Levant crisis - III
Re: Levant crisis - III
isis mercenaries were induced to travel to Syria by recruiters most of whom worked for Saudi Arabia’s General Intelligence Department or the Awqaaf. The ability to recruit rodents for isis or alqaeda, for that matter, was in place well before March 2011. It was a bragging point for the Saudis when plotting the overthrow of the government in Damascus that Riyaadh had a proven capability to send vast numbers of riff-raff to fight with the “Support Front” (i.e. Nusra/Alqaeda) or with the Islamic State (just as they were able to do during the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan). It was a resource upon which Robert Ford relied when he sat down with the toxic ape, Prince Bandar, to implement the plan that was hatched in 2007 to target Syria’s Dr. Assad, in on this plan were Hillary, Albright, NeoCon, OldCon, Netanyahoo etc. Contacts with Syrian Army officers like Riyaadh Al-As’ad, Ibraaheem Al-Shaykh and Saleem Idrees seemed to be a great start but for the fact the numbers could never amount to a sufficient force to dislodge the leader of the country. Intense efforts by these traitors to induce more desertions by Sunni officers and enlisted men met with miserable failure and the “rebels” found themselves at the cusp of pure extermination. When it all went wrong, Ford insisted that the Arabians use their connections to bolster the failing insurrection against the Syrian people initiated by a trickle of army defectors who were not able to get their “revolution” off the ground. This came in the shape of “Nusra” (Assistance).
Recent reports in the reliable eastern media confirm that there is an organized plan in place to extract the families of the ISIS jackals and repatriate them to either their homelands or, most probably, to areas ISIS believes it can hold indefinitely, like Mosul or parts of southern Turkey – or Libya. All this means is that there are sober, organized minds amidst the rabble who realize that this poor excuse for a Xanadu is about to go the way of Ozymandias. Whole caravans of rodent families have been filmed escaping certain death as they make their way to the dubious security of their Alamo in northern Iraq, or even Raqqa.
3 individuals who worked in the Saudi kingdom recently and who narrate a tale of woe and breast-beating in Riyadh essentially state that the Saudi apes would like very much to revitalize their ISIS cousins, but, for 2 discomforting facts: 1. The Saudis are nearly broke, having squandered their wealth on other similar campaigns of nihilism, and 2.a fear that their open policies of support for ISIS would further degrade relations with the U.S.
As ISIS continues to contract, its rank-and-file, the minions whose lives are necessarily wasted on ridiculous promises of Paradise, are beginning to wonder how it is that Allah is on their side while they are losing every battle. With the Iraqi Army at the threshold of conquering Falluja, the Syrian Army turning off the oil spigot, the death of the Caliph of Cockadoodledoo, the difficulty in obtaining new weapons systems and the unrelenting conflicts with fellow nihilists, ISIS is starting to shrivel. Their project, has started unraveling and the children they dragged over into their imagined Islamic Utopia are wailing.
Recent reports in the reliable eastern media confirm that there is an organized plan in place to extract the families of the ISIS jackals and repatriate them to either their homelands or, most probably, to areas ISIS believes it can hold indefinitely, like Mosul or parts of southern Turkey – or Libya. All this means is that there are sober, organized minds amidst the rabble who realize that this poor excuse for a Xanadu is about to go the way of Ozymandias. Whole caravans of rodent families have been filmed escaping certain death as they make their way to the dubious security of their Alamo in northern Iraq, or even Raqqa.
3 individuals who worked in the Saudi kingdom recently and who narrate a tale of woe and breast-beating in Riyadh essentially state that the Saudi apes would like very much to revitalize their ISIS cousins, but, for 2 discomforting facts: 1. The Saudis are nearly broke, having squandered their wealth on other similar campaigns of nihilism, and 2.a fear that their open policies of support for ISIS would further degrade relations with the U.S.
