• New Registration

    To become a member of JackpineRadicals please see post: https://jackpineradicals.com/boards/topic/join-jackpine-radicals/

Home Main Forums General Discussion The central problem of U.S. "regime change" wars

  • Peace Patriot (4952 posts)
    Donor

    The central problem of U.S. "regime change" wars

    I frankly don’t trust anyone described as a “award-winning reporter” who has written for The New Yorker, Time Magazine, etc., as is the case with Rania Abouzeid, whom Aaron Mate interviews in this segment of The Real News.  I’d rather hear from a vegetable vendor in an Idlib market or a Syrian mother who now can’t walk to that market without a veil over her face and a male escort.  But since we don’t have access to Syrians in Idlib, Abouzeid will have to do.  It is to her credit that Aaron Mate has chosen her to interview, and she has been on the ground in Idlib.

    A quick summary of the Syrian war, for those who need to catch up:  The U.S. – with the complicity of the U.K., Saudi Arabia and Israel  – has been trying to overthrow the legitimate government of Syria for some years now, by funding and weaponizing extremist jihadi Islamists, who have converged on Syria from all parts of the world (even China!) to create an Islamic ‘caliphate,’ who have turned Syria into a war zone and have routinely stripped the Syrians whose cities or regions they conquered of their religious and civil rights as Syrians.  The rightful government in Damascus – the government of President Bashar al-Assad – is SECULAR and tolerant and protective of all religious groups.

    Syria’s ally Russia came to Syria’s assistance and together they have fought and defeated the jihadis and re-conquered most of Syria.  Interestingly, Assad, who wasn’t all that popular at the beginning of this foreign-instigated war, is now very popular with liberated Syrians as they return to or reclaim their homes and their tolerant culture, and try to clear the rubble of this U.S.-caused disaster and rebuild.

    As Syria, with Russia’s significant help, rid each area of the jihadis, they gave surviving jihadis the option to remain, if they stopped fighting, or to be bussed north to Idlib (on the border with Turkey) if they laid down their arms.  (I’m not sure if they made the offer to remain to foreign jihadis or just to Syrians.)  The jihadis in Idlib continued the war.  Recently, Syrian and Russian forces gathered around Idlib to reclaim that area for the Syrian government.  President Assad vowed to re-take every inch of Syria.  The last battle was about to begin…

    …when Israel decided to overtly intervene, to prevent Assad’s total victory and to draw the U.S. and NATO directly into the war.  Israeli jets, using a French naval vessel offshore for cover, entered Syrian airspace, and then, using a Russian cargo plane as further cover, proceeded to bomb Syrian targets.  One of Syria’s missiles, firing at the Israeli jets, went astray and downed the Russian plane, killing some twenty Russians.  This effectively ended the Russian-Israeli “gentlemen’s agreement” to keep out of each other’s way in Syria.

    Vladimir Putin immediately stopped the momentum toward the battle of Idlib and instead held a meeting with Turkey’s ruler, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to devise a peaceful ending to the Idlib situation.  History may show that we owe Putin for preventing WW III, which is certainly what Israel had in mind.

    Russia is now equipping Syria with an upgraded missile and reconn system.  They are creating a no-fly zone over Syria.  But the Idlib situation remains unresolved.  The Idlib region is still largely occupied by extremist jihadists who continue to try to impose their woman-hating Saudi religion on Syrians.

    This is the situation that Rania Abouzeid describes in Idlib city, at the 5:45 minute mark in this interview.  It is why I am posting this interview.  This is EXACTLY the problem of the U.S.-instigated war on Syria, and it has been the problem with EVERY U.S. “regime change” war, from Vietnam to Iraq to Libya:  the use of proxy forces who could not otherwise obtain the consent of the people to their rule.**

    (published 10/9/2018) (See minute mark 5:45 for Abouzeid’s comments in Idlib.)

    – – –

    **(This applies also to the U.S. economic wars, which are sometimes used as the cruel prep for hot wars, and/or to cause collapse of the targeted government, so that U.S.-approved rulers can be installed.  Cuba, Venezuela, Brazil, Argentina and of course Iran and Russia are among current U.S. targets.  The U.S. sometimes uses locals for “regime change” – whether economic or military – but they are always from the local privileged class or military who could not otherwise impose their policies on the majority.  The U.S. has used all of its methods except direct invasion to topple Assad  – and has failed.  That is why our elite hates Russia so much just now – that and the CIA/Neo-Cons’ long-standing goal of conquering and carving up Russia, for which they have concocted the absurd “Russiagate” propaganda.  There is no reason at all that We the People of the U.S. should hate Russia.)

