I've seen more and more geopolitical analysts eyeing with concern the showdown at the Syrian corral that appears to be developing. I am referring to comments by Eric Draitser (see this and this), Peter Korzun, and Maxim Egorov in addition to Lauria's in this article.
Korzun in his article sums up the concern in this paragraph:
The recent news about the US sending troops to Syria, Turkey’s announced intent to launch a ground operation there and Saudi Arabia’s statement on its readiness to join "any" military campaign on Syrian soil serve as indicators of imminent large-scale war. It was not accidental that the opposition supported by Saudi-Arabia and Turkey did its best to stymie the Geneva-3 peace talks. The deployment of ground troops in Syria is not only an outright violation of international law. The action will bring the Russia-Syria-Iran coalition and the US-led collation to the brink of collision. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and other states willing to start this dangerous game rely on the US support. The United States is the key country. It can and must use its influence to avoid the worst from happening. It can direct the process and keep the situation from sliding into an uncontrollable conflict with unpredictable repercussions.But then, would not the US Empire directors like to see Russia bogged down in a lengthy war, Saudi Arabia over-extending itself and thereby causing conditions for its own destabilization, a splitting up of Syria as well as Saudi Arabia into smaller, more manageable nations? In short, more chaos that the Empire could reap various benefits from?
