Quote:
Originally Posted by Targan
Little to nothing in the way of dramatic military intervention by the US will come of this. And any serious control the US may have thought it had with the Israelis, that's on hold for the duration of the Trump presidency. The Israelis will do whatever they want (or more accurately whatever they think they can get away with).
In any case, it's bleakly comical that the world gets up in arms about civilians being injured and killed by chemical weapons, when our own side has killed many thousands of civilians over the past couple of decades, mostly with explosives. The concern of the US and its allies (including my country) hasn't been whether or not there's been "collateral damage", it's been whether the media coverage can be managed.
|
I couldn't see any US intervention either but I could see Assad's forces getting a serious pounding from air and missile strikes. And I would agree that the Israelis have more freedom to do what they want and they would be a major factor in any ousting of Assad. The Israeli military is vastly stronger than any Middle Eastern rival and would outclass anything that Russia could send to the region these days.
However I would disagree over chemical strikes against civilians being the same as collateral damage from bombs and explosives. The US and allies did not deliberately attack civilians when they were going after Saddam, Al Qaeda, the Taliban or ISIS forces, and all of these were guilty of doing exactly that to their opponents and civilians and a lot worse. Assad used chemical weapons on his own people, its a blatant act of terror.