The Answer to the Syrian Question is “Lebanon”

First off, Russia has released a report claiming that Syrian rebels used poison gas on March 19th. Whether or not the report is true, it does cast doubt on the Administration’s “Assad rat bastard against Freedom Fighters” narrative.  The Russian report, if proved correct, just adds one more bit of evidence that the rebels in Syria are just as nasty and inhuman as the Assad forces.  And this, in turn, makes it less and less wise for us to intervene in Syria.  But, there is a course of action the United States can take during this crisis which will help us, help our allies, weaken our enemies and leave us in a better position no matter who wins the Syrian Civil War – and that is to concentrate our efforts on Lebanon.

What is important is not necessarily what is in the newspapers.  In fact, what is making the headlines is as often as not the last thing we should be paying attention to.  This is because most reporters and editors are ignorant of things like history, strategy, military issues and such.  They are in the news business not to keep the citizenry informed, but to make bags of money and get rich and famous.  This Onion parody of why the MSM reported on Miley Cyrus actually explains the motivation of the  news business correctly.  Read it for the truth – and for the laughs, as its quite funny (language warning).  While reports showing the horrors of war and dead bodies will get people to tune it (especially if their are explosions!), what you’re seeing there isn’t what is at issue…it is the result of an issue.  The issue going on in the Muslim world right now is who gets to be in charge…all the battling and civil war and revolution and repression is all about who gets to be top dog.  Our leaders might think this, that or the other thing but the people there causing the trouble simply want power and are willing to go to horrific, anti-human lengths to obtain it.

Given this, we can be certain that whomever ruthlessly climbs to the top over a mountain of corpses probably won’t be a paragon of virtue.  In other words, whomever wins will be an enemy – actual or in prospect – of all we hold dear.  We can’t intervene on either side because both sides are simply after the same thing – ruthless, absolute power in order to perpetuate themselves (though, truth be told, the least dangerous outcome for us is an Assad victory…he doesn’t appear to have dreams of a global caliphate, as do many of the rebels).  So, our task then is to ensure that at the end of the bloody war, we and our allies are in the best possible position.  To me, this makes me turn to Lebanon.

Lebanon was wracked by civil war for years and then, essentially, came under Syrian and proxy-Iranian rule (the Iranian proxies are Hezbollah).  While this has made for peace in the sense of nobody immediately shooting each other, it has made for a lot of oppression as neither the Syrians nor Hezbollah are interested in the rights and desires of the people of Lebanon.  With Syria now locked in a death match and Iran expending energy keeping her ally Assad in power, the time is ripe for us to try and leverage Syria and Hezbollah (Iran) out of Lebanon.  The people there probably don’t like Syrian/Hezbollah rule, even if they don’t particularly like us, either.  There’s not much Syria can do if we decided to apply a little political pressure backed by covert military pressure to help the Lebanese push out the Syrians and then turn on Hezbollah. If we can get Syria/Hezbollah out of Lebanon then at the end of the Syrian Civil War we’ll have a weaker Syria, a weaker Iran, a free Lebanon and a more secure Israel – and if our efforts fail, we’ll be no worse off than we are now and we won’t have gotten ourselves involved in a Syrian Civil War which can do no good for us.

I don’t at all expect Obama to do anything like this.  He’s even more ignorant than a news reporter.  But I thought it worthwhile to demonstrate that there is an alternate policy for us to support – and thus put to rest the concept that some how or another because Obama screwed up and Assad is a bastard that we have to get directly involved.  The world doesn’t work like a machine – its run by human beings and thus can be quite confusing and the real issue can be off to the side while everyone is looking at the shiny object.  A true sense of our power and what our interests are clears things up a lot – pity that hardly anyone in a position of authority has any idea of either thing.

16 thoughts on “The Answer to the Syrian Question is “Lebanon”

  1. J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) September 5, 2013 / 8:40 pm

    There’s been endless talk about how the brutal Assad regime has slaughtered a couple hundred thousand of his own people. But it isn’t like he’s murdering people by the thousands just for the fun of it. He’s simply trying to stay in power. Just some food for thought — if there developed in this country a violent opposition to the Obama regime, how many Americans do you think said regime would slaughter?

    • neocon01 September 6, 2013 / 10:39 am


      as stated by barrys friend, neighbor and business partner ayers, some where around 25 million.
      strange though in war it is sooooo terrible to kill a few thousand people, while right down the street from barry they MURDER thousands of babies a week in the name of “choice”

  2. Retired Spook September 6, 2013 / 12:12 am

    I’ve been playing catch up ever since we got back from our two week loop through the Rockies, including a great 3-day visit with Amazona. From my navy background, much of which was mid-east related, I’ve been trying to paint a mental picture of all the different possible scenarios, depending on what the U.S. does or doesn’t do WRT Syria. There are a number of possibilities, most of them bad, and the rest worse. So, in the end, the best strategy, it would seem, would be to get the least bad result possible. And that’s a horrible position to be in, made even more horrible by the political posturing of the leaders of both parties.

  3. Amazona September 6, 2013 / 8:51 am

    Sorry—should have posted this here:

    There’s a lot of hand-wringing and fretting about what kind of message we will send to “the world” if we don’t back Obama’s silly “red line” posturing.

    First, “the world” has already made up its mind about Obama, and one token flutter isn’t going to change that.

    Two, why should we charge in to mitigate some or any of the fallout of electing the moron in the first place? As people keep saying, AFTER THE FACT, elections have consequences. Yeah, they do. And we should just let this play out, and let every bozo with an Obama sticker on his car be the focal point of contempt for helping put us, as a nation, in this position.

    I don’t believe that “the world” conflates the United States with its inept figurehead in the Oval Office. “The world” has to think that about half of us are either pathetically stupid or just blindly gullible, but even given that our national profile as a nation which has a tendency to defend itself is still there, though lurking in the background behind all those American flags that have been taken off the presidential podium.

    I expected nothing but problems the first time the guy was elected, and was one of those who predicted that being dumb enough to hand him the position for a second time, with no reelection coming up to keep him at least a tiny bit restrained would lead to even more.. With Obama, it’s never been “will he screw up” but “what screw-up will he hand us THIS week?” I don’t blame Obama. He is what he is, and he is so proud of what he is that he kept telling us even though his handlers tried to rein him in.

    No, I blame each and every person who voted for him.

    And I think it is not only too late to save ourselves from the consequences of that foolishness, it is not worth the trouble to try, I think every talking head ought to say, loud and clear, “Sure this is utter insanity, but then so were the last two elections. X number of Americans wanted this, they won, so this is just more of what they have imposed on the country.”

    So instead of trying to find a way to mitigate the damage he has done and is doing to our nation in things like his international blundering, I suggest that all our of our voices, political and talk show and us out in the heartland, make a point of saying a hearty “THANK YOU” to every Obama voter, and making it clear that we know who put us in this position. It was not Obama. It was those who put him where he is, and we can’t forget that, or let them forget it.

  4. Amazona September 6, 2013 / 9:01 am

    Some thought-provoking comments and links from RedState”

    “Obama’s proposed strike at the forces of Bashar al-Assad in Syria is filled with ironies. We have the man who had pledged to make America more respected reducing America to a laughingstock, we have the man who praised Assad as a moderating force in the Middle East about to bomb said moderating force, we have a Nobel Peace Prize winner about to launch an unprovoked attack on one party in a civil war… that could have been stopped or mitigated by the Nobel Peace Prize winner two years ago, and we have the sorry spectacle of the United States about to aid the same al Qaeda that we are killing with drones in Pakistan and Yemen.”
    “His assertion has prompted Russian President Vladimir Putin to call Kerry out as a liar.
    Speaking to his human rights council (Ed note: okay, I did laugh when I read that), Mr Putin recalled watching a congressional debate where Mr Kerry was asked about al-Qaeda. Mr Putin said he had denied that it was operating in Syria, even though he was aware of the al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra group.

    Mr Putin said: “This was very unpleasant and surprising for me. We talk to them (the Americans) and we assume they are decent people, but he is lying and he knows that he is lying. This is sad.”
    “Today the New York Times reported on the increasing prominence of al Qaeda and al Qaeda allied forces in Syria:

    Much of the concern among American officials has focused on two groups that acknowledge ties to Al Qaeda. These groups — the Nusra Front and the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria — have attracted foreign jihadis, used terrorist tactics and vowed to create a society in Syria ruled by their severe interpretation of Islamic law.

    They have established a firm presence in parts of Aleppo and Idlib Provinces and in the northern provincial capital of Raqqa and in Deir al-Zour, to the east on the Iraqi border.
    While the jihadis claim to be superior fighters, and have collaborated with secular Syrian rebels, some analysts and diplomats also note that they can appear less focused on toppling President Bashar al-Assad. Instead, they said, they focus more on establishing a zone of influence spanning Iraq’s Anbar Province and the desert eastern areas of Syria, and eventually establishing an Islamic territory under their administration.”

  5. Retired Spook September 6, 2013 / 9:41 am

    Steve Hayes, senior writer for the Weekly Standard and a regular panel member on Fox News Special Report said on Fox & Friends this morning that Congressmen and Senators he’s talked to say constituent calls WRT military involvement in Syria have been running 10-1 against. When asked if he thought there was any way Obama could get approval from Congress, he said no — not even close.

    The ultimate irony, as noted at RedState, is that a Nobel Peace Prize recipient is about to launch an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that poses no threat the us.

    • M. Noonan September 6, 2013 / 11:53 am

      I think it was David Burge (Iowahawk) who tweeted last week “Nobel Prize: Good For Three Wars of Your Choice!”.

      • J. R. Babcock (@JRBabcock) September 6, 2013 / 12:10 pm

        Perhaps the Nobel committee will rescind the award. Naaaaw, probably not. It is entertaining, though, seeing Obama and his buds twisting in the international wind.

  6. tiredoflibbs September 6, 2013 / 9:56 am

    “a Nobel Peace Prize recipient is about to launch an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that poses no threat the us.”

    That should read “a Nobel Peace Prize recipient is about to launch ANOTHER unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that poses no threat to us.”

    …”unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation that poses no threat to us.”

    Where have I heard this before….. oh yeah! That was the mindless regurgitation from the left during the Bush years. Notice that these same drones are mostly silent now. Most of the left that are in favor of action in Syria are doing so only because the pResident wants it. That is the perfect example of mindless group think. Yeah mitchie, I know it is repetitive, but it is repetitive for a reason. It is a very accurate description of the political stance of the left. If you don’t like reading my highly accurate description then give me a reason to change it.

    In one of your last threads, you revisited the first decade of 2000, and you REGURGITATED all the inaccuracies, slogans, dumbed down talking points and debunked leftist “facts” for that period. How can you complain with a straight face when what I accurately describe is all you do?

    I see that you cowardly removed the NY/Texas thread.

    Go ahead and delete this post to prove what an utter hypocrite you really are.

    • tiredoflibbs September 6, 2013 / 9:57 am

      I posted the above from the “blogs I follow section” thinking I was in the hate blog. Sorry, but it is just too easy to tweak these buffoons.

      • neocon01 September 6, 2013 / 10:45 am

        but it is just too easy to tweak these buffoons.

        been there, done that, now banned ROTFLMAO!!
        give em hell.

      • Amazona September 9, 2013 / 9:03 am

        If you follow them and/or post there, you are feeding the trolls. Surely you can see that even a negative post like yours feeds their egos and fills out their blog.

    • 02casper September 6, 2013 / 9:00 pm

      Hate to tell you this, but the thread is still up. You might also notice that there isn’t a lot of support for Obama on the whole bombing Syria thing either.

      • tiredoflibbs September 7, 2013 / 6:52 am

        There isn’t the passionate criticism of him either that we saw from the left during the spin up of Iraq War nor during the “civil war” afterward.

        0bAMATEUR wants to deposit us in the middle of a CIVIL WAR with an evil regime on one side and terrorists on the other. The left is hardly passionate the way they were before…even you. Your token “I disagree…” or “I don’t support…” is nothing compared to the level of criticism you had before.

        The left does not want to humiliate 0bAMATEUR and they will either vote for the war out of loyalty and give scant criticism when they absolutely have to otherwise they are silent.

  7. neocon01 September 6, 2013 / 10:42 am

    so……. we bomb syrian muslim cut throats, so they can beat al quida muslim cut throats in a war for muslim cut throat dominance???
    WOW sounds like a stellar plan to me……
    the only thing we are missing in this FARCE is hanoi jane sitting on a cruise missile in syria.

Comments are closed.