http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=191534&p=2634315&hilit=Bibi+syria#p2634315
Wasn’t thrilled with the debate, Trump did better as he hit more strategic questions involving policy.
He showed he us Anti-Assad, Anti-Iran, but at this point, is open to a Russian oriented marriage of convinance in tackling Syria. He also suggested he doesn’t know who on the Arab side to back, thinking any faction can be as bad or worst. In a previous debate, he mentioned talking to “Bibi”, who is the prime minister of Israel.
What would this strategic alliance look like, as far as I can tell?
Assuming a Russian leaning, Israeli leaning, yet anti-Iranian bent, yet his distrust of local factions, Assad remains in place. Does the US & Russia backing or tolerating with grinding teeth Assad maintain the Arab-Turkish Alliance, and does it even assure Assad survives? No on both accounts. ISIS isn’t going to be defeated for decades, nor Al-Nursa. At any point, Assad can crap out, nothing Putin can do can save him once that comes, most Putin can do is back Assad limited in terms of market access via liquid exchange of debt, arms imports, air and naval support. Snipers and assassins don’t worry about those obstacles. Syria via Assad might suppress the opposition, but has to remain a police state. He doesn’t currently have a path fireward for independence in terms of recruits and economy.
Therefor Russia is looking past Assad, while Assad is only looking out for Assad. Russia wants returns on it’s investments. US could obviously give a damn one way or another, as long as the state stomps out ISIS and Al Nursa.
So Russia has to move on priorities neither immediately warranted from a Syrian Addad perspective, or US. Our alliance with Putin will be pickled at best, but can work if you keep this in mind. Generals and advisers close to Trump know this better than me, but I’m not sure if Trump will get this. Perhaps he will given his experience in business negotiations.
Iran is backed by Russia, they provide the infantry support to Assad, and Iran gave Russia Air Space access, in the form of sharing a airbase and in ballistic missiles access through their airspace from the caspain sea. If he has a Anti-Iranian stance, it is going to unsettle the balance of power between US interests (few as they are now given Obama’s train wreck) and Iran, and Iran will pressure Russia back.
Is this a recipe for disaster? Fuck yes, but we’ve helped Iraq liberate Falluja, Ramadi, and now are pushing up riven into Mosul… Iraq uses Iranian backed Shia Militias, who we refuse to back, and the Iraqi Army, who we do. Now, the end result is purely academic, even when your “not backing them” your backing them.
Will this happen in Syria? I don’t know. I don’t know his actual alliance desires. I don’t even know from these three debates if he is backing at least the Kurds, much less the remains of the Euphrates Volcano Alliance. I don’t think Trump much cares for the Arab Alliances at this point, wrote them off. This is going to result in intrigue and hysteria with Qatar, Oman, and Saudi Arabia. Will the Arab League step in and organize the balance of power, or will they turn Machiavellian on one another like in Syria. The 21st century has witnessed the elevation of Proxy Wars not seen since the Cold War, where not just major powers, but small states back militias in brutal fights against one another, while their aircraft fly around next to one another merely waving. We didn’t do that in past proxy wars, airspace was hotly contested. It is a bizarre gentleman’s agreement, one certain to collapse once a state snaps out of it, the concept nearly collapsed when Turkey shot down the Russian Jet.
Overall, I’m highly intolerant of abandoning the Kurds, but at the sane time, they are Sunni- not a high priority for other Arab factions to attack, and Assad tolerates them, and they don’t really need their air space protected from anyone but Turkey, which we never would do, due to Turkey being in NATO. I love the Kurds, hate Erdogan, but even I wouldn’t turn my back on the NATO alliance even if Turkey was in the wrong, not openly at least.
So how do US & Russia have an Alliance when Iran is the odd man out? Through Israel and Turkey. Both are like warm on Russia, prefer Russian tourism and investment, and each other for that matter.
Those two stares share a birder with Syria, and a relation with factions on the ground. Israel is pro Iraqi-Peshmerga Kurd, so this likely translates to pro Syrian Kurd. Thus will likely be a result of negotiations, not to mention the US Military establish silent, to lay off the Kurds.
