Saturday, October 10, 2015

This is not a blog post about Syrian policy

There will be plenty of time to discuss that after 60 Minutes airs their interview with an incredulous Steve Kroft.  No, this is about the execrable New York Times and their atrocious editorial page.  Today they criticize Obama's Syrian policy and if you guessed they ran this in Saturday's edition (the least-read of the week), you win a prize:
The initial plan was dubious. The new one is hallucinatory, and it is being rolled out as the war enters a more perilous phase now that Russia has significantly stepped up its military support of Mr. Assad’s forces.
Russia?  Russia is filling the power vacuum that Obama has left behind in the Middle East?  As Neo-Neocon noted, the NY Times once sneered at such delusions:
Two decades after the end of the cold war, Mitt Romney still considers Russia to be America’s “No. 1 geopolitical foe.” His comments display either a shocking lack of knowledge about international affairs or just craven politics. Either way, they are reckless and unworthy of a major presidential contender.
Maybe there was a tickle of conscious by this editorial writer, an acknowledgment that he/she should at least make a passing reference to Russia's ascendancy in the region.
That will require the ironing out of stark differences between the United States and Mr. Assad’s chief backers, Russia and Iran. 
Oh, NYT, you so crazy.  The 80s called and they want their foreign policy back.

No comments: