As Syrian Sand Trap Gets Deeper: Certain Influences Looking for Plausible Deniability?

Submitted by M Tovey (United States), Oct 4, 2016 at 15:45

It took a while (from August to October) to digest this in light of the facts on the ground; that Russia has been posturing its 'resources' for an after action scenario that was not fully developed beyond the premise of protecting al-Assad's precious little hold on the former Syrian domain. The motive, a little fuzzy even by Biblical standards, needed more information to flush out the end game as it pertained to the reasons of why America was still involved. As of this writing, that has cleared up somewhat: America balks at the talks of ceasefire. Is the American Administrative Chief Executive backing off? Why?
In the interim, Russia has ramped up its efforts and even brought more sophistication to the continuing expansion of the Middle Eastern front, missiles systems of a more tactical theater sort: what are they thinking?

In the American political theater, does this reflect on the impossibility of the candidates to fully address the situation when on an almost daily basis, the incumbent is working so very hard to make it hard to undo what he has done. The Candidate has done nothing if not make things worse.

The suggestion by another that an article contrasting a Clintonian administration versus a Trump institutional revolution might be a way to sort out new tactics for a different American approach to the Middle East, such that AMERICA IS NOT GOING TO BE DRAGGED INTO THE WRECKAGE LEFT BEHIND BY THE FORMER ADMINISTRATION; or is she?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".