SYRIA - PART TWO
In Sun Tzu’s Art of War, it is made
very clear that knowledge of the enemy’s capabilities, and of your own
capabilities, is critical to winning any war; and war is much more a game of
chess than that of a boxing match.
The current situation in Syria is to a large
degree the result of the policies instituted by Obama when he first took office
in 2009 and went on his world apology tour that began in Egypt. That was quickly
followed by policies of getting us out of Iraq and Afghanistan as quickly as
possible; which are now complete in Iraq and in the final stages in
Afghanistan.
Then we ignored the Green revolution in Iran and the
support of the Arab spring in North Africa.
The message of all these actions, or inactions, is very clear and that
is --- the United States is in support of removing the strong men ruling any of
the Islamic countries in favor of those with strong ties to their religion, especially the Muslim Brotherhood.
Russia and Putin have a somewhat
different view of the world as they have probably had more citizens killed by
the Islamic fanatics than we have in Chechnya and the various southern
boarder areas they have with the Muslims.
Putin would like to see a continuation of the old system of Strong men
ruling these countries since their desire for power was greater than their
religious faith and that kept some of the heat off the Russians. Syria was a win-win for them since, besides
preventing the emergence of a Caliphate, it was a jab at the United States since
it was Obama’s policies that started all this change to begin with.
To be blunt, the Russian policy makes more sense than the United States policy mainly because
in the United States the political leadership of both parties has been
infiltrated by the Muslim Brotherhood and they have been able to manipulate
Washington into doing their bidding, which is not to our betterment.
Making this situation even worse
we have the entire leadership of this administration being composed of
academics and political neophytes with no understanding of power and the use of
power. They only know what the books say is supposed to work but few have ever
actually had to do anything, including the current president, prior to taking
office.
After five years it’s very clear
that Obama’s team has no clue as to what is really going on anywhere as they
are solely focused on yesterday’s polls and how to keep their base of power
satisfied so they can complete the transformation of the country into the
utopian society that they envision. The
rest of the world, is now seeing that the White House is empty and there is no
coherent strategy so they are taking advantage of the situation where they can.
This current debacle started when, in late August 2012, made his comments on the use of chemical weapons. Then, a month later at the UN, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu showed a bomb with a fuse
and a red line and said Iran was getting to the point that
something would have to be done. Although these comments were not technically
related, the media jumped on the Red Line and soon it was the policy of the
administration in both Iran and Syria. Neither leader denied this so it
became de facto policy. And to be fair, this was being pushed as something the UN should do since neither leader
wanted to do this alone.
But this is international politics
not lawn tennis with multiple power centers using Machiavelli’s The Prince, not Robert’s Rules of Order, as the logic in their dealings with other rulers.
And therein lays the “Rub” since Obama got to his position without ever having
done anything and all those he is dealing with become leaders in their countries because they were good at what they do, not just looking good. Obama and his academic and Hollywood friends
are being played by leaders that actually know what they are doing and that is
why this situation is so dangerous.
The logic for doing something or
not doing something is being based on having “normal” political leaders in
power in the major power centers, i.e. the United States, Russia, China, Great
Briton and Germany. However, Obama is
not up to the task of the office he occupies and that could lead to disaster
beyond mere reputation. For example;
Putin gets Assad to set up a hospital with demolition charges and after the
United States sends cruse missiles into hit their targets the Syrians gather up
the missile pieces and takes them to the hospital (a women’s or children’s
hospital would be best), and then they blow the hospital up during a missile
strike and throw the US cruise missile pieces from the previous strike in the
ruble. Then they go in and find the
pieces and blame the United States and Obama for what happened. What do we do if this or something like this
is done?
The logic for doing something is
strong but not compelling, especially since the UN is still evaluating the
evidence. What Obama should have done right after this use of chemicals
occurred was to immediately go to the UN and demand they do something. Then, if
they didn’t, well it was on them. And he still had an option to do something but
the extra time would have allowed us to at least have a better idea of what
actually happened. As it is, it’s
basically out of control and that means the outcome is not predictable.
Sara Palin, Rand Paul and Ted
Cruze have it right. This is not in our
national interest; it is a world problem (UN) and not ours to get involved. Push
the UN, not our Congress. Ted Cruze also
made a very good point; let’s say we get rid of Assad and the rebels get in. What do we do if the Al Qaida or Iranian factions get control of some of the
Chemical weapons that Assad has?
David J. Pristash
BBA, EMBA, Graduate GE management program,
Captain US
ARMY (Retired), Seven issued patents’
Member Beta Gamma
Sigma
Brecksville Ohio 44141
