This
ASTONISHING PICTURE has just been tweeted by British MP George
Galloway; it’s astonishing because it exposes US troops posing as
ISIS TERRORISTS…So there are obviously factions within the US
military and government who are engaged in terrorism; it’s not
difficult to see now how easily ISIS will enter into America;
especially if there are those within her own military and government
willing to facilitate the terror!!!
We
are aware that this photo had been photoshopped to make a point, but
not made by us. It states clearly who was promoting the photo.
Many
countries have been arresting jihadists who have gone to Syria to
fight with the terrorist groups. The Obama does not arrest them on
return, but treats them as heroes.
Eric
Harroun was not arrested when returning to the US, but died later of
a drug overdose.
Eric
Harroun was
one of a group of Americans that were fighting with the terrorists,
was questioned and freed when he returned to the US. He later died of
a drug overdose, so we were led to believe.
In
the following video you will see Matthew Van Dyke who has been
promoting the terrorist groups with his propaganda films. He has been
in Iraq, Libya and Syria promoting the terrorist groups for the US.
He
has been fighting alongside ISIS for his propaganda films and is now
in Iraq again training Iraqi soldiers. He has been promoting Obama’s
lies and is lying in the following interview to incite war and take
over of a sovereign state.
Van
Dyke still promoting the lies of the chemical weapons being used by
the Government when it has already been proven to be US lies.
Van
Dyke is nothing but a terrorist himself, as US Veterans would never
support terrorists. Van Dyke is not a veteran but working for the US
Government to incite war by propaganda.
US
Veterans have had enough of the US supporting ISIL and Van Dyke
mentions that the US have been funding the “moderate” terrorists
long before Obama’s latest round of training and arming another
2,000
.
The
following video shows the US Veterans speaking the truth. Real
Veterans do not want to support terrorists, that Matthew Van Dyke is
promoting.
Over
the past 4 years the western media and Al Jazeera have been showing
fake videos. continuously to justify another war.
We
are interested in your views, that is why we have not taken down the
photoshopped photo.
Keep
the comments coming. If it wakes up people to the truth then it is
doing it’s job.
October
30, 2015 Politnavigator Translated
by Kristina Rus
Bill
No. 3368 was registered in the Verkhovnaya Rada, which prohibits to
name Ukrainian cities and streets in honor of anything associated
with Russian history since the XIV century until 1917. This
was posted on the official website of the Verkhovnaya Rada of
Ukraine. As
stated in the draft law, it is prohibited to assign geographical
objects names which are the names or nicknames of monarchs, state,
political and military leaders of the Russian (Moscow) Kingdom, the
Russian Empire of the XIV-XX centuries, or derivatives of them; the
names, consonant with such names or pseudonyms; names, which include
elements of the titles of the monarchs of the Russian (Moscow)
Kingdom, the Russian Empire of the XIV-XX centuries. "So
the laws regarding totalitarian regimes and fighters for
independencereally
meet the standards of European practices, it
is expedient to prohibit the assignment to geographic objects of
names associated with propaganda of pro-Russian imperialism, Russian
(Moscow) Kingdom, the Russian Empire of the XIV-XX centuries, during
the colonial dependence of Ukraine, which may facilitate the
intention to appropriate its territory", — say the authors of
the bill. Among
the authors of the project — deputies from all four factions of the
ruling right wing nationalistic coalition. Obviously,
the project aims to prevent renaming of Kirovograd to Yelisavetgrad.
Although formally the city of Yelisavetgrad was originally not named
in honor of the Empress Elizabeth, but in honor of Saint Elizabeth -
the saint patron of the Empress. Thus,
the name Yelisavetgrad may be officially banned.
Ukraine
Defaults on Russian Loan - And IMF Changes its Rules to Let It Happen
Unable
to argue that the debt owes Russia is not “public debt”, IMF is
obliged to change its rules so that it can continue
supporting Ukraine
I
said that Ukraine’s argument that the debt was a “private” as
opposed to a “public” debt looked in legal terms a hopeless one.
The
point was that if Ukraine defaulted on a “public” debt, then
according to its current rules the IMF cannot proceed with its
bailout programme.
Ukraine
has now made it utterly clear that it will default on the debt.
