Well, its… kind of hard to totally disentangle Syria from Israel and Iran… and Palestine, and Iraq, and Lebanon, and the Kurds, and Russia… and Trump recently just directly, very publically, bombed Iranian nuclear facilities…
I am reasonably confident this would not have happened in a Dem regime.
They are genocide enabling and duplicitous assholes, but Trump and his cabinet turned that situation up to 11 by sending in B2s with GBU 57s, and being very, very public, antagonistic about this.
…
Regardless of the strike actually being effective or not, it completely slams the door shut on basically ever doing another nuclear deal with Iran (again, done under Obama/Dems, revoked by Trump)…
… barring something like a complete 180 in some theoretical future Dem regime that totally 180s on basically everything connected to Israel. No clue how likely that is or isn’t at this point, but it is at least theoretically possible.
…
Dropping morality from the equation, massively directly aggroing against Iran, with is a player in Syria, is just incompetent on its face at being any kind of sensible policy.
Like, I guess just even more full throatedly going against Iran does remove a significant amount of their influence in Syria (maybe?)… but the cost is looking like a completely insane mad man at the international level…
…not to mention pissing off a significant domestic chunk of Trump’s own base, the ones stupid enough to somehow believe Trump was the ‘peace candidate’.
…
US foreign policy irt Syria in particular has been a shitshow for about 2 decades now, simply on its own terms of theoretically ‘promoting American security interests.’
Trump has accelerated this from ‘a clusterfuck’ to ‘a paradigm ending disaster that has totally ended the US as the dominant world hegemon’.
It has totally destroyed any remaining remnant of plausibly being a morally justified ‘World Police’.
The US is now just obviously a rogue state, by its own definition of a rogue state from 10 years ago.
This is what I mean by ‘making sense’, or really the complete absence of that.
Foreign policy kinda involves having allies.
Not many people wanna ally with a beligerent mad man.
I am reasonably confident this would not have happened in a Dem regime.
I’m fairly confident in my memory that Israel attacked Syria under Biden, taking advantage of the instability to expand it’s illegal settlements in the Golan Heights. Am I wrong?
I believe you are correct, but I was perhaps not clear enough there.
What I meant was, had Kamala won, I doubt she would have sent B2s to bomb Natanz, Fordow and Ishfahar.
She maybe, might have agreed to some kind of support role in a much, much more limited version of that kind of a strike, but it likely would have been at least given the Blinken treatment of a veneer of plausible deniability.
Which is fucking awful, but is at least more competent in terms of staying on messsge and presenting an official ‘stance’… in neoliberal ghoul logic, which does unfortunately convince many people.
EDIT: Or, maybe, now being President, she could have actually broken from the seemingly very Biden driven deference to Israel, and actually drawn a line at at least… maybe no Israel, you shouldn’t bomb Iran that provocatively, we will actually stop giving you some kind of weapon if you do that… maybe even abstain from some UN vote on whether or not you’re doing a genocide, instead of voting no.
Hypotheticals, but…seemingly at least possible, to me.
As opposed to Biden merely calling their decisions “outrageous” and strongly condemning them while supporting Netanyahu after they issued a warrant for his arrest.
How so?
Well, its… kind of hard to totally disentangle Syria from Israel and Iran… and Palestine, and Iraq, and Lebanon, and the Kurds, and Russia… and Trump recently just directly, very publically, bombed Iranian nuclear facilities…
I am reasonably confident this would not have happened in a Dem regime.
They are genocide enabling and duplicitous assholes, but Trump and his cabinet turned that situation up to 11 by sending in B2s with GBU 57s, and being very, very public, antagonistic about this.
…
Regardless of the strike actually being effective or not, it completely slams the door shut on basically ever doing another nuclear deal with Iran (again, done under Obama/Dems, revoked by Trump)…
… barring something like a complete 180 in some theoretical future Dem regime that totally 180s on basically everything connected to Israel. No clue how likely that is or isn’t at this point, but it is at least theoretically possible.
…
Dropping morality from the equation, massively directly aggroing against Iran, with is a player in Syria, is just incompetent on its face at being any kind of sensible policy.
Like, I guess just even more full throatedly going against Iran does remove a significant amount of their influence in Syria (maybe?)… but the cost is looking like a completely insane mad man at the international level…
…not to mention pissing off a significant domestic chunk of Trump’s own base, the ones stupid enough to somehow believe Trump was the ‘peace candidate’.
…
US foreign policy irt Syria in particular has been a shitshow for about 2 decades now, simply on its own terms of theoretically ‘promoting American security interests.’
Trump has accelerated this from ‘a clusterfuck’ to ‘a paradigm ending disaster that has totally ended the US as the dominant world hegemon’.
It has totally destroyed any remaining remnant of plausibly being a morally justified ‘World Police’.
The US is now just obviously a rogue state, by its own definition of a rogue state from 10 years ago.
This is what I mean by ‘making sense’, or really the complete absence of that.
Foreign policy kinda involves having allies.
Not many people wanna ally with a beligerent mad man.
…
Maybe a shorter version of my viewpoint could be:
Pete Hegseth is the Secretary of Defense.
More or less agree with your take, but:
I’m fairly confident in my memory that Israel attacked Syria under Biden, taking advantage of the instability to expand it’s illegal settlements in the Golan Heights. Am I wrong?
Eyup. Both parties are liberal, both parties have the same foreign policy. They differ primarily in name only.
I believe you are correct, but I was perhaps not clear enough there.
What I meant was, had Kamala won, I doubt she would have sent B2s to bomb Natanz, Fordow and Ishfahar.
She maybe, might have agreed to some kind of support role in a much, much more limited version of that kind of a strike, but it likely would have been at least given the Blinken treatment of a veneer of plausible deniability.
Which is fucking awful, but is at least more competent in terms of staying on messsge and presenting an official ‘stance’… in neoliberal ghoul logic, which does unfortunately convince many people.
EDIT: Or, maybe, now being President, she could have actually broken from the seemingly very Biden driven deference to Israel, and actually drawn a line at at least… maybe no Israel, you shouldn’t bomb Iran that provocatively, we will actually stop giving you some kind of weapon if you do that… maybe even abstain from some UN vote on whether or not you’re doing a genocide, instead of voting no.
Hypotheticals, but…seemingly at least possible, to me.
Sanctioning the ICC for example.
As opposed to Biden merely calling their decisions “outrageous” and strongly condemning them while supporting Netanyahu after they issued a warrant for his arrest.
I’m not sure how that’s connected to Syria, tbh.
Not saying Biden wasn’t a war criminal and a mass murderer or anything. More like, Biden had at least some shame at being one.