War on ISIL Is Not What It Seems
The covert US-led war on Syria, under the guise of fighting terrorism, is now well underway despite its flagrant criminality and fraudulence. Thanks to the Western and Arab-sponsored terror networks, as well as Zionist-controlled Western media, the military aggression is being conducted with a grotesque image of humanitarianism and lawfulness.
US military leaders say their aerial bombardment, backed by five Arab allies and not the original 40-nation coalition, is the beginning of a prolonged campaign that could continue intermittently for years. They also warn that airstrikes against their own creation, ISIL, will not have a serious impact on the terrorist group’s overall operations – just like in Iraq.
These comments seem to suggest that the strikes are just about the US administration going through the motions, with no real expectation and strategy. But they do have expectation, and certainly, they do have strategy. They are doing what they can to add to the neocons’ call for boots on the ground in the second phase of the war on Syria, which among other things, is clearly intended to:
1. Expand US military presence in the region
2. Train/arm new “moderate” militants (the old ones became ISIL)
3. Push for regime change in Damascus
4. Wrest control of the oil from ISIL
5. Arm the Kurds so they can separate from Iraq and Syria
6. Partition Iraq and Syria.
So the US-led war on ISIL is not what it seems. Even the political class in Washington has made clear that “the bombing campaign is in no way aimed at helping the Syrian government to fight ISIL and/or gain ground.”
This could only mean one thing: Preventing the Syrian government reclaiming its own sovereign territory against the newly trained so-called “moderate” extremists. It further anticipates that the next move would be the targeting of Syrian government forces to prevent them reclaiming territory. And the nefarious logical conclusion: Saudi, Qatari, and Jordanian warplanes striking Damascus, alongside American Tomahawks/drones, and Israeli missiles.
At this point, the hysteria in Washington over the illicit campaign seems a pitch or two higher than anything experienced in the al-Qaeda years. Yet one clear sign of the farcical nature of this moment is Washington’s inability to understand that they have plunged into the swamp of yet another war that is destined to fail to create an American client state in Iraq, Syria or the Levant – tragically and completely.
President Obama hardly can be blamed for all of this, but he has done his part to make it worse – and worse it will surely get as his administration assumes ownership of this doomed military adventure that is destined to bleed into many things with disastrous consequences.
In any case, on a 36-month schedule, Obama is ceding his war to the next president, as was done to him by George W. Bush. That next president may well be Hillary Clinton, who was secretary of state as Iraq War 2.0 sputtered to its sour conclusion. Notably, it was her husband whose administration kept the original Iraq War of 1990 alive via no-fly zones and sanctions!
The echoes could go back even further as similarities are telling. If there is a summary lesson here, perhaps it is this: In Syria, just like the covert/overt wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Yemen, Libya and Somalia, a clear-cut success for the War Party is beyond reach. That’s because Syria’s Shia, Christians, Kurds, Druze, and other religious and ethnic minorities, along with a sizable number of Sunni Arabs, continue to back their elected government in Damascus – the only force still standing between them and a good beheading at the hands of “moderate” rebels.
In effect, the new war of deceit against Syria has no UN resolution authorizing force; is not part of a NATO operation; has no Arab League resolution in favor of military action; lacks any specific US congressional authorization; and enjoys no invitation of the host country to conduct military operations. The only way to win is not to play the game. At least, this much is certain.