A
cheeky suggestion from Putin - echoing a suggest that I made in my
April article - that the IMF increase its lending by $3 billion so
that Ukraine could pay the debt, has gone unheeded.
Instead, caught between the legal reality that the debt is a “public debt” and the political imperative to support Ukraine, it seems - according to comments by Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov and an article in the Wall Street Journal - that the IMF is going to change its rules so that it can go on supporting Ukraine even if it defaults on the debt.
As the
Russians correctly say,
this is a major precedent that will undermine further the IMF’s
credibility at a time when it is being increasingly challenged by
the new financial institutions that China is setting up.
It
seems a very big price to pay when the cost of avoiding having to
make such a precedent is just $3 billion.
What
that shows is how unwilling Western governments are to back Ukraine
with money - even if doing so avoids putting them in a position
where the IMF’s credibility is being put at risk - exposing it as
nothing more than an instrument of Western foreign policy.
There
will now be a court case in London, which the Russians are certain
to win - there being no defence to it.
How
the Russians will enforce the Judgment they will obtain - and
whether the IMF will become a third party in the case - remains to
be seen.
The
seasonal hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica has widened to
near-record size according to the United Nations, who insists that
efforts to save the earth's protective shield are still working.
Thwaites
Glacier in Western Antarctica. Photo: AFP
/ NASA
The
World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said colder-than-usual high
altitude temperatures over the Antarctic combined with ozone-eating
gases lingering in the atmosphere had stretched the ozone hole to an
average of 26.9 million square kilometres over a 30 day period -
covering an area larger than all of North America.
"This
is the third largest observed after the record-breaking ozone holes
in 2000 and 2006," the UN's climate and weather agency said in a
statement.
The
hole peaked on 2 October, when it measured 28.2 million sq km,
according to the measurements conducted by the US space agency NASA.
"This
shows that the ozone hole problem is still with us and we need to
remain vigilant," WMO scientist Geir Braathen said in the
statement.
"But
there is no reason for undue alarm."
The
size of the hole in the ozone layer above the Antarctic fluctuates,
usually peaking during the polar spring in September and October,
when extremely cold temperatures mix with the returning sunlight to
release chlorine radicals that destroy ozone.
WMO
said that during colder years, the hole was larger, but stressed that
"this does not reverse the projected long-term recovery in the
coming decades".
The
ozone layer - which helps protect the Earth from potentially
dangerous ultraviolet rays that can cause skin damage - began
developing holes on an annual basis starting in the 1980s due to
widespread use of chlorofluorocarbons, or CFCs.
Once
commonly used in refrigerators and aerosol cans, CFCs are now almost
non-existent thanks to an international treaty signed in Montreal in
1987, amid global concern over widening holes in the ozone layer.
Last
year, the UN said the ozone layer was "well on track" for
recovery by mid-century, although fixing it over Antarctica would
take longer.
"The
Montreal Protocol is in place and is working well," Mr Braathen
said.
He
warned though that "we may continue to see large Antarctic ozone
holes until about 2025" because of weather conditions in the
stratosphere and because ozone depleting chemicals linger in the
atmosphere for several decades after they have been phased out.
The
Empire Files - The Censored Reality Of The Refugee Crisis
Today
60 million human beings are displaced by war and extreme poverty.
Many European countries are responding to the crisis with racist
hysteria and polices, backed by police measures.
Abby
Martin exposes the facts that are left out of the mainstream
reporting: the role of criminal wars, disastrous neoliberal economics
and why mass displacement is a permanent feature under this system.
The
White House spokesman has confirmed that US is planning to send up a
small number of special forces operatives to advise "moderate
opposition" in Syria on the ground.
Josh
Earnest refused to give more information to the reporters during the
briefing citing operational security. He insisted that the mission of
advisers in Syria will be to build the capacity of local forces to
fight Islamic State (IS, formerly known as ISIS or ISIL).
Earnest
reiterated that the administration is not planning to put "boots
on the ground," otherwise they would be sending "more than
50 troops."
The
White House press secretary insisted that the deployment is merely an
“intensification” of the US campaign against IS that began in
September 2014, noting that US special forces have conducted a
hostage rescue operation in Syria last year, and a combat raid
against an IS leader this spring.
“We
have shown a desire to intensify those elements of our strategy that
have shown the most promise,” he told reporters, referring to the
improvement in combat capabilities of Iraqi forces trained and
advised by US troops.
“These
forces do not have a combat mission,” Earnest said repeatedly.
Asked
about the legal framework for sending forces to Syria, Earnest cited
the 2001 congressional authorization to use military force, passed
following the September 11 terrorist attacks.
The
presence of any sort of US troops in Syria was not authorized by
either the elected government in Damascus or by the United Nations.
Though
Earnest did not say specifically which forces the US advisers will be
aiding, he did refer to a group 45 kilometers outside the IS capital
of Raqqa, which the media has been calling 'Syrian Democratic
Forces.'
US
aircraft delivered ammunition to the group earlier this month.
However, the Arab militias have told reporters that most of the
supplies ended up with the Kurdish YPG, whose promised advance
towards Raqqa has stalled due to the protests of the US ally Turkey.
Obama's
October Surprise: US Special Forces Are Now 'Assisting' Rebels in
Syria
Obama's
October Surprise: US Special Forces Are Now 'Assisting' Rebels in
Syria
Remember
when Obama said “no boots on the ground” in Syria? He fibbed
Did
Obama ask the Syria government if it was okay for U.S. soldiers to
“do stuff” in Syria? Not exactly, but at least the Pentagon
“consulted” with…Iraq? This is unreal:
The
Pentagon has also been “consulting” with the Iraqi prime
minister, Haider al-Abadi, to establish a special operations
taskforce to fight Isis “leaders and networks” across
the Syrian border in Iraq, a senior administration official
told the Guardian on Friday.
The
Iraqi government said Wednesday it didn't ask for — and doesn't
need — the “direct action on the ground” promised by
the Pentagon.
Ha-ha.
Back to the U.S. special forces operating illegally in Syria:
The
White House insisted that its overall strategy to combat Isis
remained the same and said the special forces troops would be helping
coordinate local ground forces in the north of the country and other
non-specified “coalition efforts” to counter Isis rather than
engaging in major ground operations.
Yes.
Obama has sent U.S. soldiers into Syria to conduct “non-specified
coalition efforts”. Any questions?
Now
Russia will have to stop bombing al-Nusra. Can't kill Americans.
President
Obama has authorized the deployment of a small contingent of elite
U.S. troops to northern Syria as part of the campaign against the
Islamic State, also known as ISIL, a senior administration official
tells The Intercept.
The
White House is expected to make a formal announcement later on
Friday. Administration officials have been authorized to inform
members of the press of the planned deployment, on condition that the
news be sourced only to a “senior administration official.”
While
portrayed by the administration as an intensification of the current
strategy and enhancing “efforts that are already working,” the
deployment of forces represents a clear escalation of the conflict
for the president who has previously said, “I will not put American
boots on the ground in Syria.”
The
use of special operations forces is increasingly seen as a preferable
alternative to heavy-footprint, large-scale military missions and
occupations of the sort carried out in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The
contingent, comprised of fewer than 50 members of the special
operations forces, will be sent to Kurdish-controlled territory
“where they will help coordinate local ground forces and Coalition
efforts to counter ISIL.” The deployment in Syria may represent a
broader effort to increase the use of elite U.S. troops in the war on
the Islamic State. According to the administration official, the
president also authorized consultation “with [Iraqi] Prime Minister
[Haider] Abadi and the Iraqi Government on the establishment of a
Special Operations Force (SOF) task force to further enhance our
ability to target ISIL leaders and networks.”
The
special operations deployment to Syria comes at a time of expanding
use of America’s most elite forces all around the world. In the
fiscal year that just ended, U.S. special operations forces — Army
Green Berets and Navy SEALs, among others — deployed to a
record-shattering 147 countries, according to Special Operations
Command (SOCOM) spokesperson Ken McGraw. That number translated into
a SOF presence in 75 percent of the nations on the planet and a jump
of 145 percent since the waning days of the Bush administration. On
any day of the year, America’s most elite troops can be found in 70
to 90 countries.
Previously,
U.S. special operations efforts in Syria have been brief, targeted
missions, such as a night raid in May in which members of the Army’s
Delta Force killed an Islamic State commander known as Abu Sayyaf.
