Syria: Iraq’s Shadow Looms and Exit Strategy Remains Unclear

The recent chemical attack on civilians has unleashed renewed calls for international intervention in Syria. However, it’s unclear what will happen if this intervention does take place and who would take over from Assad if any international action did succeed in disposing this despot.

The global intervention in Iraq should have taught the world two things: a. Never trust the intelligence provided by the western intelligence agencies, and b. When it comes to the Middle East, the global powers never have an exit strategy.

Therefore, any intervention in Syria has to be driven by actionable and unimpeachable information, and the clear communication of an exit strategy.

Certainly, neither of these has been shown to the general public. While leaders in western nations continue to shout about how these recent deaths were due to Assad’s chemical weapons, they have not presented any evidence to support their assertions.

Furthermore, how are deaths by chemical weapons worse than those by bullets? While both are tragic, the number of people killed over the past two years – when no chemical weapons were used – dwarfs these recent deaths. So, why call for intervention now? What has changed in this conflict? Is this still not an internal civil war?

Before getting into a discussion on exit strategy, let me highlight what would an acceptable form of actionable intelligence. It isn’t evidence showing that Assad has x kind of chemical weapons and those were the kind of weapons that were used in this recent attack.

Rather, actionable intelligence would show the kind of chemical weapons accessible to the Assad government, that those kinds of weapons were used in the attack on civilians and that Assad’s government used those weapons.

Anything less would just be a repetition of the “yellow cake” level of evidence and we all know how well that turned out.

Speaking of turning out, does anyone have a plan for what happens in Syria after Assad is tuned out? If there is a plan, then it certainly hasn’t been shared with the global community?

Will Syria become a Libya where the world supported Qaddafi’s removal and then promptly lost interest turning a once proud and functioning nation into its retarded cousin? Or, will it be like Iraq where the central government controls little more than half the nation and is constantly bombarded with sectarian attacks and killings?

Finally, what about Syria’s allies? Russia and China already don’t support US and European intervention, how will they be placated? While Saudi Arabia tries to buy Russia off, there is only so much it can do before it too runs out of ways to spend its money.

My point is that under current conditions, intervention in Syria will be nothing short of a disaster and that everyone who is calling for this action has a motive that has nothing to do with the well-being of that nation or its citizens.

If all these “do-gooders” truly wanted to support and help the Syrian people, they would raise and expend funds to improve the conditions of the Syrian refugees and plan an exile strategy for Assad and his allies.

I see neither happening. On the other hand, the vast beasts that are the western military-industrial complexes are getting hungry and it looks like feeding time’s coming closer.