Big Red Car here. Early morning this morning with a coffee at 6:30 AM. Hope to get the transportation assignment but truthfully sometimes a Big Red Car likes to sleep in a bit.
Yawn — oh well. Hey this business in Syria is getting very serious and dangerous for the United States. Let’s chat about this impending conflict in Syria, eh?
Background
In case you have been sleeping in the driveway, you should already know that the President has authorized direct lethal aid — that means weapons, ammunition and perhaps a no-fly zone over certain parts of Syria. The United States already has Marines on the ground in neighboring Jordan. Jordan is being inundated with refugees trending toward a million. Boots on the ground.
This decision was made because the President had previously warned Syria that the use of chemical weapons would cross a “red line” and there would be “consequences”.
Syria has been in a civil war for two years and almost 100,000 Syrians have been killed thus far. Apparently 2,000 of those victims were killed by the recent deployment of chemical weapons in the form of Sarin gas, a particularly repugnant and indiscriminate killer.
The Syrian regime, led by the second generation of the Assad family, has been a typical Middle Eastern despotism. They have been active supporters of terrorism and terrorists. They are allies of the Iranians. They need killing and replacement and about that there is no real argument.
The Assad regime did not just go bad last week. They have been shitheads for a long, long time. Like North Korea with a multi-generational claim on being shitheads.
Strategic considerations
Syria does not amount to a pimple on the world’s ass from a strategic perspective and it is difficult to fathom why the United States would have any strategic national security interest in the resolution of the Syrian civil war other than a general humanitarian interest — which could be applied to about half of Africa — and perhaps Syria’s proximity to our ally, Israel.
What is important is that Syria is a vassal and client state of the resurgent Russia of former KGB agent Putin. Russia and the United States had been squaring off in Syria through proxies. Now, they are going to be directly confronting each other through this pivot toward the injection of direct lethal aid.
This will make for a lively G-8 Summit conversation between President Obama and Mr Putin. Russia has called bullshit on the reports of the use of chemical weapons by its client state Syria. The US has a weak track record on the accuracy of WMD callouts. Putin knows this and is sticking his thumb in Obama’s eye.
Syria is an ally of Iran and Iran has already announced its intentions to send 3-4,000 combat troops to assist Assad. Iran and the United States have been warily circling each other over the issue of nuclear proliferation. Thus far Iran is leading on points and the US has been totally ineffective in delaying or defeating the Iranian efforts to obtain a nuclear weapon. May I offer you a second helping of sanctions, anyone?
Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism, a provider of particularly lethal IED weapons in Iraq and now enjoys a land bridge directly to Syria through Iraq as a result of the recent American pullout from Iraq.
Nasty details
The region is aflame — the bullshit Arab Spring, talk about putting perfume on a turd, eh? — and the report card is pretty damn discouraging. Egypt is now controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood, Libya is in shambles, Syria is aflame with civil war, Iran presses forward with its nuclear ambitions and Al Qaeda is resurgent and spreading its footprint by posing as “opposition” where it can.
The US has supported the new Egyptian Morsi regime of the Muslim Brotherhood. The MB is a particularly nasty piece of business having provided two infantry divisions to Hitler in the Second World War. These soldiers fought on the Eastern front and returned to Egypt after the war with a virulent hatred of the Jews and ultimately Israel. They are well established and trouble with a capital T.
In typical American fashion, we have ignored the realities of their underlying objectives — the creation of an Islamic nation, the elimination of the State of Israel and their hatred of the US — and have recently supplied them with massive amounts of both foreign and military aid. This is easily one of the most misguided decisions in the history of our involvement in this region.
Ask yourself a simple question — against whom are the Egyptians likely to deploy their new toys? Modern tanks and cutting edge fighter planes? This being multiple choice, the only available answers are their own people or Israel. Not smart policy on our part — cowardly really.
Conflicting details and unresolved questions
When America gets itself into foreign military adventures, we always look back and question the wisdom of that particular war. Usually after the body bags have begun to arrive at Dover Airbase. Gulf of Tonkin? Weapons of mass destruction?
Does the US really have a strategic interest that was triggered by the use of chemical weapons — a granted beastly development — after the Syrian civil war has already cost almost 100,000 Syrian lives? Or is this just a case of someone’s mouth writing a nonsensical check that will be cashed with American blood and treasure?