In
July, SOCOM Commander Gen. Joseph Votel told the Aspen Security Forum
that his troops were not “doing anything on the ground in Syria.”
Despite that claim, special operations forces had carried out the Abu
Sayyaf night raid there a couple of months before and the Washington
Post recently revealed that they are involved in a secret campaign of
drone strikes in that country.
SOCOM
did not respond to a request for clarification if Syria was counted
among the 147 countries that saw SOF missions in 2015.
In
addition to the new special operations deployment, President Obama
also authorized enhancing assistance to neighboring Jordan and
Lebanon and deploying A-10 and F-15 attack aircraft to Incirlik air
base in Turkey to combat Islamic State forces.
The
administration is taking pains, however, to downplay the ultimate
significance of the enhanced military mission. “ISIL is a
determined enemy,” the senior official said in an email. “And we
will not defeat ISIL by military means alone.”
There's not much on this from western media (nothing that I can see from CNN) but here is America's ABC
The
19 global and regional powers who have gathered in Vienna have agreed
to work towards setting up a nationwide ceasefire in Syria, according
to the joint statement.
"One
of the most important agreements of today's meeting is that the
talks’ participants are asking the UN to gather representatives of
the Syrian government and the opposition to begin the political
process,"
Lavrov told a press-conference in Vienna. This political process
should provide for all sides to create "an
inclusive structure"
that will help to prepare a new constitution and hold elections that
should be controlled by the UN. All Syrian nationals should be able
to take part in the elections, including refugees in other countries,
the top Russian diplomat stressed.
Terrorists
must not be given a chance to seize power in the country, Russian FM
Sergey Lavrov said during a press conference, adding that this
understanding is shared by all 19 parties attending the talks. "We
have a common enemy, and we must not let this enemy gain power
neither in Syria nor in any other state,"
Lavrov said.
"If
a ceasefire is declared, no terrorist organizations should be
subjected to it," Russia's Foreign Minister said. A
comprehensive list of terror groups operating in Syria will be
defined during a separate meeting.
Participants
of the Vienna talks agreed on the necessity to work on a new
constitution in Syria, and to hold elections that should be
administered by the UN, Lavrov said. State institutions are to remain
intact.
"Russia
remains firm on its position that fighting terrorism should be
conducted in accordance with the solid basis of international law,
whether we are talking about military interventions from air or
ground operations, these need to be conducted in agreement with the
government or with the UN Security Council," Lavrov said.
Meanwhile,
the truce is to be followed by the formation of a transitional
government. Earlier reports said that the ceasefire should be
achieved within four to six months, but the Russian FM did not
confirm the timetable.
The
UN is calling for all the countries that have influence on the Syrian
government and opposition to try and put them at a negotiating table,
the United Nations' special envoy for Syria, Staffan de Mistura said.
Humanitarian
access should be provided to all territories in Syria, and help to
refugees intensified, the talks’ participants pointed out.
Should
Assad go?
The
fate of Bashar Assad remained a stumbling block throughout the seven
hour meeting.
The
US and its allies including Saudi Arabia believe that the Syrian
president, whose term expires in 2021, must resign. "There is no
way President Assad can unite and govern Syria," US Secretary of
State John Kerry said, adding that "Syrians deserve a different
choice."
"We
can't allow that difference [in views on Assad's fate] to get in the
way of the possibility of diplomacy to end the killing and find a
solution," the US official said. But added: "Make no
mistake: the answer to the Syrian civil war is not found in the
military alliance with Assad in our point of view."
Kerry
also told the journalists that US is employing a two-part approach in
Syria: intensifying the counter-terror campaign and "intensifying
our diplomatic efforts in order to end the conflict," adding
that both steps are "mutually reinforcing."
US
troops will be deployed in northern Syria, Kerry said in Vienna. They
"will help to coordinate local ground forces and coalition
efforts" in the region. He said that the announcement of Obama's
decision to deploy more military forces in the country during talks
on peace efforts is "a coincidence," adding that the US is
"very proud" of what has already been achieved in Iraq and
Syria.
The
US and its allies do not demand the immediate resignation as a
precondition for peace process anymore, saying Assad can stay in
power for months during the period of transition, but insist he must
step down when it draws to a close.
At
the same time, Russia's Lavrov again stressed that it is up to the
Syrian people to make such decisions.
"The
Syrian people should define the future of their country... including
Assad's fate," Russia's FM added.
As
the meeting in Vienna wrapped up it remained unclear how truce and
the transitional period are going to be implemented, how long the
latter will last, and whether the parties in the Syrian conflict are
ready to accept it - as neither Damascus nor the opposition took part
in the negotiations. The next round of Vienna talks is scheduled to
take place in two weeks.
The
civil war has been going on in Syria since 2011, when violent
protests erupted as part of the so-called Arab spring. Having seized
the vacuum of power, terrorist organization Islamic State (IS,
formerly ISIL/ISIS) managed to capture huge territories in Syria and
Iraq. On September 30 this year, Russia started a military operation
against IS and other terrorist groups in Syria. The US-led coalition
has also been fighting terrorists in the region for over a year.
Vienna
meeting participants: Russia, the US, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Iraq,
Italy, Egypt, Great Britain, Germany, Lebanon, Qatar, Iran, France,
China, the UAE, Jordan, Oman, the EU and the UN.
Putin
lays it all out on the table for Obama regarding Syria
Why
is John Kerry so eager to convene an emergency summit on Syria now
when the war has been dragging on for four and a half years?
Is
he worried that Russia's air campaign is wiping out too many
US-backed jihadis and sabotaging Washington's plan to topple Syrian
President Bashar al Assad?
You bet, he is. No one who's
been following events in Syria for the last three weeks should have
any doubt about what's really going on.Russia
has been methodically wiping out Washington's mercenaries on the
ground while recapturing large swathes of land that had been lost to
the terrorists. That, in turn, has strengthened Assad's position in
Damascus and left the administration's policy in tatters. And that's
why Kerry wants another meeting with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei
Lavrov pronto even though the two diplomats met less than a week ago.
The Secretary of State is hoping to cobble together some kind of
makeshift deal that will stop the killing and salvage what's left of
Uncle Sam's threadbare Syrian project.
On
Tuesday, Reuters reported that Iran had been invited to the confab
which will be held in Vienna on Thursday. The announcement is bound
to be ferociously criticized on Capital Hill, but it just shows to
what extent Russia is currently setting the agenda. It was Lavrov who
insisted that Iran be invited, and it was Kerry who reluctantly
capitulated. Moscow is now in the drivers seat.
And
don't be surprised if the summit produces some pretty shocking
results too, like a dramatic 180 on Washington's "Assad must go"
demand. As Putin has pointed out many times before, Assad's not going
anywhere. He's going to be a part of Syria's "transitional
governing body" when the Obama team finally agrees to the Geneva
Communique which is the political track that will eventually end the
fighting, restore security, and allow millions of refugees to return
to their homes.The
reason the administration is going to agree to allow Assad to stay,
is because if they don't, the Russian Airforce is going to continue
to blow US-backed mercenaries to smithereens. So, you see, Obama
really has no choice in the matter. Putin has put a gun to his head
and made him an offer he can't refuse.
That
doesn't mean the war is going to be a cakewalk for Russia or its
allies. It won't be. In fact, there have already been some major
setbacks, like the fact that ISIS just seized a critical section the
Aleppo-Khanasser highway, cutting off the government's supply-lines
to Aleppo. This is a serious problem, but it is not a problem that
can't be overcome nor is it a problem that will effect the outcome of
the war. It's just one of the obstacles that has to be dealt with and
surpassed. Taking a broader view, the outlook is much more
encouraging for the Russian-led coalition which continues to cut off
supply-lines, blow up ammo dumps and fuel depots, and rapidly
eviscerate the ability of the enemy to wage war. So, while the war is
certainly not a walk in the park, there's no doubt about who's going
to win.And
that might explain why the US decided to bomb Aleppo's main power
plant last week plunging the entire city into darkness; because Obama
wants to "rubblize" everything on his way out. Keep in
mind, that the local water treatment plants require electrical power,
so by blowing up the plant, Obama has condemned tens of thousands of
civilians to cholera and other water-born diseases. Apparently, our
hospital-nuking president isn't bothered by such trivial matters as
killing women and children. Now
check this out from the Daily
Star:
"U.S.-led
coalition forces in Iraq and Syria carried out a large-scale attack
on Syria's Omar oil field as part of its mission to target ISIS's
ability to generate money, a coalition spokesman said
Thursday.
Operations officer Maj. Michael Filanowski
told journalists in Baghdad that airstrikes late Wednesday struck
ISIS-controlled oil refineries, command and control centers and
transportation nodes in the Omar oil field near the town of Deir
el-Zour. Coalition spokesman Col. Steven Warren said the attack hit
26 targets, making it one of the largest set of strikes since
launching the air campaign last year.
The refinery
generates between $1.7 and $5.1 million per month for ISIS.
"It
was very specific targets that would result in long-term
incapacitation of their ability to sell oil, to get it out of the
ground and transport it," Filanowski said.
ISIS
seized a number of oil refineries and other infrastructure in Iraq
and Syria as it sought to generate revenue to build a self-sufficient
state. ("US-led
forces strike ISIS-controlled oil field in Syria", Daily
Star)
Isn't
it amazing how - after a year of combing the desert looking for ISIS
targets - the USAF finally figures out where the goddamn oil
refineries are? No
wonder the western media chose to ignore this story. One can only
conclude that Obama never had any intention of cutting off ISIS's
main funding stream (oil sales). What he really wanted was for the
terrorist group to flourish provided it helped Washington achieve its
strategic goals. Putin even pointed this out in a recent
interview. He said:
"The
mercenaries occupy the oil fields in Iraq and Syria. They start
extracting the oil-and this oil is purchased by somebody. Where are
the sanctions on the parties purchasing this oil? Do
you believe the US does not know who is buying it? Is
it not their allies that are buying the oil from ISIS? Do
you not think that US has the power to influence their allies? Or is
the point that they don't wish to influence them?
Putin
was never taken in by the whole ISIS oil charade. He knew it was a
farce from the get-go, ever since Financial
Times published
their thoroughly laughable article on the topic which claimed that
ISIS had its own group of "headhunters" offering
"competitive salaries" to engineers with the "requisite
experience" and encouraged "prospective employees to apply
to its human resources department."
The ISIS "human
resources department"?? Have you ever read anything more
ridiculous in your life? (Read the whole story
here.)
In an interview with NPR, FT fantasist
Erika Solomon (who wrote the article) explained why the US could not
bomb the oil fields or refineries. Here's what she
said:
"What
ISIS has done is managed to corner control of the extraction process,
which is smart because they can't get bombed there. It would cause a
natural disaster. So they extract the oil, and then they immediately
sell it to local traders - any average person who can buy a truck
that they can fill with a tank of oil."
Well,
that sure didn't stop Maj. Michael Filanowski, now did it? He seems
to have blown up those ISIS refineries without batting an eye, which
just proves that Solomon's "natural disaster" fairytale is
pure bunkum.
But if it was all baloney, then why did the
USAF decide to hit the targets now? What changed?
Here's
a clue from an article that popped up on RT just one day before the
attacks:
"Russia's
airplanes cut off routes used by Islamic State (IS, formerly
ISIS/ISIL) to deliver supplies to Syria from Iraq by bombing a bridge
over the Euphrates River, the Russian General Staff said
"The
bridge over the Euphrates River near [the Syrian city of] Deir ez-Zor
was a key point of the logistics chain [of IS]. Today Russian pilots
carried out a surgical strike against the object," the deputy
chief of the General Staff of Russia, Colonel General Andrey
Kartapolov, said on Thursday during a news briefing, adding that the
terrorist group's armament and ammunition delivery route had been cut
off." ("Russian
Air Force cuts off ISIS supply lines by bombing bridge over
Euphrates", RT)
There
it is: The Russians blow up a critical bridge over the Euphrates
making oil transport impossible, and the next thing you know, BAM,
the US goes into scorched
earth-mode leveling
everything in sight. Coincidence?
Not
bloody likely. The whole incident suggests the mighty CIA is rolling
up its pet project in Syria and headed for the exits. (It's worth
noting that ISIS has never been a self sustaining corporate franchise
netting over a million bucks a day on oil receipts as western
propaganda would have one believe. That's all part of the public
relations coverup used to conceal the fact that the Gulf allies and
probably CIA black ops are funding these homicidal maniacs.)