    Yanath, nevereVereven, ThinkingANew and 12 othersozoneman, Koko, MistaP, Ohio Barbarian, 99thMonkey, OCMI, Johnny Rash, sadoldgirl, Tierra y Libertad, N2Doc, chknltl, Enthusiast like this

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

▼ Hide Reply Index
16 replies
  • Enthusiast (16192 posts)
    Donor

    1. End these foreign entanglements! The mission is counterproductive.

    "I got a great big pointed fang Which is my Zomby Toof My right foot's bigger than my other one is Like a reg'lar Zomby Hoof If I raid your dormitorium Don't try to remain aloof . . ." The Zombie Woof
  • Tierra y Libertad (3326 posts)
    Donor

    2. There are no good guys in this atrocity.

    What difference does it make to the dead, the orphans and the homeless, whether the mad destruction is wrought under the name of totalitarianism or the holy name of liberty or democracy?  Gandhi

     

    But such is the irresistible nature of truth, that all it asks, and all it wants is the liberty of appearing. Thomas Paine

     
  • sadoldgirl (3035 posts)
    Donor

    3. When I hear the words "Assad regime" I become suspicious.

    Yes, the problem is that nobody wants these people back in their country.

    The other problem, which she did not mention is Erdogan’s intent to keep

    part of Syria, in other words to help divide the country up into parts. I don’t

    think that Assad will move into Idlib without Putin’s agreement. The question

    then is how much influence does Putin have over Erdogan.

    • Peace Patriot (4952 posts)
      Donor

      5. You have summed up the situation very well!

      I would add, though, that Putin chose this difficult deal with Erdogan over WW III.  Israel tried very hard to start WW III, with its stealth incursion into Syria, where a stray Syrian defensive missile downed a Russian plane, killing 20 Russians.  Israel thus broke their agreement with Russia, in a desperate effort to draw the U.S. and NATO directly into the war.  Putin did not retaliate but headed off the crisis by calling off the battle for Idlib.  Russia is now upgrading Syrian missile defense and reconn and creating a no-fly zone over Syria.

      The U.S. was poised to follow Israel’s lead into WW III.  Remember Bolton or whoever it was (a US general, I think) saying, just before the attack on Idlib, that, IF Syria used chem weapons (huh?), the U.S. would bomb Syria.  Then Israel did its nasty murderous trick, using the Russian cargo plane as cover.  All was set.  And Putin wouldn’t take the bait.

    • MistaP (11126 posts)
      Donor

      8. ditto Morsi–he was the biggest backer of Sunni jihadis in Syria, more than

      Erdogan, but the US nodded at his deposal anyway under SoS Kerry–perhaps even to keep post-Red-Line Syria from blowing up too hard with Islamist neighbors pumping up the less-controllable anti-Assad forces: allying with people decapitating kids or literally al-Qaeda couldn’t have been easy for most of the paper-pushers

      things are always less than they appear

      the Clinton campaign created Trump with the Pied Piper strategy (Third Way = Bell Curve)
  • Fire with Fire (1735 posts)
    Donor

    4. There is only one real goal and one "benefit" of regime change wars

    To make money for contractors.

    The USA spent less, even adjusted for inflation, on the Cold War with all its proxy wars than it does now with no enemy at all, other than “evil” personalities like Assad and Putin.  Personally, I absolutely refuse to debate about “brutal dictators,” for the simple reason that it is none of “our” business who runs other countries and how they do it.

    I have as big a disagreement with doctrinaire socialists as I do with the war mongers themselves.  Our government is not fucking around in Syria to “get” oil or pipeline easements or for any other palpable imperial purpose.  “We” already control the world market for oil.  No, we are at war with Eastasia because we have always been at war with Eastasia.

    • Ohio Barbarian (13443 posts)
      Moderator

      6. I agree with you that what were once called the Merchants of Death are making

      shiploads of money off of regime change wars, but the doctrinaire socialists, as you call us, still have a point. The believers in an American Empire dominating the world do want control of those Syrian oil pipelines in order to increase their power, and there is a huge imperial geopolitical factor in Syria–the Russian naval base on the Mediterranean coast. I know this because some of them come right out and say so in things like Foreign Policy and Foreign Affairs.

      American imperialists wanted to take that base away from Russia, and the easiest way to do that was regime change. I think all of these factors coalesced in Syria, to the detriment of Syrians everywhere.

      No man ought to stay poor so another man can get rich. --Newton Knight
      • Fire with Fire (1735 posts)
        Donor

        11. You are right that the operating doctrines from the intellectuals is imperialism

        I’m not sure whether you agree or disagree with this:  In the dance between the Merchants of Death and the erudite members of the  National Security Community, the intellectuals are the junior partners — after-the-fact rationalizers for what the sponsors of the War Against East Asia want.  Keeping Syria out of Russian hands makes a lot of sense if you are playing Risk!  And that is what the Ph.Ds writing for Foreign Affairs are playing with their spheres of influence and other mumbo jumbo.

        Like so many issues of “public” policy, there are layers and layers and layers of bullshit.

