How to behave in the U.S. against Syria and Iran against the backdrop of massive unrest in the Islamic world?

How to behave in the U.S. against Syria and Iran against the backdrop of massive unrest in the Islamic world?
In the near future, when the Islamic world is very aggressively responded to the emergence of the web in the trailer of the film «Innocence of Muslims» publicly burning American and Israeli flags, attacks on embassies of Western countries, arson diplomatically machines, pogroms offices of foreign companies in a new light and proved itself a question about the likely invasion of coalition forces in Syria and Iran.

Almost raging Middle East and North Africa forced main ideologists of unleashing «liberation» or «democratic» wars look at the situation from a different side. Of course, the new head of the Arab countries that are actual appointees of the United States simply do not have the ability to delay the situation under control. At the same time the leaders of these countries themselves must make difficult choices: either to support the folk performances, most of which provoked own design Islamists, or put a hard barrier to these organizations and to support the West. Needless to say, none of the new presidents and heads of the interim administration to make such a choice is simply unable to. As a trivial example, you can name the new Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi, who himself is openly Islamist political forces, and through support for these specific and more constructive forces appeared in the presidential chair. In this regard, the question arises: Can the Mursi show political will and rigid state who are now meeting at the square Egyptian cities, the brakes and go home. Saying that if Mohamed Morsi will allow for myself to do it, then after a couple of weeks it can wait retaliation by supporters yesterday. And lose the support of the Islamists Mursi now does not.

But on the other hand, it is today a favorite Egyptian was on his own post, and not without the help of the West. In the end, you can apply for a long time on the fact that it is specifically the Egyptian people went to Tahrir to overthrow Hosni Mubarak and hoist the banner of democracy, the presidential palace, but this version still remains topical except in the United States. Though what adekvatnomyslyaschy people realize what specifically the West had a hand in terms of the destruction of the old political system in Egypt. So, it appears that and stand completely on support for anti-American shares Mursi also, to put it mildly, not an option. Not an option, in the 1-x, as the Egyptian economy at the moment than ever dependent on the U.S. economy, and in-2, Mursi and his understanding that is at the beginning of the revolution, the revolution have no end, and means nothing will prevent Washington and use the new Egyptian president as a sacrifice to appease the raging crowd. Such a lamb to the slaughter, or 2-Mubarak …

That such as read classic daunting situation, the Western world and the United States, first, you need to make their own choices. Or this option will appear in continuing to support the disparate radical transformation in Syria and Iran in another victorious government chaos, or on the other side of the Atlantic all the same to rethink their position on these issues.

Try to imagine what option can choose South American power. By the way, do not forget that all these «adventures» occur in the hot stage of the presidential race in the United States, where each of the candidates is less likely to maneuver (especially not a lot of them the incumbent President Barack Obama).

So, the first option: South American authorities decide picturesquely flex its muscles, forcing their carriers scurry back and forth in the territorial waters of countries shrouded anti-Western unrest. This move will not look for another as complacent Washington: say, we at the problem and react at any moment ready to punish all those who decided to oppose the «peaceful and transparent» policy of the White House, Congress and the Municipal Department. But even if the unrest in the Islamic world will grow into something more than the obvious flagoszhiganie and throwing stones embassies in Western countries (although the «something more» of killing a South American ambassador and other diplomats in Libya has already happened), the Americans anything else, apart from the uncovered Encased and guns on their own warships, noting simply fail. After provoke revolution is much easier than it once later kept under control. At this time segodnyaschy South American administration will continue to conduct extensive discussions about democracy in the world, the need to overthrow Assad and pressure on Iran with the aim that nuclear programm this country was curtailed.

But agree that something stupid talk about the new steps of democratization, when not far from the old all right. Again keep unsuited forces in Syria, which act under the dark banner «Al-Qaeda» against Bashar al-Assad, when these same forces are killing American diplomats in other countries — well, it is, sorry, top political oddities.

But still did not so long ago, Barack Obama himself stated that precisely because of his administration’s pragmatic policy of democracy came to the land of Near East and North Africa. And here — on to you! Hit below the belt with all the consequences. No desire to make far-reaching conclusions, but the feeling that someone is ruthlessly Obama framed with the introduction of inadequate film about the Prophet Muhammad as the ability of the new collection ardent protest movements in the Islamic world, not leaving. After all, we are not going to think that all those hundreds of thousands of people who are now harness flags and stormed the embassy from start to finish themselves revised «innocent Muslims» and concluded to go to the Americans … Of course, that someone found a pain point and well poked it to put on the ears of the Muslim world.

If you find those to whom it may now be at hand, for some reason it did not «Taliban» or «al-Qaeda» come to mind, and strength, which are either in the United States, or very, very closely associated with them . Republicans? Say, they are the most since then accused of slander … So, I will throw myself to such a question without an answer …

2nd Option: South American administration after some time and sweat starts to peel in all directions, showing the Islamists, «who is the boss.» With all of this through the UN force will push the latest resolution on Syria with the necessity of foreign intervention, and then pulled his hands already and Iran. To do this, the Pentagon receives additional funding from Congress, because of the reasons the threat hanging over the most democratic country in the world, at all times impressed congressmen, no matter what party they may belong. True, there are several obstacles appear immediately.

In 1-x, at the moment a bit whether any of the Muslim world almost rebelled against the United States (that’s 10 matches States in both Africa and Asia), and wage war with so many enemies of Americans can not, well, can not . Precedent to wage war against almost a quarter of the modern world, in the history of this country was not, as there was here and figures zoom Napoleon or Alexander the Great. In the United States in recent years, once more used to attack a flock on the 1st of the enemy …

In-2, in this case the Republican congressmen wing can in case of begging the current administration of new funds to the latest war situation just freeze. Republicans are not profitable, so that even a fraction of Obama raised its rating on within the country due to the very ability to take action to protect U.S. interests. Most likely, if the issue of funding for new campaigns and will open a discussion, it was only after the presidential election.

B-3, in general it is not clear against whom the current situation in the United States to wage war if the unrest raging in those countries where the States themselves not so long ago planted democracy. Now we even start that you must remove Assad, so in its place came the «democratic» forces itself little funny.

The only thing that whitewashed house (with the active support of Israel) is able to focus, it’s the fact that you must immediately resolve the Iranian nuclear program from, that enriched uranium falling into the hands of Islamic radicals raged. If there is a particular case, then the newcomer porridge brewed in the Middle East has its own explanation.

There is also another option that is very much unlikely. It may be that the United States suddenly abandon thoughts of regime change in Syria, pressure on Iran, and of general revision of the Arab revolutions. Universal repentance is to say: were wrong, their error conscious, more so do not be curious … someone believes in it? ..
Alexei Volodin Creator

Like this post? Please share to your friends: