Right
after Trump's sudden announcement that he will withdraw the US forces
from Syria, we had some mixed reactions. Some liberals reacted
angrily, but most of the reactions from the liberal machine were
rather moderate, or at least not as intensive as someone would
normally expect.
On the
other hand, Trump's supporters and all those who had enough of the
pro-war neoliberal establishment, felt a kind of vindication, as it
appeared that Trump would eventually keep its promise for an
'anti-interventionist' policy.
But the
blog wrote immediately a 'not so fast' article
to explain that most of the Americans and all those who are tired of
the US endless wars, should not rush to celebrate. We estimated that
Trump's move is probably a sign that he is going to re-organize
troops and go after the big target called Iran.
Indeed,
shortly after the move, Trump, suddenly again, announced that he will
also pullout troops from Afghanistan.
And
then, about a week later, a former Pentagon official spoke to RT and
actually verified our estimation. As Michael Maloof said:
The
troops are going to remain in the area. They're all special forces
and you're going to need special forces for something larger. I think
that they're being repositioned and my concern is that with the
pullout of the troops both from Afghanistan and Syria you're going to
look - just watch if he's [Trump] going to pull out any troops of
South Korea. And the fact that he mentioned Iran is something, I
think, we need to be concerned about.
I think
that Trump will be using these troops ultimately for something bigger
in Iran - potentially against Iran, maybe just after the beginning of
the year.
He's not
going to telegraph his moves, just like the pullout of Syria. He
didn't telegraph that at all, caught everybody by surprise. The fact
that Bolton is quiet, I think is problematic. I think it's going to
be one in which he's got a placate, not only Netanyahu, but Bolton.
And Iran seems to be the target.
It is
one of these very rare times that the 'flip-flop' Donnie doesn't
flip-flop at all. His position on this matter is clear and stable.
Even with North Korea had his ups and downs. Yet, being hostile to
Iran and Venezuela and probably cutting taxes for the super-rich are
Donnie's favorite actions as it seems.
We would
disagree with Maloof only in one thing: the timing of a potential war
with Iran. It is unlikely that Trump will organize a millitary
operation against Iran before 2020 US presidential election. Another
devastating war will probably cause him the opportunity for a second
term.
So, as
we already mentioned, by playing now the 'anti-interventionism' card
Trump returns to the game with at least three big advantages:
First,
he saves military strength and manpower and buys some time until the
2020 US presidential election to organize better the mother of all
military campaigns against Iran in case of a second term in the US
presidency.
Second,
he leaves the others, and especially the Russians to deal with the
chaos in Syria. In this way, he keeps them occupied with the Syrian
chaos, while he prepares to open the war front in Iran. It will be
very difficult for the Russians to participate in the Syrian and the
Iranian front simultaneously.
Third,
he may re-boost his popularity among his supporters in the interior,
as he essentially exhibits his 'anti-interventionism' to them. This
will give him a much better chance to win the 2020 US election and go
for a second term. Then, he will have all the time to focus on Iran.
The big
problem is that he has to find a way to sell another absolutely
devastating war to the Americans. And, unfortunately, it will
probably take a shockingly loud false flag operation.
Comments
Post a Comment