In
any event, the Russian intervention is forcing Washington to rethink
its Syria policy. While Kerry is bending over backwards to end the
fighting, Obama is busy tweaking the policy in a way that appeases
his critics on the right without provoking a confrontation with
Moscow. It's a real tight-wire act, but the White House PR team
thinks they can pull it off. Check this out from NBC News:
"Defense
Secretary Ash Carter today revealed that the U.S. will openly begin
"direct action on the ground" against ISIS forces in Iraq
and Syria.
In his testimony before the Senate Armed
Services committee on Tuesday, Carter said "we won't hold back
from supporting capable partners in opportunistic attacks against
ISIL...or conducting such mission directly, whether by strikes from
the air or direct action on the ground." ("Sec.
Carter: U.S. to Begin 'Direct Action on the Ground' in Iraq, Syria",
NBC News)
This
sounds a lot worse than it is. The truth is, Obama has no stomach for
the type of escalation the hawks (like Hillary Clinton and John
McCain ) are demanding. There aren't going to be any "safe
zones" or "no-fly zones" or any other provocations
which would risk a bloody conflagration with Moscow.
What Obama is looking for is the best face-saving strategy available
that will allow him to retreat without incurring the wrath of the
Washington warmongers. It's
a tall order, but Sec-Def Ash Carter has come up with a plan that
might just do-the-trick. This is from The
Hill:
"Defense
Secretary Ash Carter on Tuesday described new ways the U.S. military
plans to increase pressure on the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,
after months of criticism that the administration is not doing enough
to defeat the terrorist group.
"The changes we're
pursuing can be described by what I call the 'three R's' — Raqqa,
Ramadi and Raids," Carter testified the Senate Armed Services
Committee.
First, Carter said the U.S.-led coalition
against ISIS plans to support moderate Syrian forces to go after
Raqqa — the terrorist group's stronghold and administration
capital.
The secretary also said he hopes to pursue a
new way of equipping the Syrian Arab Coalition, which consists of
about a dozen groups.
"While the old approach was
to train and equip completely new forces outside of Syria before
sending them into the fight, the new approach is to work with vetted
leaders of groups that are already fighting ISIL, and provide
equipment and some training to them and support their operations with
airpower," he said.
He also said the coalition
expects to intensify its air campaign with additional U.S. and
coalition aircraft, and to target ISIS with a higher and heavier rate
of strikes.
"This will include more strikes against
ISIL high-value targets as our intelligence improves, and also its
oil enterprise, which is a critical pillar of ISIL's financial
infrastructure," Carter said, using a different acronym for
ISIS." ("Pentagon
chief unveils new plan for ISIS fight", The Hill)
See
anything new here? It's a big nothingburger, right?
They're
going to kill more "high-value targets"?
Big
whoop. That's always been the gameplan, hasn't it? Of course, it
has.
What this shows is that Obama is just running out
the clock hoping he can keep this mess on the back-burner until he's
out of office and working out the terms of his first big book deal.
The last thing he wants is to get embroiled in a spitting match with
the Kremlin his final year in office.
Unfortunately, the
problem Obama is going to encounter is that Putin can't simply turn
off the war machine with the flip of a switch. It took Moscow a long
time to decide to intervene in Syria, just like it took a long time
to marshal the forces that would be deployed, build the coalition and
draft the battleplan. The Russians don't take war lightly, so now
that they've put the ball into motion they're not going to stop until
the job is done and the bulk of the terrorists have been
exterminated. That means there's not going to be a ceasefire in the
immediate future. Putin needs to demonstrate that once Moscow commits
its forces, it will persevere until it achieves victory. That victory
could come in the form of "liberating Aleppo" and a
subsequent sealing off of the Turkish-Syria border or he might have
some other goal in mind. But it's a matter of credibility as much as
anything. If Putin pulls back, hesitates or shows even the slightest
lack of resolve, Washington will see it as a sign of weakness and try
to exploit it. So Putin has no choice but to see this thing through
to the bitter end. At the very least, he needs to prove to Washington
that when Russia gets involved, Russia win. That's
a message Washington needs to hear. Mike
Whitneylives in Washington state. He is a contributor to Hopeless:
Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion (AK
Press). Hopeless is
also available in a Kindle
edition. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.
Posts
