International Jihadis and the West's Response

I just find it ironic that you paint the president as an naive idealist who knows nothing of world politics when you demonstrate so little interest in the subject yourself.

After you. You always asked what President so-and so might do. But what would a president bis do? Create an imaginary line in the sand and buckle once it’s crossed? Let Russia dictate ME politics?

Why don’t you tell us. You are an expert no? Certainly, you’ve worked on the inside of the government and you know all the intelligence and the inside track. So with all the inside knowledge and personal experience, you are in a position to school us.

The world is an unstable nightmare, we are in a piecemeal world proxy war. Millions are displaced, thousands have been killed. We have an unprecedented migrant crisis. Please, tell us why this was the best way forward and what great things we can expect… Seriously, do tell… If this administrations moves have been so great, why is the situation so bad? Why has Russia been able to humiliate us so well? Why is the ME this unstable. …
Please say Bush, pretty please with sugar on top, please say it’s all Bush’s fault…

In this analogy, is the person stepping in the relief pitcher or the batter?

Pitcher (mandatory word count)

Ok. For a pitcher, that is a shit position to step into. As a batter you have a world of possibilities.

Likelihood of throwing 9 strikes in a row is nil. Especially when every pitch is going to a batter from a different team.

Honestly, I don’t know that anybody could have done anything differently. Our exit strategy had already been laid out by Bush (no, not blaming him), even in light of the pre-ISIS insurgency, which was addressed in the document that outlined the exit strategy.

I think that the unaccounted for factor was that Putin was just waiting in the wings to step in and exert his influence in the region. His timing was impeccable.

edit: In the long run, he’s going to hit a grand slam.

Here is a video that’s worth watching. This guy was the last ambassador to Syria:

We could have done a lot differently. We knew what was happening, we watched it unfold before our eyes. As soon as Assad started striking his own people we should have intervened. When Assad crossed the red line, we should have taken out all known chemical weapons and personal assets of Assad, including his houses. Warning that more will be coming without compliance. We needed a strong hand and a steel fist in dealing with Assad from the get-go.
Yes, unfortunately people would have died. But with our precise munitions we could have limited that greatly. We should have kept the Russians out, they are cluster bombing civilian neighborhoods, for crying out loud.
The humanitarian crisis in Syria is beyond the pale. An early and firm intervention could have gone a long way to preventing the crisis in the scale it is today.

I repeat, this is the worst possible scenario that could have played out. This is it worst case scenario. The Syrian crisis is out of control, people are desperate. It is an utter catastrophe. Any denial of that is just blind. Literally almost any other course we could have taken would have been better then what is going on now…

Oh Putin, hit the grand slam, he’s currently standing at home watching it sail. We have no leverage now. We bomb ISIS with no bigger plan for Syria as a whole… It’s really sad. The suffering is unimaginable. There are not enough tears available for the crisis in Aleppo. They (Russia and Assad) are targeting hospitals and civilians to get it to cave. There’s almost nothing left. The living envy the dead.

Watch:

Have you even ever been to another country? Have you actually ever experienced, first hand, the effects of foreign policy? Any of your family ever been arrested for going to church or not delivering enough eggs to the government? Have you ever seen the devastation of oppression first hand? I can answer yes to all of this.

You know why loppar’s input is valuable? He’s seen it first hand, not just read it in a book or had a debate in class.

The economic crisis and the wars are largely independent. The common effect between them would have been morale/war-weariness in the electorate, but they’re significantly independent.

We needed to keep the Russians out Syria at all costs–that increases their sphere of influence and decreases our own. That would have been priority 1 from a political standpoint.

1 Like

I agree. The human toll it is taking is phantasmagoric. From my personal ethical point of view, there are no winners when the means reach such an extreme, never mind the ends. There is also absolutely no coincidence that two leaders-Assad and Putin, that are willing to go to these lengths ended up as bedfellows.

Therefore it is the inevitability that I would contend. There were a lot of people making long term strategic plans for this to unfold the way that it has, either unbeknownst to us, or without regard. No one needed to pull a proxy strategy on us like we did with the USSR in Afghanistan through the 70’s and 80’s. We did it to ourselves. All Putin had to do was wait it out and form back room alliances with Syria, which was ripe for the pickin, and Iran (also ripe).

Add to that the comparative advantage price war Saudi Arabia has been engaging in with us, and the message is clear- They want the US out of their sub-continent.

There is also a bunch of stuff rattling around in my head about a Eurasian play to oust the USD in favor of a petro-dollar and land based trans-continental shipping infrastructure as motives for these maneuvers, but I don’t want to look like a complete tin foil hat wearing window licker.

But those two things, successfully executed, would push us straight off of those continents.

