Submitted by Chris Rossini via RonPaulLibertyReport.com, [8]
A few years ago, New York Times columnist David Brooks [9] wanted the U.S. government to wave its magic wand and turn the Syrian civil war into a Vietnam for Iran:
We should be trying to turn the Syrian civil war into Iran’s Vietnam. We should make them waste money and effort trying to back their client...I’m thinking that maybe it’s time for a more active U.S. role. I have no clue how to do that.
Well, a few years have now gone by, and Brooks has experienced his eureka moment [10]! He apparently tuned into a warmongering speech from Hillary Clinton and now (at long last) has a clue:
Clinton...gestured to the reality that you can’t really deal with ISIS unless you are also willing to deal with Assad. Assad is not some secondary threat who we can deal with after we’ve tamed the ISIS monster. Assad created the failed state and the power vacuum that ISIS was able to fill.
Some of Clinton’s specific prescriptions were a little too limited and Obamaesque for my taste (she didn’t even call for more American Special Operations forces to improve the bombing campaigns, though she said she would be open to it).
But wait! There's more:
The grand strategy of American policy in the Middle East, therefore, should be to do what we can to revive and reform Arab nations, to help them become functioning governing units.
America has destroyed Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya, leaving them in virtual chaos with nothing resembling "functioning governing units." Syria needs to be number four on the lucky list?
That begins with stepped-up military pressure on ISIS. But it also means going hard on Assad, creating no-fly zones for sanctuaries for Syrian refugees to limit his power, ratcheting up pressure on Iran and Russia to force his departure.
It's safe to say, that despite Brooks' Clintonian awakening, he still has no clue about Syria.
