Everything Marco Rubio Said About Russia and Syria at the GOP Debate Is Coming True

The Washingon Free Beacon ^ | September 29, 2015 | David Rutz

[Kaslin]

Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) was prophetic at CNN’s GOP presidential debate Sept. 16, predicting that Russia would continue to exploit a vacuum in the Middle East and “prop up” Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad to demonstrate to the Middle East it was the most important power broker there.

The Obama administration was admittedly caught by surprise this week when Russia announced an intelligence-sharing agreement with Iran, Syria and Iraq to battle the Islamic State, another example of Vladimir Putin expanding his influence in the region after he deployed warplanes and tanks to help Assad earlier this month. Over the weekend, Russia announced it would step up its military support to prevent the collapse of Assad, which Putin believes would be destabilizing.

This, Rubio said at the time, is Putin’s vision for repositioning Russia “as a geopolitical force.”

“It’s pretty straightforward,” Rubio said at the debate. “[Putin] wants to reposition Russia, once again, as a geopolitical force … He’s trying to destroy NATO. And this is what this is a part of. He is exploiting a vacuum that this administration has left in the Middle East. Here’s what you’re going to see in the next few weeks: the Russians will begin to fly combat missions in that region, not just targeting ISIS, but in order to prop up Assad. He will also, then, turn to other countries in the region and say, ‘America is no longer a reliable ally, Egypt. America is no longer a reliable ally, Saudi Arabia. Begin to rely on us.’

“What he is doing is he is trying to replace us as the single most important power broker in the Middle East, and this president is allowing it.”

Such overtures from Russia on fighting IS and expansion of influence into Syria and Iraq are “exactly what the Arab world hoped to obtain from a foreign power”, the Wall Street Journal reports:

Russia’s influence in the Middle East has grown steadily since the fall of the Soviet Union largely because of its alliance with Iran. As Iran severed ties with the U.S. and reduced alliances with Western countries, it looked toward Russia for economic trade and military assistance. The two nations also shared the common interest of reducing the U.S.’s influence in the region.

Now Iraq and Syria appear to be following Iran’s trend in turning to Russia, as opposed to the U.S., as a new patron. Russia’s swift and forceful foray into Syria and Iraq while voicing clear commitment to fight Islamic State at whatever cost is exactly what the Arab world hoped to obtain from a foreign power.

The Russian leader has been bulking up forces and bases in Syria in moves U.S. officials say are designed to safeguard Mr. Assad and his regime. Over the weekend, Iraq revealed that it had signed an agreement to share intelligence with Russia, Iran and Syria, and an Iraqi defense official said on Monday that the country would welcome Russian surveillance flights over Iraq.

Full exchange:

JAKE TAPPER: Senator Rubio, you’ve taken a very different approach to the – the question of Russia. You’ve called Vladimir Putin a, quote, “gangster.” Why would President Rubio’s approach be more effective than President Trump’s?

MARCO RUBIO: Well, first of all, I have an understanding of exactly what it is Russia and Putin are doing, and it’s pretty straightforward. He wants to reposition Russia, once again, as a geopolitical force. He himself said that the destruction of the Soviet Union – the fall of the Soviet Union was the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century, and now he’s trying to reverse that. He’s trying to destroy NATO. And this is what this is a part of. He is exploiting a vacuum that this administration has left in the Middle East.

Here’s what you’re going to see in the next few weeks: the Russians will begin to fly – fly combat missions in that region, not just targeting ISIS, but in order to prop up Assad. He will also, then, turn to other countries in the region and say, “America is no longer a reliable ally, Egypt. America is no longer a reliable ally, Saudi Arabia. Begin to rely on us.” What he is doing is he is trying to replace us as the single most important power broker in the Middle East, and this president is allowing it. That is what is happening in the Middle East. That’s what’s happening with Russia, and–

TAPPER: Thank you, Senator Rubio.

[D-fendr]

I think he probably gets it but knows there is not much we can do about it.

If you want to parse it very charitably. To me, it's obvious, he doesn't get it. The fact that we cannot change it right now, doesn't excuse not getting the basics. Russia's move is dangerous and bad. Not "what do we care?"

Lots of people said nice things about Obama when he first got elected.

Nobody with good sense. :) And, um, Hillary for Iranian negotiator? :)

"Don't import Syrian 'refugees' is window dressing to me. A symptom of bad policy, not a solution to it.

Let me ask you: What do you see as Donald Trump's experience and examples of superior judgement in national defense, global politics?

[D-fendr]

Do you trust them on National defense?

Nope, for other reasons than experience .Comparing experience of those i (we) wouldn't reject for other reasons.

Trump had the Speaker of the Indonesian congress with him at one of his speeches.

I don't see that as a great qualification.. particularly if it's the best he has..

I do like Ted Cruz but that is because he is Ted Cruz, not because he sat on some do nothing committee.

Bear in mind the context of the discussion was comparing experience. The other factors are.. other factors.

thanks for your reply..

[D-fendr]

I like Cruz. Carly is a no-go in my book.

Personally, I agree with you. However, just looking at experience with foreign leaders, experience in national security matters, hers is better than others. This may be damning with faint praise, but it is what it is compared with those with less than.

[jospehm20]

Trump has not been in the position to make decisions on national defense. I like what he says about rebuilding the Armed Forces. He has shown himself to have common sense, an ability to learn and adapt to changing situations and he seems to know what people want. I trust he will get the right people to explain stuff to him based on his past record in business. I think he has demonstrated good decision making skills honed by years of doing business with his own money. Unlike politicians who never take risks with anything that belongs to them. Trump did not get to be where he is by being stupid, timid and unable to learn or adapt. I can ask you the same question. What have any of the other candidates actually done to show superior judgement in national defense or global politics? I honestly do not see anything.

[D-fendr]

I understand your points.

But if you don’t get the basics, if don’t understand that, then you’re not going to pick the right people and you’re not going to have the right context to judge what they advise.CIC is really a different world.

>>>”good decision making skills honed by years of doing business with his own money.”

He’s had big failures - using other peoples money. Read his books on how you can do this too! :)

>>What have any of the other candidates actually done to show superior judgement in national defense or global politics?

A couple of quickies:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?t=3&v=vknegr1nEHE

http://www.cruz.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=2429

Here’s what I think is missing in this discussion as a pitch for Trump:

“He’s conservative; he has integrity; he has knowledge/experience in national defense...”

[jospehm20]

I am in Afghanistan. I don’t have bandwidth to stream video most of the time. The letter is a good one and seems to me a pretty common sense take to anybody who loves the country. I like Cruz also but the truth is he is not a national defense expert either. He may know more inside and classified information due to his position but other people would get that when they are in the position. I think selecting somebody with good decision making skills and the right guiding principles for President is the important thing. As screwed up as our foreign affairs are, I am not sure that it will even be the major issue this election. We have plenty of issues at home that need to be solved. The most important issue in my view is immigration. I think that needs to be handled correctly or we will be through as a country. If we get an amnesty or “pathway to citizenship” candidate elected, nothing will really matter much after that, even what the Russians are doing in Syria.

[D-fendr]

selecting somebody with good decision making skills and the right guiding principles for President is the important thing

Yep, I would add character/integrity to the list, and I always value experience. But there's not going to be a candidate that has it all.

Vote and pray I guess... :)

Thanks for your posts.

[jospehm20]

I agree. Thank you for your posts.