By Craig Andresen – Right Side Patriots on American Political Radio
The current situation in Syria, has gone from bad to worse this week, as a chemical weapons attack left dozens dead, and dozens more critically injured in a northern Syrian community, the Idlib province described as a rebel enclave.
It has been described as the worst chemical attack in the war-torn country in years, but the real question is…who did it?
Therein, lies the problem.
Internationally, the UK, U.S., France and the U.N. are blaming Syria’s president, Bashar al Assad, while Russia and Putin are laying the blame on the Syrian Rebels. Al Assad says he and his military had nothing to do with it, and the rebels have even tried to blame the U.N. for the situation that led to it.
Witnesses claim they saw chemical weapons being dropped from aircraft, and have reported a blueish-yellow haze that resulted from the bombing. The World Health Organization says the results seem to look like a sarin gas attack, but both I, and my Right Side Patriots partner, Diane Sori, believe the attack most likely was not sarin, but possibly chlorine gas.
Sarin has a lingering effect and contact with those exposed to it would also expose first responders to the deadly effects of sarin, and we have all seen the videos of first responders carrying, and trying to wash down the bodies of gasping victims. Those first responders, by the way, were not wearing hazmat suits or any other protective gear and would thus be exposed to sarin, and by now would also be dead, had it actually been sarin gas.
Also, sarin would have killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, not dozens. But chlorine gas, is a weapon of a different stripe. Chlorine gas would have a much smaller, much more localized effect, and would dissipate quickly, not leaving a residual, deadly residue on the skin of its victims making it possible for rescuers to immediately, and in an unprotected fashion, respond to those laying in the streets.
First, that blueish-yellow haze…that also coincides with chlorine gas. And second…the reports from witnesses that they saw chemical bombs being dropped from aircraft…how could they know that? While I am sure they saw ordinance being dropped, there would be virtually no way for them to distinguish what sort of ordinance it was, and what they have done seems obvious…they have conflated what they saw directly before the bombs hit, with what they saw directly after the bombs hit…and they drew a conclusion. Aircraft dropped bombs, and people were left gasping for air, and dying in the street…some reportedly foaming from the mouth. Therefore, to them, it was chemical weapons they saw being dropped.
They could be right…or they could be mistaken as well, as what may have happened is that whatever building it was that got hit, contained some sort of chemicals or chemical agents that were then dispersed due to the bombing.
Frankly, as things stand at the moment, we just don’t know the answer, and in the greater scheme of things, it really doesn’t matter who did it…it happened, and unless something is done, Syria will eventually become a haven for Islamists…another Islamist state.
Yesterday, Senator Marco Rubio made a valid point from the senate floor, when he said, in effect, that the people of Syria believe al Assad was responsible, and that those same people, having lost family members to the attack, will join whatever entity has the guns, and the means to remove al Assad from power. Right now, according to Rubio, that entity, with the guns and the means, are the Syrian rebels. This, again according to Senator Rubio, is why America must see to it that al Assad is removed from power…because we don’t want those people joining those rebels who are increasingly linked to Islamic terrorist groups like ISIS, al Nusra, al Qaeda and others.
First…if we step up our involvement in Syria, to take out al Assad…we would be in direct conflict with Russia…perhaps a better word for it would be that we would essentially be going to war with Russia…in Syria…and that is not something we want to do.
Frankly, although Syria does have a strategic significance to the United States, basically due to its geographic placement on the map…Syria, as a festering crap-hole, simply isn’t worth a war against Russia.
And second…once we would rid Syria of al Assad…what then?
The Obama doctrine in the Middle East was to create vacuums of power that would then be filled by Islamist terrorist organizations. How exactly would, or could we avoid that very scenario in Syria, as those Islamic terrorists organizations are already in Syria, posing as Syrian rebels?
This is what is going to pose the greatest dilemma for President Trump…if we ramp it up, and remove al Assad from Syria once are for all times…unless we are willing, and ready to have a permanent military presence in Syria…ISIS and their various ilk will pour in and set up shop, controlling not only an entire country, but a very strategic location which poses an even greater threat to our allies in the region, including a dire threat to Israel.
The absolute last thing we want to do, is to continue the Obama doctrine of creating a vacuum of power in a Middle East country, and therefore, ousting al Assad cannot be our endgame in Syria…but I believe there is a way to proceed.
This will surely test President Trump’s abilities as the Commander in Chief, but…I believe this will take a three pronged approach.
First…deploy our military assets, in league with Putin’s military assets, to rid Syria of Islamist terrorist entities. Run them into the ground. Wipe them out. Finish them. I believe that together with Russia, this could be accomplished in rather short order…perhaps in a matter of months.
Second, Trump will need to get Putin on board with putting the screws to al Assad, and remove him from power…either by force, or by diplomacy. In other words…provide al Assad with an option…either leave willingly and get the hell out of Syria and never come back…or be buried there.
And third…work diplomatically to set into place a true democratic, secular government in Syria while maintaining a military presence there to keep the peace and protect the Syrian people against further incursion by Islamic terrorist organizations.
Such an approach would be beneficial to both the United States, to Russia, and to the entire region as it would add stability to the area and security for the people of Syria, and our allies in neighboring countries.
Such an action as I describe, would work in concert with our current efforts to run ISIS into the dirt in neighboring Iraq…it would put Hezbollah in Lebanon on notice…create a buffer zone against Iran and their consistent arming of various terrorist organizations in the region…and be an asset to Egypt in clamping down on, and ridding themselves of the Muslim Brotherhood.
This three-pronged approach would also be in the best interest of Israel, as down the road, it could well provide a resettlement area for Palestinians if that could be made a part of an overall package with a new government in Syria, and an agreement with neighboring Jordan…as the Palestinians are, in fact, Jordanians.
Taking sides in the Syrian civil war is not a viable option. Supporting either Assad, as the Russians are currently, or supporting the rebels, who are nothing more than various, loosely connected Islamic terrorist organizations, will not bring about a long-term solution to the toxic situation that threatens the entire region.
Yesterday, ISIS mass executed more than 30 people inside Syria, in a show of terroristic force. In other words…join them or die…in an effort to amass numbers to further their goal of taking over Syria once a vacuum of power exists.
Syria is doomed under either Bashar al Assad, or under the control of Islamic terrorists and neither can be allowed if the goal is to add stabilization to the region, therefore, it doesn’t matter one wit who was responsible for the chemical attack earlier this week.
The people of Syria will believe and take whichever side they think will bring them at least short-term protection, while a long-term solution…such as the one I am proposing…would allow them to live in relative peace under a democratically elected government that would be secular in nature.
Is it easy? Certainly not, but is it a worthwhile goal…absolutely…and the time for taking sides in the current conflict must end if stability is to be the ultimate goal.
Finding a way to work with Russia, and allies in the region to sweep both the rebels and al Assad out of Syria should be the plan, and creating a more stabilized region should be the endgame. By cooperation with Russia, achieving both their goals in Syria, and ours, and then working together to keep the peace while fostering a new government in Syria, is the only way to set new precedent in an area that threatens strategic interests, and the existence of our allies.
If either the rebels, or al Assad are allowed to remain…there will never be a solution to the turmoil that plagues the region. It’s time to set aside the old way of thinking, and simply clear the slate…and start from scratch.
After last night’s cruise missile attack against the Syrian al-Shayrat airfield, which reportedly destroyed it…an attack against al Assad by the United States…what happens next is very important. If President Trump only goes after al Assad, he would be making a mistake, in my opinion, as that would leave Syria to Islamist factions.
If the U.S. is to get in this…get in it all the way…sweep both sides out the door, and make it decisively quick. That would send a message to the entire region, that the Obama doctrine is gone forever, and that games will no longer be played.
The ball is now in Putin’s court, and his reaction to President Trump’s military action last night,calling it “aggression against a sovereign state” and in violation of international law, is a strongly worded statement…but will he go any further than words? That is the question.
President Trump put al Assad, and the entire region on notice last night…and he also issued that notice to Putin and the United Nations…the message is unmistakable…”We will act alone, if necessary,” and the United States is “no longer leading from behind.”
President Trump now needs to make a big decision…will he go big…or go home?
I say…go big.
Copyright © 2017 Craig Andresen / thenationalpatriot.com
Today, Friday, April 7th from 7 to 9pm EST on American Political Radio, RIGHT SIDE PATRIOTS Craig Andresen and Diane Sori discuss this week’s major news events, including Susan Rice being unmasked as the unmasker, and the situation in Syria.
Hope you can tune in at: http://bit.ly/2cpXuRd