|Submited on :||Sat, 9th of Jun 2018 - 16:32:58 PM|
|Post ID :||8prhc7|
|Post Name :||t3_8prhc7|
|Post Type :||link|
|Subreddit Type :||public|
|Subreddit ID :||t5_2x5s1|
Gunmen storm KRG governorate building in Erbil
No plans yet to open Syria border crossing — official
Drivers for Moderation in Iraqi Politics
Raqqa’s future lost with no plans for rebuilding
Iraqi refugees in Egypt denounce lack of protection, services
I think it was really naive to believe that the United States is simply withdrawing from Syria. If (!) the US withdraws, it will only be if its interests are preserved. And that will only happen if there is a deal with Iran and between Assad and the SDF.
They'll never withdraw if they suspect they can gain something from it.
It's basically kiddy level geopolitics.
If they can hang on and destabilise the syrian gov they'll hang on, If they think the can put a bit of pressure on turkey they'll try it etc.
The thing that limits their involvement now is potential (expendable or deniable) reach in circumstances whereby they can't afford to get involved directly and can't afford to risk scenarios whereby the russians get involved directly.
What are our interests there again?
This is funny because nobody can actually answer this. The most prevalent answer seems to be preventing Iranian influence from growing, but nobody knows why doing that is in US interest, or why US has such a beef with Iran anyway...
Protecting Israel. It's not a US interest per se, but it's definitely important to US leadership to ensure that Israel and Saudi Arabia are protected against Iranian agression.
Furthermore, I believe the antagonism toward Iran is in part fueled by the Chinese One Belt One Road initiative. Keeping Iran (and by extension China) and Europe separated and keeping Russia and Europe separated is a core US national interest. It's why the US is forcefully encouraging the Europeans to sanction Russia even though they'd rather trade.
One could argue that the US are protecting a democracy against Turkish aggression.
He is arguing in the wrong discussion then. Question was what are US interests in Syria not the narrative. You could say a stable northern syria is in their interest
The US is allied with absolute monarchs, and now I'm supposed to believe we care about democracy?