The only winner in Syria is Iran

| June 12, 2013

The Washington Post speculates today that the only victor emerging in the Middle East wars is Iran;

But after the Assad regime’s capture of the small but strategic town of Qusair last week — a battle in which the Iranian-backed Shiite militia played a pivotal role — Iran’s supporters and foes alike are mulling a new reality: that the regional balance of power appears to be tilting in favor of Tehran, with potentially profound implications for a Middle East still grappling with the upheaval wrought by the Arab Spring revolts.

“This is an Iranian fight. It is no longer a Syrian one,” said Mustafa Alani, director of security and defense at the Dubai-based Gulf Research Council. “The issue is hegemony in the region.”

Well, sure they are. Since 1979, the US, through six administrations, has been unwilling to face off with the mullahs. Our exit from Iraq should have happened in 2003 and the route should have been through the streets of Tehran. After 2003, our fight in Iraq was with Iran, or it’s agents. Our fight in Afghanistan is with Pakistani Taliban and Haqqani trained and equipped by Iran.

And now, the fight in Syria is between the rebels and Iran-backed Hezbollah. We’re more interested in having Europe do that thing they call “leading” which is really nothing more than public masturbation just like we’ve done with Iran’s nuclear program (remember that?). Nothing gets accomplished in the world without US leadership, because the rest of the world is accustomed to diddling around until we do something. But since we’ve abrogated our leadership, the world gets worse. If it was up to Europe, Hussein would still be threatening his neighbors and his people would still be starving as a result of the “sanctions” – the same kind of sanctions we’ve placed on Iran, which unsurprisingly, aren’t work there either.

Oh did you read yesterday how the shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that we gave the Libyans to fight Qaddafi are somewhere with al Qaeda in Mali now? But, yeah, let’s send some more arms to the Syrians like the Euro-twats want.

We screwed this up long ago, but that’s not a excuse to continue to screw it up.

Category: Barack Obama/Joe Biden, Terror War

11 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
68W58

It would seem to me that the Turks have more than a little interest in what happens in Syria and that they are more than capable of supporting whatever forces they believe are fighting in their interests (still, they have to figure in how more active intervention on their part would piss off the Russians, but they certainly don’t want a stronger Iran and its proxy on two borders).

rb325th

Iran is the big kid on the block now, and have been working towards becoming a super power in that region since 1979. They have sponsored more terrorism than any number of mid east countries combined. I agree with Jonn, not one of our Administrations has had the balls to stand up to them. Europe will never do what is right either, they are too busy trying to appease their own radical islamic populations that they have fostered.

David

I suspect the Russians would not be terribly happy with an expanded Iranian hegemony on their border either, seems to me there have been rumors of Iranian support for trouble-makers in the various -stans for years. Last thing they wants is a wide strong Moslem insurgency… they have already had their fun in Afghanistan and (still) in Chechnya and have a pretty good idea what to expect.

Ex-PH2

The Russians will be coming to us (US) for sustenance and solace and some serious help, one of these days.

Sparks

In the news. 😀 The French have said they will take a lead role in the Middle East conflict. They promise, promise to only export their most inferior table wines to Muslim fundamentalist countries from now on. That is the extent of Europe’s “leading” role from this point forward. Well, if you don’t include all the haggis the British nations are sending.

LostOnThemInterwebs

On this topic I do not know much, but I wonder and if someone can explain I would appreciate it a lot:

Why do people get all worked up because US forces are on ‘stan, ask questions, push hard for comebacks, etc. but they are never really outraged that somehow this incredibly complex and expensive machinery ends up in their hands, so at the end US technology is killing US soldiers. I find that honestly more shocking than anything, but I might be missing something here as honestly I … i just can’t grasp it.

B Woodman

The best thing to do when in a deep hole — is to stop digging.

WOTN

What should have been the title is “The only winners in Syria are Islamists.” It is a war between Al Qaeda and Hezbollah, with the Syrian Govt and Iran allied against their own allies Al Qaeda and Hamas. Turkey? Oh yeah, that’s run by the “political islamists” that prefer to use legislation to oppress, rather than openly fight in the streets.

There was a small window in history, when there was a democratic force fighting the Ba’athist allies of Saddam and Iran, but that window was slammed shut years ago, by inaction of the US regime.

Unfortunately, there is a longer period of time, where the current administration has been supplying the Al-Qaeda “rebels” with arms through proxies in Saudi Arabia and Yemen, and directly supplying the Islamist govt of Egypt with arms, despite facts that they are slaughtering Copts in the streets, and oppressing women at home and work.

DaveO

No, Russia is the biggest winner. Turkey is becoming destablized under Erdogan’s increasingly autocratic rule. Lebanon remains in chaos. And, most important to Russia, Israel is too preoccupied to exploit it’s newfound potential wealth in petroleum. Russia’s revenue streams of petroleum is increased, plus selling weapons, and with Turkey f*cked up, a warm water port to be secured by the Russian Navy.

Iran is a winner, but not a big one.

2/17 Air Cav

“Nothing gets accomplished in the world without US leadership, because the rest of the world is accustomed to diddling around until we do something. But since we’ve abrogated our leadership, the world gets worse.”

That’s true but transforming America is a 24/7 operation and includes resposturing on the world stage. “What is in the best interest of the United States?” is no longer a pertinent question to be asked by the Chief Executive, the Department of State, or Congress. And that is why we have no idea whatsoever just what our foreign policy is. Hey, what did you think transforming America meant, just obamaphones, targeting traditionalists, and domestic spying?

Sparks

@10 Thank you 2/17. I thought about it but could not say it better.