NOTE: I have provided readers a map to help them better understand the context of the article. However a map is only a simple picture. For example, Iraq appears to be majority Sunni, but in fact it is ~60% Shia.
In another potentially disastrous decision, without any thought of what will
occur, Obama might be launching another war soon.
Southpoint Qualified Fund and Southpoint Qualified Offshore Fund returned 2.5% net for the first quarter, compared to the S&P 500's 6.2% return and the Russell 2000's 12.7% gain. During the first quarter, Southpoint's funds averaged 133% long and 70% short. Q1 2021 hedge fund letters, conferences and more The fund's long positions added 13% gross Read More
Although I would like to believe the Obama administration has thought these questions out, based on prior actions in the Middle East we remain highly skeptical.
1. Who will take over after Assad? Will it be the 75% Sunnis and the extremist Muslim brotherhood, which is spearheading the opposition. Yes Assad’s father killed over 10,000 members of the Muslim Brotherhood in 1980, but as the civil war continues the extremists are becoming more powerful. One only need to see the increasing sophistication of attacks by the opposition to confirm this. Turkey will also step in to make sure they have an authoritian Government, which will be an ally. Turkey will make sure the kurds won’t be allowed any freedom.
What will happen to the 10% Alawites, which Assad is a member of. Will there be a civil war or a massacre?
2. What if full scale war breaks out? Assad has chemical and biological weapons. He has threatened to attack Israel if NATO/US intervenes? Why not he has nothing to lose. This could lead to an attack on Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, Turkey etc. Full scale war could easily break out.
3. Is America safe? Readers might find this conspiratorial but anyone can do a google search and see that Hezzbollah has terrorist cells in America (from mainstream sources). They have been operating in the country for close to a decade. Here is one from 2003-http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/030310/10hez.htm. Assad can use Hezbollah cells to strike targets in America.
4. Syria has a lot more sophisticated weaponary than Iraq or Libya. What if they down a US plane with their advanced anti missile batteries provided courtosey of democratically elected, Vladmir Putin.
5. Assuming the war is successful, what will happen to all the chemical weapons? In Libya over 10,000 advanced anti-air missiles are unaccounted for. The Obama admin seems to have forgotten to consider what would happen to them after Qaddafi fell. Needless to say WMDs are much more frightening than surface to air missiles.
6. Will this kill the economic recovery? A full scale war in the Middle East does not bode well for oil prices, especially since Saudi Arabia and Iran are already fighting a proxy war in Syria, with Iran supporting Assad, and Saudi helping the opposition. In case anyone forgot, Saudi Arabia and Iran have huge reserves of oil. Iraq which is now a pawn of Iran is another country adjacent to Syria.
7. This brings us to our last question. Assuming Assad is ousted and the Sunnis take over, will this increase tension in Iraq? Very likely yes. Iraq is currently controlled by the Shia led Government, which is an ally of Iran. The Sunnis in Iraq feel increasing pressure coming from the Iranian led Government. Will the Sunnis in Syria send weapons over to their brethren in Iraq and spark a civil war there? The answer is likely yes, since the Sunnis in Iraq are already providing weapons to the Sunni opposition in Syria. So now what does Obama do about a civil war in Iraq?
These are seven of dozens of uestions, which I have. Again I would like to think our Government is smart enough to think these things out, but based on prior events, I am a skeptic.
Without further to do, some details on WWIII
As the violence in Syria spirals out of control, top officials in President Barack Obama‘s administration are quietly preparing options for how to assist the Syrian opposition, including gaming out the unlikely option of setting up a no-fly zone in Syria and preparing for another major diplomatic initiative.
Critics on Capitol Hill accuse the Obama administration of being slow to react to the quickening deterioration of the security situation in Syria, where over 5,000 have died, according to the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights. Many lawmakers say the White House is once again “leading from behind,” while the Turks, the French, and the Arab League — which sent an observer mission to Syria this week – take the initiative to pursue more aggressive strategies for pressuring the Assad regime. But U.S. officials said that they are moving cautiously in order to avoid destabilizing Syria further, and to make sure they know as much as possible about the country’s complex dynamics before getting more involved.
But the administration does see the status quo in Syria as unsustainable. The Bashar al Assadregime is a “dead man walking,” State Department official Fred Hof said this month. So the administration is now ramping up its policymaking machinery on the issue. After several weeks of having no top-level administration meetings to discuss the Syria crisis, the National Security Council (NSC) has begun an informal, quiet interagency process to create and collect options for aiding the Syrian opposition, two administration officials confirmed to The Cable.
The process, led by NSC Senior Director Steve Simon, involves only a few select officials from State, Defense, Treasury, and other relevant agencies. The group is unusually small, presumably to prevent media leaks, and the administration is not using the normal process of Interagency Policy Committee (IPC), Deputies Committee (DC), or Principals Committee (PC) meetings, the officials said. Another key official inside the discussions is Hof, who is leading the interactions with Syrian opposition leaders and U.S. allies.