14:37 GMT +3 hours27 July 2016
Live
Saudi troops pose in front of an helicopter

On Shaky Ground: Will Washington Give Blessing to Saudi Invasion of Syria?

© AFP 2016/ PASCAL POCHARD-CASABIANCA
Politics
Get short URL
148700405

Will Saudi Arabia dare invade Syria? Controversy is still simmering around Riyadh's plan to send ground troops to Syria; Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams have weighed the pros and cons of the prospects of a Saudi intervention.

Last week Saudi Arabia announced that it was seriously mulling a ground operation in Syria aimed against Islamic extremists. The news came as a surprise: it is no secret that Riyadh has been sponsoring the region's Sunni Islamists for years.

Ahead of the move Riyadh asked the Obama administration to give its blessing to the plan.

US State Department spokesperson Mark Toner confirmed Thursday that Washington is discussing the deployment of ground troops with Riyadh.

"As to the offer of ground troops [from Saudi Arabia], we're still in discussion with that… I think we're still in discussion with how those ground forces would be deployed on the ground," Toner said during a press briefing.

In their Liberty Report program former Republican congressman Ron Paul and Daniel McAdams of the Ron Paul Institute for Peace & Prosperity call attention to the fact that if the invasion goes forward "it would pit Saudi forces directly against Iranian, Syrian, and probably Russian forces."

"Is the US really ready to unleash WWIII over whether or not [Bashar] Assad stays in office?" they asked.

"Common sense would dictate that this should not happen. We shouldn't be there. But common sense does not prevail," Ron Paul noted.

However, the former Republican congressman stressed, in the case of Saudi Arabia common sense should be taken into consideration: "You know, their bank accounts are getting smaller, their income is going way down, they started to pinch pennies."

Indeed, the tremendous oil price slump has dealt a heavy blow to the kingdom's economy. Furthermore, the Saudi-led Arabian intervention in Yemen that began in 2015 has become a quagmire for the Gulf state.

According to Dr. Paul, people who have the advantage in war are not always those who possess the most powerful weapons: "Sometimes, it's the one who has the moral high ground and the support of the people."

"One example we are most familiar with is Vietnam… This is the same thing here. It looks like Assad may have the moral high ground," the former congressman emphasized.

According to Paul, if Syrians really abhorred Bashar al-Assad, as the US media used to say, there would be an overwhelming uprising in Syria that wiped the government out. But it is clear that the Syrian President still enjoys a high level of support in the country.  

The experts pointed out that the so-called "moderate" rebel forces are comprised not only of Syrians. There are lots of foreign jihadi fighters on the ground involved in the conflict.

The concept of "moderate" uprising is falling apart at the seams as it turns out that major driving forces of the Syrian insurgency are Islamists and al-Qaeda affiliates.

In this context "the whole idea of the Saudi invasion is absurd on the face of it," McAdams remarked, "because they claim they are going to invade Syria to get rid of ISIS [Daesh] and the terrorists. But everyone who has been paying attention knows [that] for years they [Saudi Arabia] have been backing and funding al-Qaeda and ISIS."

While Riyadh is trying to pressure Washington into a joint invasion of Syria, Russia and Iran warned the parties against the potentially dangerous move.

"They [Saudi Arabia] claim they will send troops (to Syria), but I don't think they will dare do so. They have a classic army and history tells us such armies stand no chance in fighting irregular resistance forces. This will be like a coup de grace for them. Apparently, they see no other way but this, and if this is the case, then their fate is sealed," Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, the commander of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) told journalists last week.

While commenting on the issue Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev stressed that a ground military operation in Syria could lead to yet another "permanent war."

"A ground operation would involve all participants in a war. Therefore, the Americans and our Arab partners must consider well whether they want a permanent war. They are wrong if they think they could win this war quickly, especially in the Arab world where everybody fights against everybody," Medvedev told Germany's Handelsblatt newspaper Thursday.

It still remains unclear whether or not Washington would to give its blessing to the impulsive and warmongering Saudi leadership.

Related:
Swept Under the Carpet: British Middle East Crimes Brought to Light
Turkey Poised to Invade Syria? Is NATO - Russia Confrontation Possible?
Daesh Uses Chemical Weapons, Able to Produce Chlorine, Mustard Gas - CIA
Russian Prime Minister Warns Against Int'l Ground Operation in Syria
Tags:
Islamic extremism, Islamists, war, The Syrian war, NATO, Daesh, Daniel McAdams, Ron Paul, Dmitry Medvedev, United States, Saudi Arabia
Community standardsDiscussion
Comment via FacebookComment via Sputnik
  • Сomment

All comments

  • siberianhusky
    Ouch the little dog is barking, it is that Napoleon complex that small dog have.

    I hope it does not happen but secretly I wish that the KSA would do it for the only reason that Russia will put them in those incest camel humpers in there place and shut up for the next 10,000 years
  • patkelly1595
    Obama probably does not want a war with Russia, but the Neocons who brought us the Iraq war still do. The love the prospect of war with Russia . This is what they have done in the Ukraine. The only safety we have now is that Hilary or Ted Cruz (Israeil firsters) are not yet in power
  • ariavd
    As Ron Paul said (power of the people) As soon the they start to loose their (fighters) the people more and more turn against them,and more countrys turn against them. Spesially united snakes must be aware of the spirit of gaining ,or loosing,We have seen lately, It is inpossible to figth against the spirit ,and the will of people,But the united snakes want the war to spread ,
  • michael
    wow, a congressman using the term 'moral high ground' I didn't realise that they knew such concepts. :)
  • hopscotch64
    US allies act bold and feel they are undefeatable because they have the United States to bail them out or do the bulk of the fighting. So, if we assume this is a correct analysis then the problem is the United States which emboldens and ferments these fantasies of invulnerability. No matter how you cut the cake the root of the problem always comes back to the United States as the main source of discourse and war. The Saudi's would never on their own even contemplate such a suicidal operation without US backing whether it is before or after the fact.
  • ralf.sxm
    Concerning Andreas Gabriel · Illinois Institute of Technology on facebook (me personally I do not work with fb)
    "It is said that americans rule the middle east by creating chaos. I will correct this by saying the americans rule the middle east via chaos which has always been a characteristic of the area instead of organizing a suitable system. Afterall democracy in each country takes a different form based on indigenous people's mentality."
    Why don't you get it?
    US is not America and US is not representing America. It seems to be an illness like megalomania. We Americans, but Not-US-Americans, are not responsible for that dirty US-politics. I shall not get tired of pointing this out. Best regards from Middle / South America
  • ralf.sxm
    Concerning "... Therefore, the Americans and our Arab partners must consider well whether they want a permanent war. ..."
    1.) NOT "... the Americans" but only US. Please respect that Mr Medvedev. US is not America and US is not representing America. It seems to be an illness like megalomania. We Not-US-Americans are not responsible for that dirty US-politics. I shall not get tired of pointing this out. Best regards from Middle / South America
    2.) US needs wars. It is not about winning wars. It is about permanent wars, as US military industrial complex is already about 25 % of US economy. Without wars and the criminal money system (not only Petro-$) US is broken immediately. And of course, all wars are bankers’ wars. That fits. I shall not get tired pointing that out either.
Show new comments (0)