This discussion is in response to the article that came
under the title: “A mission quandary in Syria ,” written by Jed Babbin and
published on March 18, 2018 in The Washington Times.
However, a few things need to be cleared up and set aside
once and for all before discussing an article of that kind. Here is how one of
the things was expressed in Babbin's article: “Trump ordered a cruise missile
attack on a Syrian air base.” What needs to be said for the sake of clarity is
that this missile attack was not an isolated incident. It was the latest
installment in a pattern that started with the election of President Bill
Clinton.
Since that time, what happened immediately after the
election of a new President –– be that a Democrat or a Republican –– was that
the right-wing groups in America
launched a pressure campaign, forcing the President to prove he deserves being
called commander-in-chief. They told him cruise missiles were the way to go;
they chose the Arab country to which the missiles were to fly, and they
provided the argument that would legitimate the attack. Except for Barack Obama
who refused to play the game, every other president played it. The murderous
balance sheet for America
has been a baby formula plant blown up in Sudan ,
a hotel where an Islamic conference was being held, nearly destroyed in Baghdad , and an air base needlessly bombed in Syria .
Another habit that must be discredited is regularly
encountered in articles written by right-wing authors. You'll notice that
foreign groups fighting on the side of America (provided they are not
hated by the Jews) are always described as the best fighters the Americans had
on their side. This time, the honor was bestowed on the Kurds who fought
alongside the Americans in Iraq .
Worth mentioning is that the Israelis are eying the Kurds as
potential future partners in the Jewish scheme to cantonize the Arab countries.
Here is how Jed Babbin told a fake story to inflate the military prowess of the
Kurds: “American troops, joined by our Kurdish allies, have been in Syria for more
than a year. They sustained casualties and inflicted enormous losses on our
opponents, including Russians”.
A third trend that must be met with a chuckle and discarded,
appears in the works of right wing authors when they feel compelled to tell a
sad story about American forces that came short on the battlefield. To mitigate
the sting of the bad news that's coming, the writer would first tell a
fantastic tale in which the American military scored glorious successes on the
battlefield.
Having thus joyfully decorated the road to the lament that's
ahead, the writer winds his way to the sad news as did Jed Babbin who played
the game like a master of exaggeration: “Russian forces built a bridge over the
Euphrates . A Russian force of about 500 men,
supported by tanks and towed artillery crossed it to attack Syrian rebel and
Kurdish forces. American artillery and aircraft destroyed the Russian force; killing
about 200 Russians”.
And so, if you discard the suspect passages in the Babbin
article on the grounds that they deal with matters not fit to exist in a
serious presentation, you'll discover a strange thing. You'll discover that the
author is trying to tell a big story where there isn't even a small one. In
fact, what you're left with is a whine about America
having screwed up badly in the Middle East .
What follows is the expression of that whine in condensed form:
“With their forces dominating most of Syria , it is clear that Russia , Iran
and Turkey
control the outcome of the war. Syria 's
fate is irrelevant to our national security. Because our goal in the Syrian war
is undecided, it needs to be recalculated in terms of the benefits to our
national security. Let's focus on the Kurds because they are the next target in
the Russian-Iranian-Turkish axis. We will continue to protect the Kurds but not
everywhere Kurdish populations are present. The Kurds deserve our protection
but not unlimited support. While we should protect their homeland, we won't go
to war for their independence. Regardless of the outcome of the Syrian war,
major alliances in the Middle East are
shifting against us”.
Do you see a meaning in this apparently meaningless article,
my friend? I'll tell you what it is. Imagine you hypnotize Jed Babbin and get
him to tell the unvarnished truth as he sees it. What follows is what he'll be
telling:
“We, Americans went into the Middle
East because the Israelis wanted us to oust Bahsar Assad. We
failed in that mission because other players in the region outwitted us and
protected Assad. Let's not make this defeat the end of the game. On the
contrary, let's do something that will give Israel a consolation prize. To that
end, let's belabor the Kurdish issue and create a Kurdistan that will be a clone
of Israel .
We should do it knowing that we’ll double the losses we suffered in the Middle East . We know this will happen because we'll have
not only the Israeli albatross to carry around our necks; we’ll have that of Kurdistan as well”.