Turkey is strongly Pro-Turkoman, Turkish populations left in Syria after the fall of the Ottoman Empire. They are very Anti-Kurd, but US has a history with them. I see a conflict arising that Trump may back Erdogan thinking all the pieces fit, while backing Putin, with Putin and Israel and even Assad saying don’t mess with the Kurds, and Iran lukewarm, indifferent to them but not hostile. No easy answers here, Erdogan will do everything he can to make this a decisive issue. I think Trump will eventually back both Kurds and Turkomans, in the north, does this mean the rest or select Arabs will follow? Fuck if I know. Honestly, I can’t penetrate his plan much beyond that. What he is saying about a marriage of convienance makes sense with Russia, Aleppo is done for, countless nations in history have entered into alliances on such basis in the past, and we have no real long term desires out of Syria. It isn’t becoming a NATO candidate anytime soon, it won’t ever be very pro western. It is going to hate us for what Hillary and Obama did to them for centuries, like people hate Hitler and Stalin today. I really don’t know what we hope to get other than a desire to hunt down terrorists and preferably a buffer state or autonomous region to cuddle NATO and the Arab regions. Nothing can benifit Turkey and NATO long term over the next few centuries than having a nice Kurdish buffer zone on NATO’s most volitile border, given Turkey is 1/5 Kurd. NATO would culturally dominate them in time, it something Ergogan can’t see, because it doesn’t benefit him directly politically. I’m not thinking Trump gets this, but it will increasingly dawn on him. He is impulsive, but doesn’t have Obama’s disregard for advisors. I think Trump will take his cabinet more seriously that Obama ever did, will be impressed with his quality Pentagon advisors, who will have to struggle at times to make their points, but can and will get through, and Trump will respect them more for the effort. He is also likely to invest in the best advisors if for no other reason than because he can say he does, it a luxury and status symbol. We designed the office of the chief executive knowing not everyone would be a expert in all fields, put a lot of backups and advisory roles built up over generations. I don’t see Trump taking a sledge hammer to this, or boxing them off into the ignore category like Obama did. I think he might “fire” a few though. Expect media controversy on this, even though Obama did the exact sane thing.
In regards to Hillary- oh fuck. I think she will get further entangled with Euphrates Volcano- I can see scenarios where this can “work” but none without a significant mission creep. Pentagon admitted yesterday to having troops in Mosul “in advisory and support” roles. Look up Greece and early Vietnam to figure out what that means.
We’ve lost a lot of trust in building up from scratch “Free Syrian Army” battalions, that never got above company level in training in Turkey, millions list on shit I can’t comprehend. I literally could of just gone, sat in the bushes on a hillside, training guys, snatching vehicles on planned raids, equipped a company myself minus those millions of dollars. It is essentially what Turkey dies, they send in trainers, hold a position, train them up. We’ve been using Kurdish territory for this reason.
I don’t know how she will navigate that entanglement. Russia isn’t going to “negotiate” anything more with Hillary than with Obama, it isn’t taken seriously, merely a smoke screen. Only thing Russia is respecting is actions, and we don’t act rationally. If we were rational, we would of hit the Syrians just as systematically as Russia has been attacking the Non-ISIS, Non-Al Nursa Arabs, then go back to the negotiation table noting every supply depot between Damascus and Aleppo has been bombed, undoubtedly each one a baby-milk factory, and that the Syrian Army will not be reinforced even by the back roads and will starve, whike select Arab factions get bullet and MRE airdrops, perhaps heavier weapons in the future.
If Russia can’t have Aleppo in Assad’s hands, Putin will destroy Aleppo (which he has since done), but he will react prior to that in upmost dire response to preserving it’s investments, will restrain Assad, until it becomes pointless.
Only time Putin will honestly negotiate is at the very end, when he has won, and wants it finalized.
It is important for the US to sit hack, and recognize Russia doesn’t win in any scenario either, even if every dream in Syria is achieved, it loses. Russia can’t expect to get returns with residual elements lingering in Syria and Iraq for decades, past the contractual promises Assad has made expires. Russian engineers on the ground are high targets, will be for a long time. Will they fortify such locations? Likely, like in Romania, but that is sniper bait, and will be costly. Higher Ugandans? Likely, but they will be corrupt, even more corrupt than Putin is used to.
In order to “win”, whatever that means at this point, preventing a humanitarian tradegy at this point isn’t happening, who damn country is destroyed, you don’t win by being a diplomat first. We are well past that point, it is something the Russians mock and manipulate, worst way to do. You gotta take what they want, threaten it, or outright destroy it.
Informing Putin Assad will be killed if attacks continue is a good path, he knows merely having the intent to do so makes it likely and embolden what is left of the Arab Resistence. Saying a no-gly zone, except for Russians, is a joke. Russians will start flying in Assad’s barrel bomb helicopters as a result. They did it in the Korean War. It was vital it was a secret then, now it would be loudly advertised.
Nothing in Hillary’s plan resolves it, short of her completely losing, and Russia finishes it- or we do go to war with Russia, a extremely high chance of that happening under her plan. How will we get the troops out of Iraq after we start bombing Russian and Iranian and Syrian sites, if Iraq backs Iran? Are our troops going to fight their way to Turkey and Kuwait?
I’m not too thrilled with the variables in what she has said these three speeches. I’m seeing a better scenerio with Trump, but likewise am not too thrilled, I think our Arab Allies across Syria have tonight had s heart attack, and Assad is snickering.
I’m hoping either president, if they do blow it in Syria, has the decentry to do a massive bomb barrage on Syrian Headquarters buildings and Assad’s compounds and houses in a mass merry barrage before they leave. Worst thing we cab do is just leave with him still in power. The state his family built to support his tyranny needs up and blown up if we call it quits. That can done in a weekend, with threats to kill Assad again if we somehow missed, again and again every time he sticks his head up anywhere save in exile. Best off pretending to be dead.