Someone named Leila Al-Shami has an article dated September 2 in the New York times titled “The Death Blow Is Coming for Syrian Democracy”
Why is that? The subtitle says it all: The Assad regime’s imminent assault on Idlib will empower jihadists and crush the last of the revolution’s democrats. Why is the world standing by?
So the regime is going to take back the last of the lost territory because that’s what governments do after defeating the rebels. But, what if some of them are nice rebels and social revolutionaries? What to do?
Why is the world standing by? As the lady asks. What she means is, as the article is in the NYT, shouldn’t the Yanks bomb the hell out of the Syrians and their allies.
There is a lot in the article. I got the link from a Sic Semper Tyrannis(SST) commenter who noted, “This stuff is just too good to be written in its entirety by the stated author. This is co-written in Langley.”
For those not from the US, Langley is the locale of CIA HQ.
The SST commenter is of the opinion that, “And, certainly, the ground is being prepared for a very large US intervention in Syria... by both sides. I put my money on Putin. I think his intelligence is better than the US'... in every sense of the word."
That is his take from the article and a conclusion from watching Putin act on the world stage. From my vantage point it is hard to disagree.
Leila paints the FSA as noble warriors. This fellow disagrees. Is he right? Maybe not, but his comments have less the smell of propaganda.
This is not the point I want to make however.. What we should all understand is that since World War II, American intervention has almost always made things worse. Can anyone argue that either of our Iraq wars let to positive outcomes? Afghanistan? Okay, maybe we had to jump in after 911 (arguable), but if anyone can make the case that can convince me we needed to stay , I’ll be so shocked that a pacemaker will be needed.
Don’t mention Libya.
Sorry Leila, I don’t want to hold your hand on this one as the jets take off.