Given all the time we had to think about this eventuality, why are we making this up on the fly? Why didn’t we staff and consider the alternatives before reality took a dump in the punch bowl? Why?
This impending Syrian foray should be stopped right now by answering the following questions.
1. What is the true strategic United States interest in Syria? How does the use of chemical weapons sharpen and intensify that interest? Does it really?
2. Is this where we want to confront the Russians? Understand that the Russians are still sharpening their dagger for Kissinger having pried the Egyptians out of their tent after getting bloodied by the Israelis in the desert in the 1973 war. The Russians have a long memory and Syria is their last toehold in the region. They will not go quietly.
3. Is this where we want to start a shooting war with the Iranians who now enjoy a land bridge directly to the conflict? The Iranians have just conducted elections and supposedly they have elected a “moderate” — will we force them into a military confrontation and thus lose the opportunity to ameliorate this relationship? Is Syria worth that lost opportunity?
4. Do we want to allow Syria and Iran — the region’s and perhaps the world’s largest sponsors of terrorism — to forge an alliance with the potential of Iran contributing a nuclear capability to the Syrians? This will set off an arms race in the region of extraordinarily troubling proportions.
5. Does the United States need another conflict and can we afford one?
6. Is this a bit of “wagging the dog” to take focus off the Obama administration scandals?
7. Inasmuch as we currently have an administration that is unable to account for Benghazi, the IRS, the AP, State gone wild and the NSA — measures of raw competence and trust — do we trust the administration to undertake another war just now?
The answers
Sadly the answers to the foregoing questions are universally — Hell no! As a Big Red Car, let me put that into the following context:
1. The United States has no strategic interest in the Syrian civil war. It does not impact the United States today or after the unfortunate death of 2,000 more Syrians from Assad’s use of chemical weapons. Assad was a bastard before he used chemical weapons, an enemy of the United States and its regional allies and always will be. The chemical weapons red line was silly rhetoric and not justification for going to war. Providing lethal aid to rebels — perhaps Al Qaeda itself — and enforcing no-fly zones is going to war, Old Sport.
2. The opponents of despots are not Jeffersonian democrats yearning for freedom. They are simply the next set of shitheads who were throttled by the previous set of shitheads. This falls under the classification of being careful what you ask for because you may just get it. The situation in Egypt is instructive and disturbing. We put an enormous threat to the survival of Israel on its previously quiet western flank and have provided military and financial support to an emerging Islamic regime in a tinderbox region. Not a very thoughtful or wise performance. Let’s not do that again.
3. The Russians have measured Obama as a weak President and intend to test him right here in Syria. The Russians are providing weapons and in particular anti-aircraft weapons. Anti-aircraft weapons and no-fly zones are a lethal mix guaranteed to provide a shooting confrontation. Do you think a shithead who uses Sarin nerve agent against his own people will exercise any modicum of discretion using anti-aircraft weapons? Not bloody likely, Old Sport.
3. The notion of allowing Syria and Iran to become “war buddies” is frightening. These two despotic and terror exporting regimes are currently providing almost all of the angst in the region and their ability to collude through the Iraq land bridge is game changing. The Iranians will inject combat troops. Some of these troops will be killed. It will be blamed on the Great Satan and where it goes from their is anybody’s guess. How did the Straits of Hormuz get blocked? It may well have started right here in Syria.
4. WE HAVE NO EXIT STRATEGY and nobody is talking one up. This is the great American war failing — we never get out on time. We always end up rebuilding someone else’s country when we should be spending that money in Newark, New Jersey. Did we learn anything in ten years in Iraq and Afghanistan? We cannot afford another war right now.
Prediction
The Big Red Car predicts that the Obama administration will wander into this particular shit storm because of the “macho bullshit” elements of it all. Because the President does not want to be accused of “leading from behind”. Because he does want to take the focus off his myriad scandals. Because he is not paying attention and is spending all of his time traveling, vacationing, playing golf and fundraising.
Left to its own devices this is going to have a very bad outcome. Let’s get this out on the table now. WTF is the strategic interest of the United States? WTF is the exit strategy? WTF is the likelihood of replacing the Assad regime with a government that is an improvement for American and allied interests in the region?
Note to the Nobel Peace Prize committee — hey, WTF were you guys thinking when you gave our newly elected President the freakin’ Nobel Peace Prize? Were you high? Can you recall those things? If so, get on it and now.
But, hey, WTF do I know anyway? I’m just a Big Red Car.
