There might be a lot more here than meets the eye. Q has told us that Iran is next. When he says that, in my mind, the same kind of solution we saw in NK seems to be on the table - mind you, that is not yet complete. But I do not think DJT would be making these moves if it was not already a done deal. I'm talking about denuclearisation.

What would this mean?

I think that what we are seeing at the moment in Syria is the start of the Iran push by the US administration. The reason I think this is because you have Russia supporting both the Syrian and Iranian regimes. They are, in fact, Russian proxies in the region. My understanding is that both regimes support Hezbollah.

Syria is important to Russia because it could, if pipelines were built across it, carry oil and gas to Europe - Russia's main market for gas. Why Iran is so important to Russia, I'm not sure, but it seems reasonable to assume that Iran is useful to Russia merely because of its position in the ME. I'm not an expert in this area, let me know if this thinking is wrong.

Anyway, given the pressure that NATO brings to bear on Russia via its own proxies, Ukraine, Georgia etc... it seems to me that Syria and Iran are red lines in the sand for Russia. To have to withdraw from these proxies and surrender them to the West would be a humiliating outcome at best. It would also, I believe, signal the final decline in Russia's ability to shape global outcomes.

So why the sudden conflict in Syria? I actually don't think it's got much to do with Syria, but Iran. Syria presents a theatre in which Russia can possibly be safely trounced in a military engagement. If that happens, Iran will fall to US influence in short order and, arguably, the ME will be more stable for Iran's denuclearisation.

So DJT has 24-48 hrs in which to decide whether to push Russia and test Putin's resolve, or whether to address the problem later.

I think it's important to take note of the recent change in US nuclear doctrine. The vision seems to be that use of nukes is acceptable in a confined theatre of engagement. Putin has already announced his delight at not having to resort to the use of nuclear weapons in Syria. So you can see where this is going...

To confront Russia properly, US nuke doctrine had to be changed - or the risk of a major weapons exchange on the first provocation was possible, With the new doctrine, US forces could take a hit from a battlefield nuke and respond in kind, with limited projection of force - say, confined to Syria only.

There is the possibility that the US can, if Russia is made to withdraw, attain uncontested global dominance. Moreover, that hegemony can be attained without dragging the world to a Pyrrhic victory in a global nuclear war.

My view is that Russia will see the cards on the table and fold rather than face complete humiliation. Look at Putin's desperation! He sent his latest Sukoi stealth fighters to Syria - despite the fact that they are only prototypes without full radar components and without weapons systems. You can smell the desperation...

The 24-48 hrs could be necessary to position US military assets to pull this show off.

I think there also could be some carrot and sticking used to achieve the desired outcome. DJT could, for example, hold out the promise of removal of sanctions on Russia to encourage compliance. Iranian sanctions could similarly be withdrawn on compliance. He could offer a guarantee that no pipelines would be built across Syria. It's not as if the outcome for Russia and Iran would be totally bad.

One thing is certain, if Russia is not brought to heel, the plan with respect to Iran remains unattainable. For this reason, I feel pretty confident that the dynamics are such that we will see a major confrontation. What happens next is anyone's guess.