hearty Hell no, not in Syria. But, events may dramatically alter that mindset for you see when war starts at any pace or level, it has a tendency to do its own thing in all sorts of directions.  

It is insane to reengage in Iraq with major units? Let’s ask Einstein shall we?  If not totally insane, then it's damn close. 

Stop back later. We are just getting started.

No comments: