The Mideastwire Blog

Excerpts from the Arab and Iranian Media & Analysis of US Policy in the Region

.@BeirutCalling (still) doesn’t understand: His side’s cheerleading for Iraq War is a huge reason why Americans rejected intervention in Syria

Michael Young has it dead wrong in his latest National piece: He uses the word “glib” in order to mask a nasty argument that (he suggests obliquely) most American’s never supported his desire for a massive war in Syria and cascading US intervention because of… their racism.

He also castigates the moral depths of the Obama admin approach, Iran etc…. but, writing form the UAE/Abu Dhabi owned National, there is – as usual – no word on that regimes role in the rise of violent extremism in the region and beyond.

Michael still doesn’t understand that most Americans and many in the military simply did not believe (and rightfully so) the facile arguments that so many armchair warriors put forth for arming more rebels and US intervention in 2011, 12, 13, 14 and now.

My proposals are here in 2011 and 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/07/opinion/in-syria-we-need-to-bargain-with-the-devil.html?pagewanted=1

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nicholas-noe/a-third-way-on-syria-is-possible_b_868383.html

He writes:

“…It’s difficult to understand what is behind this western attitude. One may fall back on the glib argument that it’s all about racism, that Syrians count little for Europeans or Americans. But such an explanation is unverifiable and doesn’t explain why Washington, which alone has the power to unite and spur western action on Syria, has so readily abandoned its stated aims…”

— Yes the Obama administration made grave errors and bears a heavy moral burden – but NOT because it avoided Michael’s massive war option – in fact, as I suggest in the two pieces above, quite the opposite approach was needed strategically and morally.

BUT THAT SAID: Michael can’t see that the great war in Syria which he always wanted (and war in Iran) was derailed precisely because of the Iraq War disaster that he and many others promoted so vigorously (and still to this day!)… The ol’ neo-con project burned way to hot and too obtusely – too evidently stupid to the average American, despite the Fow-esque spin room – such that the Greater project of a US led war against Iran and Syria (two nasty regimes mind you) became ever less likely, even for Republicans, when the possibility of intervention seemed to open up and everyone on the right was salivating.

One is left with the question that should be asked of all those commentators on the right pushing more wars in the region: What do you think of Nusra Front? Is it a legit part of the rebellion? Is it an “evil” that can be dealt with? And why, especially when one compares it to, say, Iranian and Hizbullah stances (a debate for sure)?

And then of course the obvious question – why not lament (while he is at it)/explore the human rights record of say the UAE and Abu Dhabi and the role they have played in the rise of violent extremism in the region?

Is this possible in the Abu Dhabi owned NATIONAL one wonders?

Advertisements

Written by nickbiddlenoe

June 25, 2015 at 4:23 pm

Posted in Uncategorized

%d bloggers like this: