I kind of doubt that Jim Webb will be Hillary Clinton’s “worst nightmare,” but his admonition that our nation should “never get involved in a five-sided argument” is looking more and more sound in Syria.
The Guardian‘s latest report couldn’t really be much worse. The Sunnis on the ground, who have been fighting the Shi’a-suppoted Alawite government in Damascus for years now, really cannot see U.S. bombing missions against Sunnis as anything but an attack on them in support of the Assad regime.
US air strikes in Syria are encouraging anti-regime fighters to forge alliances with or even defect to Islamic State (Isis), according to a series of interviews conducted by the Guardian.
Fighters from the Free Syrian Army (FSA) and Islamic military groups are joining forces with Isis, which has gained control of swaths of Syria and Iraq and has beheaded six western hostages in the past few months.
Some brigades have transferred their allegiance, while others are forming tactical alliances or truces. Support among civilians also appears to be growing in some areas as a result of resentment over US-led military action.
We like to make a big distinction between the fanatics in ISIS or ISIL or Islamic State (or whatever you want to call them this week) and more reasonable Sunni fighters. This distinction isn’t as important in the region as it is for us. In the fight to take down Assad, there are no bad Sunnis or good attacks against Sunni fighters.
We cannot waltz in there are try to change the fight into good Sunnis vs. bad Sunnis.
Except, actually, after years of resisting direct involvement in exactly this kind of five-sided conflict, we’re failing to see how in the most important sense, it has become two-sided.
Abu Talha said he had joined the FSA after being released from prison in an amnesty Assad granted shortly after the Syrian uprising began in March 2011, and became commander of the Ansar al-Haq brigade in Ghouta, an eastern suburb of Damascus. He became disillusioned with the FSA, however, believing it was a tool of foreign intelligence services and poor in combat. After four senior fighters in his brigade were fatally wounded a few months ago, he defected to Isis.
“Since that day, I vowed not to fight under a flag bearing the mark of the FSA even for a second. I looked around for truthful jihadis, to fight by their side. I could not find any better than the jihadis of Isis. I told my fighters: ‘I’m going to join Isis, you are free to follow me or choose your own way’,” he said.
More than 200 of his fellow fighters also declared their allegiance to Isis, a move met with opprobrium by other FSA brigades and civilians. Then the US and its allies began a campaign of air strikes.
“All those who were cursing and attacking us for joining Isis came to pledge their loyalty to Isis. A couple were FSA commanders, others were members of Islamic brigades. Even ordinary people now demand to be governed by Isis,” Abu Talha said.
The point is that we will not isolate ISIS by bombing them. We will not make the Sunni insurgency against Assad more moderate or pro-American. We need to understand what we are not capable of doing.
American solution in the Middle East. We have to let go of the outcome that ultimately we cannot control.
You’re forgetting your foreign policy serenity prayer. “God grant me the firepower to change the things I cannot accept, the courage to keep trying the same thing over and over, and the wisdom to–help! do something, anything, they’re going to kill us in our beds! “
Not having a close relationship with President Obama, Secretary of Defense was asked to resign.
The failure inside the White House with NSC advisor Susan Rice has never been more evident. The Syria mess is not the fault of the Pentagon but the buck stops with the President. Hillary Clinton was an absolute failure. Throw in the mess in Ukraine, how can that be Hagel’s fault? Should the US military been more involved for an agressive NATO policy moving boundaries towards Moscow and the Kremlin?
All depends whose side one picks, here is Ms Clinton’s darling President Erdogan of Turkey, another major player in the Syria mess.
Micromanagement of a US President …
Ahrar, JN, IS are dominant and firmly embedded in the north. It’s a different story in the south.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2014/11/17/247143_moderate-syrian-rebels-say-theyre.html?sp=/99/117/&
rh=1
http://www.ibtimes.com/us-stops-flow-weapons-moderate-syrian-rebels-considers-vetting-new-groups-sou
th-1725240#.VGtqnCEVcTo.twitter
Rebels will go with who’s winning and pays the best and radical factions are far from united. Situation remains as fluid as ever. This is going to take awhile but it’s better than our troops in harm’s way.
We need to know that being stampeded by John McCain and Lindsay Graham is a losing foreign policy.
However, it is not sectarianism but political power that is driving this multi-sided proxy war.
It seems that Israel and the US are providing support to Jabhat al-Nusra south of Damascus because the FSA is allied with them there and bombing Jabhat al-Nusra north of Damascus because the FSA is opposing them there.
The US after sitting on its haunches finally provided air support to the Kurds in Kobani, against Turkey’s wishes.
What appears to be going on is multiple proxy wars supplying arms, with the shifting of allegiances based on expectations of victory and personal alliance rather than ideology, including religiously veneered ideology.
There are likely quite a bit more than five moving pieces.
But the original purpose of the US intervention was to defend the Kurds and degrade the arms that ISIL/ISIS has captured from US-supplied forward depots in Iraq.
It didn’t take long for McCain/Graham to generate mission creep.
As soon as the memo from Rice, or the General Staff geniuses, or whoever, made clear that the strategy depended on distinguishing “moderate” Sunnis from “radical” ones, it should have immediately been thrown in the trash can. Just more slicing the baloney too thin. Of course, one hopes that the strategy didn’t come from the Commander in Chief himself…
Not that there aren’t such differences, it’s just that our Imperial Sturmtruppen can’t possibly reliably identify or confirm them, especially from the air. Incredibly, they don’t even wear uniforms saying “Radical”!
There simply is no plausible military strategy for us in this conflict. Assuming “plausible” means somehow helpful or successful, which I guess is not the way McRube and Lindsay G define the term, haha.
Maybe the solution is to kindly ask the fighters to wear a “Moderate” or “Radical” uniform!
Then we can use our Empirical Powers for good by bombing the shit out of both groups, and apologizing for killing moderates every now and again.
#NewAmericanCentury
We need to understand what we are not capable of doing.
Perfectly right.
US out of the Middle East!
But totally, man.
The whole place is a five-sided argument.
Or worse.
“In the fight to take down Assad, there are no bad Sunnis or good attacks against Sunni fighters.”
If I didn’t know you better, Boo, I might think you were falling for Turkish propaganda. wasn’t aware that we went in there to take down Assad, I thought we went in to take down ISIS. Somehow Turkey insists that we are there to take out Assad.
As for good Sunnis, there are plenty of traditional Sunni tribes opposed to ISIS, and they deserve our fullest support. Even the main Shia religious leader in Iraq is urging the Iraq government to support these Sunni tribes. There are good Sunnis and bad Sunnis, just as there are good Shias and bad Shias.
I’ll say this again.
The only winning side we have is getting our military, weapons and money out of there.
We’ll always have some CIA/Special Ops in and around. Let them make sure that nothing irreparable is going to happen to us or close allies.
That’s it.
Continuing to fund/support/kill in the middle east is The. Same. Exact. Thing. As. Vietnam.