I would just like to share a thought or two with you all, largely as a result of listening to a quite extraordinary interview on BBC radio 4 this morning with a retired US General, who had just finished a phone call with Senators McCain and Graham.
What seemed extraordinary was that the General was happily on air, repeating the contents of a "supposedly" secret briefing just given to McCain and Graham by President Obama.
The content of the discussion is that the US indeed considering actions far more akin to Regime Change, than simply a punitive strike. That of itself comes as no real surprise as both I and many others of you have had little doubt that this is what many in the US Establishment have wanted all along.
The surprise the brazen (and presumably deliberate) way that these secret briefings are being made public.
I can only really think of two ultimate objectives to this whole exercise, one very benign, the other utterly malign.
The benign option is based on the ease with which David Cameron accepted defeat in Parliament last week and which left a strong impression that he was only to glad to have given the "Get out of Jail" Card and that he has absolutely no intention of trying to reverse that decision.
On that basis, I wonder if Obama is now spreading a story so scary that a rejection from Congress is guaranteed and that he too would be able to wipe his brow in relief and then complain about how Congress has tied his hands but that the will of the people must be paramount.
The malign option is naturally the very opposite of all this. This option is based on something of which I have discussed at length over the years on other forums. It is the notion that if the US were indeed determined to retain its position of Global Hegemon, this is the decade in which it must deal with the rising Chinese challenge, because by the early 2020's it will undoubtedly be way to late.
In this scenario, these revelations simply confirm in the Kremlin and Forbidden Palace the total lack of trust in US good intentions and determine to draw both powers into a major global confrontation while it still carries the advantage.
I know that I am taking a risk introducing such thoughts, but his is a "Grown Up" forum and will expect members who respond to reply in the appropriate adult manner
I think on this occasion, you may be reading too much into it. Russia is heavily invested in Syria, China isn't. The only one America might press into a war with meddling in Syria are the Russians, and in a war against the Russians, no one wins.
If America wanted to push China to war while it still holds the economic and military advantages, there are many flash points in Asia they could heat up, things like supporting Taiwan to declare formal independence, siding with Japan over the Diaoyu Islands, or poke Chubby Kim in NK.
If anything, getting sucked into a military conflict with Syria would distract America if its ultimate goal is to contain China by any means necessary, just like how Iraq and Afghanistan radically changed US focus from China to the Middle East during the Bush years.
However, if you changed China to Iran, with the ticking clock a working nuclear weapon, I think you may be onto something. Iran is as invest in Assad as Russia if not more so, and has supplied Assad with lots of weapons and Revolutionary Guard 'advisors'. If Assad decide to make a fight out if it when the US attacks, it would not take too much effort to point the finger at Iran, either with the weapons used, or by intel pointing that Iranian RG where the ones operating the weapons when they tried to engage the US military.
The US can than use that as justification for more robust sanctions, or strikes against Iran itself. If the US is already engaged in a military campaign against Iran, no one would complain too much if suspected nuclear sites also find themselves on the target list.
