When Saddam went away the tactical situation in the middle east changed a little but the overall strategic situation worsened. Teheran stronger. Waziristan stronger. Sadr stronger. IRGC stronger.
If Qaddaffi is forced to leave the same will be true, and IS TRUE NOW nomatter what the outcome. AQ stronger.
The strategic target IS IN TEHERAN.
Teheran can be weakened thru weakening or destroyed Hizballah. Weakening or removing the Syrian alliance with Teheran, weakening or destroying the Mullahs.
Bush went for an easier Iraq. It has done nothing to weaken the forces of POPULAR SALAFI DOMINANCE, and strengthened the resistance of Teheran and the Shia simply by taking out their enemy with no possible successful alternate plan. The only strategic outcome in terms of decades which benefits the USA would be if demonstration of a secular democracy respecting private rights of speech and religion (already too late to achieve that), overwhelmed the ascendant forms of Islam in the popular mind in Iraq, and provided an example others wished to emulate.
As Marco from Tripoje would say: “GOOD LUCK”
Obama has selected Libya for ‘humanitarian’ reasons, while Syria suddenly shows us an opportunity NOT OTHERWISE AVAILABLE. Justification for humanitarian intervention or bombing or destruction of Syrian strategic assets ABOUNDS .. it is call HAMA
Even a Syria aligned with KSA after Assad is dead or gone, but otherwise changed minimally would be more advantageous than any outcome in Libya, let alone one where the USA find itself functionally aligned with Al Qaeda.
Imagine this world without an Assad (and a Teheran cut off from Hizballah), or mullocracy in Teheran. No IRGC, No Hizballah backed by them, no HAMAS backed by them.
Imagine a NEUTRAL religious IRAN which has no love for the USA but NO HATE.
Instead, Bush makes a strategic error in Iraq, and Obama simply has no clue and in fact AVOIDS the difficult challenge which can bring the AMERICAN PEOPLE the most gain in personal security…IN THE END. ON PURPOSE.
American pilots, special forces and marines getting killed and killing to stop Qaddafi from the same activity?
And when ‘success’ occurs - a popular salafi govt takes over which says the same things about the infidels, and continually shows connections with AQIM?
The humanitarian mission in Bosnia and Kosovo which spared muslims and which HAS NOT ENDED brought the USA no strategic gain. Families right there feel a silent gratitude, I am sure, but they are not speaking out so as to be heard and change thought patterns in Tahrir, and cause rejection of the MB and it’s goal.
If we are going to kill and be killed, lets make sure there is a strategic purpose.
AND GAIN THAT PURPOSE.
No comments:
Post a Comment