The various iterations of the War for the Greater Middle East are urgent topics:
- Erdogan: Syrian Kurd forces used to take Raqqa 'naive' Aljazeera 11/07/2016
- Disease stalks Yemen as hospitals, clinics devastated by war: WHO Reuters 11/07/2016
- Yury Barmin, Russia emerges as a center of gravity for Israel Al-Monitor 11/08/2016
- Howard LaFranchi, Solving Syria: How next US president could pressure Russia in new ways Christian Science Monitor 11/07/2016
- Stephen Walt, The Great Myth About U.S. Intervention In Syria Foreign Policy 10/24/2016:
Also two more from Stephen Walt, this one on the Afghanistan War, now generally accepted to be the longer war in US history, The 2016 Epidemic of Afghan War Amnesia Foreign Policy 10/16/2016.[B]y far the worst argument for intervening in Syria is the suggestion that greater U.S. involvement is necessary to preserve U.S. credibility, to maintain its reputation as a distinctly moral great power, or to preserve the respect of allies and adversaries alike. The historical record shows that not intervening in humanitarian tragedies has had little impact on America’s standing in the past, and the same is true today. Indeed, diving deep into the Syrian quagmire is a good way to squander resources and burn up the attention and political capital of America’s leaders, which would in fact make the United States less able to act when challenges to more serious interests arise (as they inevitably will).
To repeat: One can make a coherent case for intervening in Syria, based on the worthy goal of reducing human suffering. But we should reject the idea that the United States should intervene because its own security, prosperity, or reputation is on the line. It’s not. [my emphasis in bold]
And this third one, a hopeful thought, Why Are We So Sure Hillary Will Be a Hawk? Foreign Policy 10/16/2016. He casts doubt on the assumption, which he notes has substantial basis in reality, that Hillary will be hawkish on foreign and military policy. Mainly by arguing that there are good, sensible reasons for her not to be. "Most important of all, none of the places Clinton might be tempted to intervene look easy or appealing."
But without popular and activist pressure, she's unlikely to follow the more restrained path, whether a "realist" version or otherwise. Because there is a huge national security establishment and military-industrial complex that have vested interests in a more hawkish foreign policy.
In this video Larry Wilkerson talks about the civil war in Syria, Larry Wilkerson: A Solution for Syria Will Require the United States to Concede on Assad The Real News 10/31/2016: