With the sometime exception of the Russians, just about everyone else he lists can't fight their way out of a wet paper bag. They're good only at killing civilians.
Trump has signaled to the Russians that we are not a threat to their interests unless they allow Syria to become an Iranian colony. If they replace Assad with a less Iranian allied client and boot the Iranians out, I think we'd be quite happy to let the Russians run the show.
The problem is that the Russians don't have the strength to do that. So we'll see.
Why is it in all these discussions nobody lays out Russia’s exact intentions for being in Syria in the first place? And why should we just give them the benefit of the doubt that it has NOTHING to do with harming our interests in the long run?
Why do people go on as if a “proxy” war between us and them was some accidental chance of circumstance and not their intention all along...
>With the sometime exception of the Russians, just about everyone else he lists can’t fight their way out of a wet paper bag. They’re good only at killing civilians.
actually they’re probably good enough fighters-if they have a fair amount of Russian support backing them up.