Wow, one missile strike and you claim to see the history of the world for the next fifty years. You must win a lottery jackpot every week.
No I use history repeating itself, have you forgotten Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya....how is this going to be ANY different?
Have I Triggered you or something? Good.
I would hope that the sane people prevail and this stays at only a one off happening from Trump lobbing Tomahawks on Syria and he isn't FORCED to escalate things....he needs to reread his OWN ******* words going right back to 2012 and what he said himself about military intervention in Syria and that it would "lead to bad things happening"
Three very different situations. Iraq has been turned into a functioning democracy. Afghanistan is no longer a safe haven from which terrorists can launch attacks against America. Libya was just a pointless mistake. However none of these has anything to do with Syria.
Under Obama's small stick foreign policy bad things were already getting worse across the ME, and the vacuum created by America's absence had encouraged Russia and Iran to move in to fill it. President Trump had just been wrong about Syria and Assad's chemical attack just days after the US indicated it could live with Assad in power showed that America's neglect of the ME had led Assad and Russia to think there were no red lines they couldn't cross with impunity. Now they have learned there are.
Iraq was never a "functioning democracy" - it just had the outward appearances of one. The cronyism, tribal/ethnic/religion fractures, the corruption - all that was still in place. The reason Iraq fractured was not because we left, but because it lacked the institutions and culture to sustain a real democracy, and we - in our incredible arrogance thought that toppling a Middle East dictator was all it would take. Oy ve.
The reality is that people think it's a simple problem and simple solutions are what is needed but they don't have a clue about the Middle East and what's worse, many don't want to learn. You can blame Obama for a "small stick" policy, but Obama had a better understanding of the realities in that region.
For example - Assad is unsupportable. But WHO IS in the plethora of rebel groups? In terms of human rights violations to Syrian civilians - many of those rebal groups aren't a whole lot better than Assad. WHO can hold and stabilize Syria if Assad is taken down? WHAT happens if Assad stays?
Who are the players here? Just a trailer....Iran, Russia, Turkey, ISIS, Hezbollah, various groups of Kurds, Syrian rebel groups. Turkey hates the Kurds and is worried about Kurdish uprising and violence in it's own country. Russia is persuing a scorched earth policy to prop up Assad who is becoming increasingy more brutal.
But Obama should have done more...like what? Boots on the ground? Without a clear idea of the end game that is unsupportable.
