President Obama’s impossibly complicated plan for dealing with ISIL involves a de facto alliance with Iran in Iraq, and training up a ‘third force,’ essentially creating a new, ‘moderate’ Free Syrian Army to attack al-Qaeda and ISIL.
Training an effective new fighting force will likely take 15 years, making it a not very practical option.
Juan Cole is a smart, well-informed guy. In an article about Syria, why no mention about the Syrian Government, and Assad? Is Assad such a pariah that even if our engagement with him offers the best hope for restoring Syria as a nation, proposing his involvement in dealing with extremism seems out of the question. What is most puzzling is that Assad has the support of most of the Syrian people, despite disclaimers by our media and Washington. Whatever irregularities might have existed in the 2014 election, they don't explain the high turnout of the overwhelming support for Assad. From some commentators, the anti-Assad project is understandable, for people like Professor Cole it is not.
"Those alliances, with al-Qaeda and the Taliban, got the USA attacked on September 11, 2001."
"The US as a de facto ally of the next generation’s Usama Bin Laden?"
Uninquiring minds don't want to know. The incurious, however, do get to maintain reliable media jobs.
Isn't that the game though? Build up some potential bogeyman to scare the public into acquiesence of an even more massive military budget. It has worked well for a long time, since at least Hitler.
