Right after Trump's sudden announcement that he will withdraw the US forces from Syria, we had some mixed reactions. Some liberals reacted angrily, but most of the reactions from the liberal machine were rather moderate, or at least not as intensive as someone would normally expect.
On the other hand, Trump's supporters and all those who had enough of the pro-war neoliberal establishment, felt a kind of vindication, as it appeared that Trump would eventually keep its promise for an 'anti-interventionist' policy.
But the blog wrote immediately a 'not so fast' article to explain that most of the Americans and all those who are tired of the US endless wars, should not rush to celebrate. We estimated that Trump's move is probably a sign that he is going to re-organize troops and go after the big target called Iran.
Indeed, shortly after the move, Trump, suddenly again, announced that he will also pullout troops from Afghanistan.
And then, about a week later, a former Pentagon official spoke to RT and actually verified our estimation. As Michael Maloof said:
The troops are going to remain in the area. They're all special forces and you're going to need special forces for something larger. I think that they're being repositioned and my concern is that with the pullout of the troops both from Afghanistan and Syria you're going to look - just watch if he's [Trump] going to pull out any troops of South Korea. And the fact that he mentioned Iran is something, I think, we need to be concerned about.
I think that Trump will be using these troops ultimately for something bigger in Iran - potentially against Iran, maybe just after the beginning of the year.
He's not going to telegraph his moves, just like the pullout of Syria. He didn't telegraph that at all, caught everybody by surprise. The fact that Bolton is quiet, I think is problematic. I think it's going to be one in which he's got a placate, not only Netanyahu, but Bolton. And Iran seems to be the target.
It is one of these very rare times that the 'flip-flop' Donnie doesn't flip-flop at all. His position on this matter is clear and stable. Even with North Korea had his ups and downs. Yet, being hostile to Iran and Venezuela and probably cutting taxes for the super-rich are Donnie's favorite actions as it seems.
We would disagree with Maloof only in one thing: the timing of a potential war with Iran. It is unlikely that Trump will organize a millitary operation against Iran before 2020 US presidential election. Another devastating war will probably cause him the opportunity for a second term.
So, as we already mentioned, by playing now the 'anti-interventionism' card Trump returns to the game with at least three big advantages:
First, he saves military strength and manpower and buys some time until the 2020 US presidential election to organize better the mother of all military campaigns against Iran in case of a second term in the US presidency.
Second, he leaves the others, and especially the Russians to deal with the chaos in Syria. In this way, he keeps them occupied with the Syrian chaos, while he prepares to open the war front in Iran. It will be very difficult for the Russians to participate in the Syrian and the Iranian front simultaneously.
Third, he may re-boost his popularity among his supporters in the interior, as he essentially exhibits his 'anti-interventionism' to them. This will give him a much better chance to win the 2020 US election and go for a second term. Then, he will have all the time to focus on Iran.
The big problem is that he has to find a way to sell another absolutely devastating war to the Americans. And, unfortunately, it will probably take a shockingly loud false flag operation.