I don’t need to elaborate on this. It seems quite straight forward to me. What other sane option is there? The only problem is, what place does sanity hold these days in American thinking?
But I do just want to correct The Saker’s comment on Gabbard’s video, of which he says – “She is wrong about Iran having nukes and Russian forces, but about the rest she is right. She is SPOT ON on the fact that there is no workable definition of “(US) American victory”. He is wrong on two things (perhaps he was lacking sleep at the time or something like that).
Gabbard does not say that Iran has nukes. What she does say is that Iran is “getting closer to developing nuclear weapons capacity” – the ability to make a nuclear weapon – which is true. Though I do believe the Iranians have no intention of taking such a path.
The second thing about “Russian Forces”. While it is not clear what The Saker intended by including that term, and of course Iran does not have “Russian Forces”, what is perfectly clear is exactly what Tulsi Gabbard actually says – “…but now our (the US) efforts are primarily directed against Iran, Syria, and the Russian Forces”. And that is perfectly true. The whole basis on which the US has acted during the whole Syrian conflict and especially since Russia became involved there, is to undermine everything that Iran, Syria and Russia are doing and have done. And undermine those efforts in any way they can – including giving aid to the various terrorist factions (all of them) that are operating there – in both Syria and Iraq. That is undeniable, and I know The Saker would agree with that – so again I say it is unclear exactly what he meant or was thinking by including those words.
He is absolutely correct though when he says – “She is SPOT ON on the fact that there is no workable definition of “(US) American victory”.