By: Kayhan Int’l Staff Writer

U.S. military actions within Syria continue to be less and less ISIL-centric these days, with more operations targeting and threatening allied forces of Iran, Syria, and Russia, and even shooting down a Syrian government aircraft over the weekend.
This isn’t just the U.S. idly getting into one-off fights in the course of a war they have already failed in Syria, but rather is reflective of a desperate push by White House officials to stay and entertain, with multiple National Security Council members looking at the regime change war less as a fight against ISIL and more as a chance to stay in post-ISIL Syria for a fight with Iran and Russia in particular, and Iraq and Syria in general.
Don’t be fooled when you hear the Pentagon regime has made clear they object, with Defense Secretary James Mattis personally rejecting multiple proposals related to this. Attacks on allied forces whenever they got sort of close to a U.S.-backed terrorist base, and a public narrative presenting the allied forces as enemies, have found the U.S. heading down that path anyhow.
This isn’t a new battle. The Pentagon seeks regime change - one way or another. This is increasingly becoming the new policy, with the White House leaning heavily toward picking new fights, and in the case of allied forces, that fight is most likely to be in Syria - and in Iraq.
No wonder the Zionist regime’s army is in regular contact with terrorist groups, and has been providing them with growing amounts of aid. It’s gotten so prevalent these days. The UN Observer Force in Syria is a bit less upbeat about that, saying Israel’s interaction with the terrorists has been growing precipitously in recent months.
A growing number of U.S. attacks targeting the Syrian government and its allies are a sign that the United States is desperate too. Its direct military involvement in the war is widening, and nothing is so indicative of this than the recent U.S. downing of a Syrian Su-22 bomber. As a matter of policy, the U.S. has officially supported the idea of regime change throughout the war, though up until very recently, their military involvement had been all but apparently focused on attacking ISIL forces, with some strikes against civilians as well.
The U.S. support for regime change is no longer limited to CIA arms supplying schemes for terrorists. This no longer conflicts with the Pentagon regime’s military operations focusing on fighting against the Syrian government and allies. They are now on the frontline of the war for regime change. The sudden military involvement in attacking Syrian government forces does make the U.S. agenda simpler: They no longer depend on their ISIL and Al-Qaeda foot soldiers. They want to occupy Iraq and Syria forever - long after ISIL has been defeated by allied forces.
The development is in part a reflection of the fact that Donald Trump, who as a presidential candidate promised to focus solely on ISIL in Syria, has as president taken a not surprisingly hard line on the allied forces. But it’s also reflective of a broader dynamic: As ISIL loses strength and territory in Syria, the endgame of the regime change war is drawing nearer and the various powers engaged in that struggle are shedding a common enemy. The result is a race to carve out spheres of influence and the United States under Trump appears to be getting in on the action.
By striking pro-Syrian forces that are targeting ISIL, the Trump administration is establishing a policy that says ‘we will stay and occupy.’ They lost the war and they no longer depend on their terror proxy forces. They have taken matters into their own hands and they want to make sure they can get in post-ISIL Syria what they couldn’t get during the regime-change campaign – which is partition of the Levant.
The problem is that allied forces are not willing to grant the Americans that plot of land. After dislodging ISIL and other foreign-backed goons, they will make sure American occupying forces will never get the chance to make Syria another Afghanistan.