        • Ohio Barbarian (13443 posts)
          Moderator

          12. Sure, because those same intellectuals often get paid, at least indirectly, for

          reaching the conclusions they do. If they’re really good at it they’ll get to be on the Raytheon Board of Directors or something for awhile.

          Your perspective is rational and reasonable. The intellectuals spew bullshit to justify conquest, pacification, whatever the imperial adventure name of the day is, for the real goals of increasing profit and global power for our oligarchical elite. IOW, some big political donors. Political speech writers and corporate media hacks water that intellectual stuff down for both politicians and the public.

          There are some smart people in government and in intelligence agencies who counsel against imperial expansion, but they are either ignored or forced out, while many others just STFU and go with the flow.

          Or, as my dad would say, “Money talks and bullshit walks.”

          No man ought to stay poor so another man can get rich. --Newton Knight
          • Fire with Fire (1735 posts)
            Donor

            13. I grew up in Texas and I use that expression all the time

            It always gets a knowing nod, and often a chuckle.  But I still don’t know what it means.

            I use it as you quoted it here, and I guess by common usage it means more or less that Money motivates and Talk doesn’t.

            I love the fact that it is basically incoherent — which is the point about bullshit walking.  The only thing I miss about Texas is the poetic way we Texans speak.

            • Ohio Barbarian (13443 posts)
              Moderator

              14. I was born and raised in San Antonio. I left because I couldn't stand the

              weather back in the 1980s-global warming was changing the climate, summers became literally hotter and longer, flora and fauna changed, nasty critters like fire ants and scorpions and evangelical preachers and arrogant capitalist pigs took over. I was also literally allergic to almost everything that grew there.

              I still miss the food and some of the festivals, but there’s plenty where I’m at, too.

              I guess the saying is one of those inherently funny things where the style and method of delivery is just as important as the words themselves.

              No man ought to stay poor so another man can get rich. --Newton Knight
  • Ohio Barbarian (13443 posts)
    Moderator

    7. I haven't watched the video; recommended for the commentary.

    I’d just like to add that Putin wasn’t the only one who showed restraint in the face of Nutty-Yahoo’s flagrant provocation; so did Macron, but for different reasons.

    I’m no more of a fan of Macron than I am of Putin, but that French frigate did fire at and probably shot down a Syrian missile that was coming at it. The French sailors also knew damned well there were Israeli planes in the area and probably figured out what they were doing after the fact.

    Putin showed he is well aware of MAD and showed restraint. Macron could have screamed bloody murder at either the Syrians or the Israelis, but chose not to do so. Awareness of MAD might explain staying quiet about the Syrian missiles; French imperial designs in the region might have kept him quiet about the Israelis, which would be a damned shame.

    No man ought to stay poor so another man can get rich. --Newton Knight
  • ozoneman (755 posts)
    Donor

    9. Excellent!

    I think there is one timeline swap. Putin made this arrangement with Erdogan before the bombing by France/Israel. Some think that that is what triggered the bombing. Peace is not an option for the West it seems.

    “Vladimir Putin immediately stopped the momentum toward the battle of Idlib and instead held a meeting with Turkey’s ruler, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, to devise a peaceful ending to the Idlib situation.”

    • Peace Patriot (4952 posts)
      Donor

      10. Oops! I think I got the U.S. general's BS about a chem attack mixed up with…

      …the Israeli jets’ dirty trick, in the timeline.  Something triggered Putin calling off the battle for Idlib – i.e., made him realize that the U.S. was looking for an excuse to come in.  That general’s statement was like an instagram.  Ah, now I remember, too, a Russian general’s reply that they had evidence that the jihadis were rehearsing a chem attack to blame on Syria.  Checkmate.  So Israel tried to toss over the chess board.

      Hotheads were urging Putin to strike Israel.  Putin didn’t.  He just quietly set the chessboard back up.  (lol.)

      • ozoneman (755 posts)
        Donor

        15. Putin played it well.

        Like you say, they had intelligence that a staged chemical weapon attack was being planned (white helmets?), giving the U.S. and allies reason to go in.

        As soon as Russia and Turkey agreed on Idlib safe zone, it seems the West’s plan B was to bomb them anyway.

        All of which gave Putin the justification for installing S-300’s in Syria. A good chess move.

        Obama’s war is now Trump’s. It matters little it seems when it comes to war, multinational capitalism, corrupt banking system…

    • MistaP (11126 posts)
      Donor

      16. flipping Erdogan was probably the key to all this

      and there’s the role of that 2016 coup (whether he triggered it early or not): this is the first time any Turkish government has managed to fend off the military, which’d always called the shots, able to impose its vision over and over against Islamists and socdems alike

      the only other longer-ruling PM was Adnan Menderes, who was executed 1961 after getting too autocratic

      the Clinton campaign created Trump with the Pied Piper strategy (Third Way = Bell Curve)