The Mess

[skankhunt42]

So the best course of action by the American Government would be to monitor and adjust then? Or would it be to dictate to the Russians something? I just don't know strategically what that would be. I'm not just not sure that the Trump or any administration has any kind of end game in the Middle East, which shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. I just feel like we are always caught with our pants down in that part of the world, like we are always a move behind and are really never dictating to our adversaries, but I could just be Naive.

Edit: In the last 15-20 years.

- Gerald

I don't see how you could dictate to the Russians unless you are prepared to leverage thermonuclear weapons, all attempts to dictate military terms to the Russians leads to an escalatory ladder towards a confrontation which would be thermonuclear by default. Quite frankly, this would probably be a better time for Trump to engage with his buddy Vladimir in a collaborative manner, and even let the Russians take the lead, is it really a strategic imperative of the United States, that the Russians be waylayed in their attempts to prop up the Assad regime, if so, could you articulate what those imperatives would be?

I like the idea of the collaborative approach, your point about the thermonuclear weapons is what I was afraid of with Clinton. You're right about leveraging Nuclear weapons, that would be the only way which isn't an option. I'm not sure what the imperatives would be, but I would love to lead the Russians into another Afghanistan if possible.

[TheReal_ND]

Who is this, a bingo hall winner?

This tbh. She's a qt

[Smitty-48]

I like the idea of the collaborative approach, your point about the thermonuclear weapons is what I was afraid of with Clinton. You're right about leveraging Nuclear weapons, that would be the only way which isn't an option. I'm not sure what the imperatives would be, but I would love to lead the Russians into another Afghanistan if possible.

To wit, when you're enemies are fighting each other; let them. The Daesh notwithstanding, I just don't see what America's strategic imperatives are in Syria, it's like the Lebanese Civil War on steroids, and yes, America did have to deal with some collateral fallout from Lebanon from time to time, but actually sticking American noses in their resulted in American noses getting burned off every single time, to no particular resolution nor utility.

[clubgop]

That is the biggest concern I have about President Elect Trump. Assuming he has the average level of ignorance someone who has not spent their life in the military or considering foreign affairs has, he will be sorely dependent on someone telling him what he should be telling others to do.

Right now he seems to be leaning on the retired brass in a way I've not seen before. Has there been a time when two generals were part of the cabinet as could happen with Petreaus at SoS and Mathis at DoD?

Come on man. Get some memory. Colin Powell ring a bell? Various CIA directors.

[clubgop]

I like the idea of the collaborative approach, your point about the thermonuclear weapons is what I was afraid of with Clinton. You're right about leveraging Nuclear weapons, that would be the only way which isn't an option. I'm not sure what the imperatives would be, but I would love to lead the Russians into another Afghanistan if possible.

To wit, when you're enemies are fighting each other; let them. The Daesh notwithstanding, I just don't see what America's strategic imperatives are in Syria, it's like the Lebanese Civil War on steroids, and yes, America did have to deal with some collateral fallout from Lebanon from time to time, but actually sticking American noses in their resulted in American noses getting burned off every single time, to no particular resolution nor utility.

If you were going to step into Syria it was before the Russians did.

[AverageJoe]

To wit, when you're enemies are fighting each other; let them. The Daesh notwithstanding, I just don't see what America's strategic imperatives are in Syria, it's like the Lebanese Civil War on steroids, and yes, America did have to deal with some collateral fallout from Lebanon from time to time, but actually sticking American noses in their resulted in American noses getting burned off every single time, to no particular resolution nor utility.

I agree, let Syria deal with Syria. Best thing Trump could do is pull completely out (military, economic supoort, etc), grab some popcorn, monitor the situation and let them figure their future out. What has our interference in their internal issue gotten us?


Besides ISIS I mean.

[Smitty-48]

America's strategic imperatives are at sea, America is a seapower, getting off the boat does not make any sense for America, 90% of the time, how does Syria imperil America's strategic interests at sea? Answer; diverting resources away from the Navy to go a dragon slaying in Syria with land based assets.

[clubgop]

America's strategic imperatives are at sea, America is a seapower, getting off the boat does not make any sense for America, 90% of the time, how does Syria imperil America's strategic interests at sea? Answer; diverting resources away from the Navy to go a dragon slaying in Syria with land based assets.

Its a shame politicians can't just say this. Trump got close but never all the way.

[Smitty-48]

America's strategic imperatives are at sea, America is a seapower, getting off the boat does not make any sense for America, 90% of the time, how does Syria imperil America's strategic interests at sea? Answer; diverting resources away from the Navy to go a dragon slaying in Syria with land based assets.

Its a shame politicians can't just say this. Trump got close but never all the way.

The Army and Air Force would go ballistic, the real strategic war in America, as you know, is interservice rivalry.

"The Soviets are our adversary. Our enemy is the Navy"~Curtis LeMay

[skankhunt42]

America's strategic imperatives are at sea, America is a seapower, getting off the boat does not make any sense for America, 90% of the time, how does Syria imperil America's strategic interests at sea? Answer; diverting resources away from the Navy to go a dragon slaying in Syria with land based assets.

Its a shame politicians can't just say this. Trump got close but never all the way.

Yes, fucking this. Smitty is right, we are a sea power. Technology is our barrier.