US President Donald Trump orders American military forces out of Syria, and the deep state-owned media goes nuts. If ever the people needed evidence of collusive warmongerers weaving chaos in our world, Trump uncocking his pistols and walking away from the debacle created by Bush and Obama should shine like a movie poster. Thankfully, not everyone in the news and information business works for the military industrialists and oil titans: case in point, a National Review story by Victor David Hanson.
“Mattis and Syria: Get a Grip on the Hysteria!” is a hopeful note in the dizzying noise of Assad haters ringing in all our ears. The story calls to question the insanity and tooth-gnashing being thrust upon the public by the likes of the New York Times, the Washington Post, and most western media imbeciles the past few days. Reading most stories, you’d think 2,000 Americans have been out there bashing ISIS like Spartans against Persians, and that their leaving will mean the end of civilization as we know it. Few, if any, recall it was Putin and the Russians slaying the deadly ISIS hordes from above, not Central Command. I won’t regurgitate the obvious, here’s that story from 2015.
The Syria pullout, along with the untimely resignation of Defense Secretary, General “Mad Dog” Mattis, has the Trump opposition foaming at the mouth over the most positive move of the wild car president’s tenure. Syria being turned back over to Syrians, now there’s a novel idea! It’s true, the Kurds and free Syrians will have to slink back into their sandy holes and let Damascus be the capital again. No, Genel Energy and other oil foxes will not be able to secure a New Kurdistan and snatch up all that Syrian energy wealth in the east, but Syrian oil revenue should pay for Syrian schools and rebuilding Syria, no? Here’s that story from 2015, as well.
More important than writing the real history of the Syria mess, the policy outcomes that power world crisis need to be evaluated. In this regard, author Hanson offers a ray of hope in his assessing the Syria pullout, and I quote:
“Fifth, on matters of entering or leaving the Middle East, U.S. strategists in the cases of Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, and Iraq must develop a more coherent rationale to justify long-term occupations — to convince Americans that these increasingly numerous and optional interventions (whether six months or 18 years) enhance US strategic advantages, and in cost/benefit analyses are worth the human and material costs of maintaining them.”
The point here being, no one alive can create a sane rationale for the trillions wasted by American leaders to fight wars we never intended to win. Hell, we cannot even take the credit for killing head choppers out in the open deserts of Syria, the Russians, Syrians, and Iranians did that. So, what was the money for? Oh, I forgot, Kurdish regional oil resources, that’s right.
While the National Review still seems to be clinging to the fantasy that Russia is some kind of aggressor in all this, their author does end up pointing out the $21 trillion bucks Americans owe the central banks and bondholders for stupid mistakes we let leaders get by with. Too bad the venerable New Yorker still wants Assad dead at all costs. That magazine’s pitch calls Idlib the last bastion of freedom in a country invaded by mercenaries armed, trained, and transported, and covered from the aid by America, Jordan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the Europeans, and Israel. And there you have it. The New Yorker even got to do a special illustration depicting the poor residents of Saraqib being bombed by those pesky Russians. It’s a scary illustration and a fairytale just like a Disney drawing. This is the insanity known as geopolitics and propaganda.
Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”