Yes. This creates several problems - first of all, the narrative problem that pushes sunnis towards islamists. Don’t forget that the vast majority of muslims are sunni - now they see their coreligionists killed in Syria while the West watches wearily.

The only people they see helping their cause are islamist militias fighting around Aleppo and Damascus, or Al-Qaeda rebranded. So all those despicable hate spreading Saudi funded preachers are going to have a field day with this, exploiting it for propaganda purposes.

Second problem - the “red lines” failure. I think the majority of experts and talking-heads greatly underestimate this problem - the perception of the US of A abroad, and when I say abroad I mean potential and actual crisis areas such as Eastern Europe, Balkans and the ME is that “when the cowboys say something, they mean it”. (actual phrase I’ve heard)

“The cowboys” may be considered stupid, impulsive, ignorant, brash by these peoples, but the consensus of everyone, regardless whether they love or hate the US of A is that the stick to their word. And this is what set USA against former colonial powers such as Britain in France, considered by all duplicitous and hypocritical. And now this bedrock of how the US is perceived worldwide is shattered.

I know that for example, Poland and the Baltic states, staunchest US allies in Europe besides the UK, on NATO meetings flatly told US representatives that they do not believe in any verbal reassurances by the US administration anymore and that only stationing of US troops would address their concerns regarding Russia. They are also making contingency plans and investing heavily in their armed forces if the US lets them down.

Also, Turkey pretty much left NATO and is now striking a deal with both Iran and Russia, something unthinkable virtually a year or two ago.

The current US administration made a fatal blunder with Syria - they made a commitment, and after receiving a lukewarm reply at best from their allies, simply backed down. “Eh, we didn’t mean it”.

And Putin smelled blood, like a boxer who sees that his opponent is wobbly. He believes in the concept of imposing your will and he saw an opportunity to impose his will on the US, embarrassing them in the process and bringing back Russia onto the world stage.

And it’s not like it was a sudden move - Putin announces it in advance, first by floating an idea on Russian language propaganda channels intended for domestic consumption such as Zvezda and Lifenews, then through English language RT and finally through a matter-of-fact announcement by the man himself.

At every step he gauges the US reaction - talking points, concern, grave concern, need for deescalation and finally that, and I have to say, idiotic “watch out, quagmire” comment.

And Putin is doing that on the cheap - I’ve read a calculation somewhere that the whole Russian operation in Syria costs in the low millions per month. That’s nothing for the amazing returns the Russians are getting. Compare that with the US expenditures in Iraq and Syria.

Now, the unthinkable happened - if you’re a ME leader/dictator/faction leader/whatever, you have a legitimate choice, siding with the Russians or the Americans, with the former seeming more inclined to back their allies.

Two years ago, people who would side with Russians over Americans were lunatics, kooks or senile communists. Now it doesn’t seem so.

3 Likes

Well put, you provide a very interesting and valuable perspective on this forum.

1 Like

This:

To quote myself.

And how do I know John Kerry is an idiot? I experienced it first hand.

First off, if I may take a stab at this, I would have not attacked Iraq had I been GWB. It was a colossal mistake. We should have concentrated all our efforts in Afghanistan fighting those who attacked us on 9-11 instead of spreading too thin and dropping the ball.

Now I know Obama got elected by saying he was going to bring the troops home. But before doing so, he should have negotiated a treaty to keep some troops in place. When we left Iraq, the Awakening Group was in full swing and Al-Qaeda in Iraq was on the ropes. We should have keep troops there to counter the growing influence from Iran, and defeated the ISIS forces had they fool hardily attacked us from Syria.

As I mentioned before, when Qaddafi said he was putting down a rebellion of Al-Qaeda in his country, I would have given him money and weapons to help him do so…there and everywhere else they raised their ugly head until the extremist group was destroyed once and for all.

Here’s Obama’s foolishness to a T: In regards to the Arab Spring. When was the last time in history a Muslim King or dictator fell and what followed was a moderate, peaceful, democratic, government?

Never.

His administration should never been so blind to believe we could bring peaceful democracy to the Muslim nations and hope they behave and love us. The Arab Spring lead directly to the spread of extremism, the spread of Al-Qaeda, and the rise of ISIS.

The Arab Spring happens in Libya. Obama and NATO bomb the Libyan troops until Qaddafi falls. Instead of a peace loving pro-Western utopia, Libya is transformed into a base for ISIS. How could anyone in his administration not see that coming?

The Arab Spring happens in Syria. Our administration once again begins funding illusionary Moderate Muslims. Who exactly are these people? Al-Nursa and ultimately ISIS. The very enemies we have vowed to destroy.

ISIS declares war on the west…this terrorist group who took over part of Iraq and is based in Syria. They take over half of Iraq. Meaning all the gains we had in that country have now been divided between ISIS and Iran.

We are in a bombing mission against ISIS and are arming the Kurds against them, driving Turkey away from us and NATO and into the hands of the Russians.

And what about ISIS and Al- Nursa? Now, suddenly they are our allies against the growing influence of the Russians and Iran in the region? How could this be possible. Why on earth would you back these barbarians? Just to block the other enemies you have in the region.

And what happens when this all ends. There’s 2 possible outcomes. Assad wins, the Russians stay and Iran has influence from Iran all the way to Syria…Iraq and Lebanon included.

The other ISIS and Al-Nursa win and then turn their guns and terrorist activities promptly against the West.

It’s a lose, lose.

Like Pat said…if this makes any sense what so ever (see his post above for more insight) please, someone, an Obama Administration supporter, anyone, please explain to us how…

Gkhan:

This is a disingenuous request, and I think you are smart enough to know it.

I have found (to my frustration), that once one deeply holds the narrative to be “true” that " …The mess in the Middle East is all the Obama Administrations Fault/Putin is the true Leader and Kicked our Ass…"; all they really want is support for that narrative, and nothing else. There is no more “discussion” or “providing proof” than there is to the battling sides of the abortion “debate”.

What is often suggested (and you suggested in your post) that we should have done and said is:

“WWPD? (What would Putin do?). Screw all these “Arab Spring” loons and support with all our might the Dictators and Thugs that are suppressing them…!”

Then the Administration (and the U.S.) would have been accused of losing it’s moral authority for not supporting human rights and the “will of the People”…and the Right would have led the charge…

So…there is plenty of support out there for the narrative you and many others believe.

Stick to it and move on.

True. The US is big on human rights. I see where you are coming from.

But I never thought this was a good way to go because it basically abandoned allies the US have had for decades and put our support behind people like The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt for 1 example. Who in their right mind thought this was a good outcome?

Who thinks it is a good idea to back terrorist supporting anti-Western governments?

1 Like

And the level of bad this is, is in the extreme category. First, their losing anyway, so the point is nearly moot and if they were winning, it wouldn’t be a much better scenario. We just armed a bunch of U.S. hating Islamists who may hate ISIS, but still are way more committed to their islamism, than they are to us.
Second, the famous guarantee of ‘no boots on the ground’ allows the terrorist freedom of movement upon reaping a loss, they would not have if they were rounded up.

The Kurds are great. They are wonderful allies, the only problem is the people they are saving hate their guts. As trustworthy as the Kurds have been, they will not be a power player in the area, ever. Really, this is it, their moment in the sun.

The cluster fuck of the ‘red line’ cannot be overstated in the damage it has done to our credibility and sphere of influence. Because we didn’t want to hurt anybody, we hurt everybody. All the issues we are suffering now can be traced to this one horrendous diplomatic blunder. It was this single action that emboldened the Russians to put their boots on the ground and openly support Assad. If we were afraid to take on a severely weakened Syrian leader, standing basically alone, we damn sure aren’t going to act against the Russians.
You can tell, just by way of the bravado in which Russia acts. Warning the U.S. as to the actions they are planning to take are completely secondary. The Russians just sent a message to the U.S. leadership in Baghdad, “Oh yeah, by the way, we started bombing ‘the terrorists’, in Syria. Those are the planes you see.”
Putin has zero and I mean zero fear of repercussions from the U.S.

The ‘Red Line’ was our ‘Falklands’ moment. The moment you realize, you are not in control anymore.

I have heard similar smatterings as well. Reports from Czech are that they are pissed at the U.S. from backing out of the missile plan, they don’t trust us anymore and cannot believe how weak we have become.
They may have thought of us as dumb “Cowboys” but they respected the hell out of us. They now think were just dumb. That’s a citizen summary, that’s what the folks there think. The Czechs tend to be more hawkish than the rest of Europe, though, so it’s not an indication of Europe overall. I don’t know how much of this sentiment rings true in the Eastern European states, but based on what you said, it seems to be similar.

That “coup” was Turkey’s chance to make a sharp left towards Islamism and that is exactly where they are headed. Having a hawkish superpower on your side is way more valuable than a tentative, weak one. They can trust the Russians to get their back militarily, they cannot trust the U.S. The fact that they are cozying up, even after Turkey shot down their plane, tells you how sharp they have turned. It’s almost as if Erdogan told the Russians, “Hey we got the bastards that shot down your plane. It won’t happen again.”

:clap:
Excellent analysis. While we watch “Dancing with the Stars”, they are watching for every opportunity they can take. It will take years to repair our reputation in the world at large and it’s going to take some big, gutsy moves.

My prediction is that we will end up joining them because we will not be able to beat them without major escalation.

1 Like