Today there is proof that perhaps these thoughts are not so alien in the hallways of U.S. hegemony. The New York Times publishes this morning an unsigned editorial, "Mr. Putin’s Mixed Messages on Syria," that amounts to a qualified about-face; qualified because the principal canard, that Assad -- and because Assad has been steadfastly supported by Russia, Putin -- is to blame for the disintegration of Middle East. Nary a word is mentioned about the role of U.S. allies Turkey and nations of the GCC in shuttling foreign jihadis to Syria and Iraq. But the gist of the Gray Lady's message is that an agreement between Russia and the U.S. is necessary to address the crisis in Syria:
The truth is, both men are in a bind. America’s fight against ISIS is failing; a stark indicator was the Pentagon’s admission that its $500 million program to train moderate Syrian opposition forces to fight ISIS has only four or five fighters who are actually on the battlefield. Meanwhile, Mr. Putin’s ally, Mr. Assad, is in danger of falling, which would destroy the last threads holding the state together, open the door to a takeover by the Islamic State and jeopardize Russia’s last foothold in the Middle East. Mr. Obama and Mr. Putin should be able to find common cause in battling the Islamic State, which is destabilizing the region and training a generation of foreign fighters, some of whom have already returned home to Europe, Russia and Central Asia.
The Islamic State cannot be confronted effectively unless there is a political settlement in Syria between Mr. Assad’s regime and opposition forces. The main impediment has been Mr. Putin’s insistence that Mr. Assad remain in power. But Russia previously agreed on the need for a transition in Syria and a compromise seems obvious.It is interesting how the troubadours of U.S. full-spectrum dominance will insist on the righteous of their propaganda even when it contradicts itself, as the two paragraphs above obviously do. The U.S. position is that the havoc, the refugees flocking to Europe and overrunning Lebanon and Jordan, are Assad's creation, and that if he would only absent himself all would right itself.
But if Assad were to leave, with whom would the remaining Baathists of the Syrian Arab Republic share power? The Pentagon has just spent half-a-billion dollars to train moderates, only four or five of whom are actually on the battlefield. The answer then is that the only meaningful possible partners in a power-sharing deal with the Syrian government would be foreign-backed jihadists, and they don't even believe in secular government.
In other words, the U.S. position, as we have seen time and again, is nonsense; it is an obscene lie.
Another way to approach this issue is by looking at the composition of the refugees flocking to Europe. The majority identify themselves as being Syrian, but there are also Afghans, Libyans, Iraqis, and Albanians from the failed U.S. experiment in Kosovo -- all countries that have been ministered to by the American war machine. What does Putin have to do with Albanians fleeing Kosovo for the northern climes of Germany and Norway? Give the Gray Lady a day or two and she will fabricate some poppycock.