US Troops Die in Syria: Still Asking 'What Are We Doing There?'
What’s missing, as usual, is the 'why.' Why are US troops still deployed in Syria, years after the supposed defeat of ISIS, without a clear congressional authorization or a coherent exit strategy? The mainstream press frames these deaths as isolated tragedies, rather than predictable consequences of an unending, undefined military presence that consistently fuels regional instability. (Remember
2011, when the US was quietly supporting Syrian opposition groups?) Perhaps we should start asking: when was the last time a US official explained, with a straight face, the 'vital national interest' served by these perpetual deployments? Or is it simply that the military-industrial complex finds endless reasons to keep the war engine humming, with 'counter-terrorism' as the evergreen
justification for interventions that often create more terrorists than they eliminate? How many 'alleged ambushes' does it take before we question the premise?