As ISIS continues to contract, its rank-and-file, the minions whose lives are necessarily wasted on ridiculous promises of Paradise, are beginning to wonder how it is that Allah is on their side while they are losing every battle. With the Iraqi Army at the threshold of conquering Falluja, the Syrian Army turning off the oil spigot, the death of the Caliph of Cockadoodledoo, the difficulty in obtaining new weapons systems and the unrelenting conflicts with fellow nihilists, ISIS is starting to shrivel. Their project, has started unraveling and the children they dragged over into their imagined Islamic Utopia are wailing.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Syrian and Russian special forces on latakia's border with Turkey after conquest of Turkman mountains.


Re: Levant crisis - III
1. If they really could act, then they would act and they would not threaten. Did they threaten to take out Osama in abottabad, no, they just went ahead and did it.Y. Kanan wrote:US again threatening airstrikes on Syrian govt:
https://www.yahoo.com/news/dozens-u-dip ... html?nhp=1
2. this also means they are pretty much given up and it is the end of the road for them and allies. They are out of ideas and now just reduced to threats.
3. if Trump comes to power in some way or another, then he may not follow zionist plan to a T.
4. even if crooked hillary comes to power, all her email server data is compromised, she can only follow obama plan which anyways does not yield great results in syria.
So far the State Dept, New York Times, Washinton Post, CNN want a war on Syria and strike on Assad yesterday. today is too late.
Re: Levant crisis - III
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36549880
Turkey tourism: an industry in crisis
"The main decline is the Russian market, the four-and-a-half million Russian tourists who were coming have fallen in number by around 95%. The trigger was Turkey shooting down a Russian military jet which violated Turkish airspace last November, sparking a diplomatic crisis between the two countries."
Turkey tourism: an industry in crisis
"The main decline is the Russian market, the four-and-a-half million Russian tourists who were coming have fallen in number by around 95%. The trigger was Turkey shooting down a Russian military jet which violated Turkish airspace last November, sparking a diplomatic crisis between the two countries."
Re: Levant crisis - III
https://now.mmedia.me/lb/en/NewsReports ... ive-report
BEIRUT – Hezbollah is set to play a “central role” in an upcoming offensive in Deir Ezzor to relieve Syrian army troops besieged in the capital of the province, according to a Lebanese daily with an editorial line supportive of the party.
Al-Akhbar’s editor-in-chief Ibrahim al-Amin wrote Friday that Iran, Russia and Syria have agreed on a “large action plan” for a “very big battle in the Deir Ezzor” province in which Hezbollah will play a “central role.”
“Perhaps the forces of [Hezbollah] will face a test largely resembling what happened in Qalamoun, Zabadani and Qusayr,” he said, in reference to the lead role Hezbollah took in the 2013-2015 operations to clear rebels from regions along Syria’s border with Lebanon.
Amin, an influential commentator known for his close relations with Hezbollah, noted that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government has expressed its “strong desire” to support the regime troops holed up in the city of Deir Ezzor, which have been repeatedly attacked by ISIS since the jihadist group swept rebels out of the rest of the province in mid-2014.
“A loss [in Deir Ezzor] means a real massacre of thousands of civilians and soldiers, and the loss of a key area in eastern Syria,” the Al-Akhbar column cautioned.
According to Amin, the plans for a wide-scale Deir Ezzor offensive moved forward after the June 9 meeting of Iran, Russia and Syria’s defense ministers in Tehran.
He wrote that mobilization efforts for the upcoming campaign “have just started,” but clarified that the battle will start in the “not-too-distant future.”
Syrian army troops backed by Hezbollah, Russia and Iran seized Palmyra—an ancient archaeological city approximately 185 kilometers west of Deir Ezzor—from ISIS on March 27.
In the days following the Palmyra victory, the pro-regime forces set their sights eastward on Al-Sukhna, a town on the M20 highway leading to Deir Ezzor, however no major desert drive materialized.
“Linking Palmyra to Deir Ezzor will contribute to [splitting lines between] ISIS’s main areas of in Syria and Iraq, and disperse their forces fighting in the Raqqa and Aleppo provinces,” Amin postulated in his report.
He further claimed that the planned east Syria offensive “will not be part of a deal” reached with the US, which is currently backing the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces battling ISIS in northern Syria.
The US has also reportedly supported two smaller Free Syrian Army-factions, the New Syrian Army and Ahmad al-Abdo Martyrs Brigades, conducting small-scale campaigns against ISIS in the vast Syrian semi-desert stretching to the Iraqi and Jordanian borders.
BEIRUT – Hezbollah is set to play a “central role” in an upcoming offensive in Deir Ezzor to relieve Syrian army troops besieged in the capital of the province, according to a Lebanese daily with an editorial line supportive of the party.
Al-Akhbar’s editor-in-chief Ibrahim al-Amin wrote Friday that Iran, Russia and Syria have agreed on a “large action plan” for a “very big battle in the Deir Ezzor” province in which Hezbollah will play a “central role.”
“Perhaps the forces of [Hezbollah] will face a test largely resembling what happened in Qalamoun, Zabadani and Qusayr,” he said, in reference to the lead role Hezbollah took in the 2013-2015 operations to clear rebels from regions along Syria’s border with Lebanon.
Amin, an influential commentator known for his close relations with Hezbollah, noted that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government has expressed its “strong desire” to support the regime troops holed up in the city of Deir Ezzor, which have been repeatedly attacked by ISIS since the jihadist group swept rebels out of the rest of the province in mid-2014.
“A loss [in Deir Ezzor] means a real massacre of thousands of civilians and soldiers, and the loss of a key area in eastern Syria,” the Al-Akhbar column cautioned.
According to Amin, the plans for a wide-scale Deir Ezzor offensive moved forward after the June 9 meeting of Iran, Russia and Syria’s defense ministers in Tehran.
He wrote that mobilization efforts for the upcoming campaign “have just started,” but clarified that the battle will start in the “not-too-distant future.”
Syrian army troops backed by Hezbollah, Russia and Iran seized Palmyra—an ancient archaeological city approximately 185 kilometers west of Deir Ezzor—from ISIS on March 27.
In the days following the Palmyra victory, the pro-regime forces set their sights eastward on Al-Sukhna, a town on the M20 highway leading to Deir Ezzor, however no major desert drive materialized.
“Linking Palmyra to Deir Ezzor will contribute to [splitting lines between] ISIS’s main areas of in Syria and Iraq, and disperse their forces fighting in the Raqqa and Aleppo provinces,” Amin postulated in his report.
He further claimed that the planned east Syria offensive “will not be part of a deal” reached with the US, which is currently backing the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces battling ISIS in northern Syria.
The US has also reportedly supported two smaller Free Syrian Army-factions, the New Syrian Army and Ahmad al-Abdo Martyrs Brigades, conducting small-scale campaigns against ISIS in the vast Syrian semi-desert stretching to the Iraqi and Jordanian borders.
Re: Levant crisis - III
^^ my hunch is the tabqa offensive will now swing south toward Sukhanah to collapse its defences from the rear. hook up with two prongs from Arak and T3 and make a beeline for deir azzor ...rather than focus on Raqqa.
Re: Levant crisis - III
http://warontherocks.com/2016/06/fear-a ... -strategy/
Projecting forward, the Turkish government will likely seek to keep the SDF off its border in the Manbij pocket. To do so, Ankara may look to the Arab rebels it is giving support to in the area to continue their eastward push along the border. If successful, this approach could form a small buffer zone, wherein “friendly” rebel groups to Turkey occupy the territory along the border, while the SDF – and its YPG allies – have a southern corridor, south of the border, that could, eventually, connect Manbij with PYD controlled Efrin. The United States supports this approach as evidenced by its continued military support for the rebel groups in Marea/Azaz, paving the way for a tactical compromise about this next phase of the anti-ISIL fight.
Projecting forward, the Turkish government will likely seek to keep the SDF off its border in the Manbij pocket. To do so, Ankara may look to the Arab rebels it is giving support to in the area to continue their eastward push along the border. If successful, this approach could form a small buffer zone, wherein “friendly” rebel groups to Turkey occupy the territory along the border, while the SDF – and its YPG allies – have a southern corridor, south of the border, that could, eventually, connect Manbij with PYD controlled Efrin. The United States supports this approach as evidenced by its continued military support for the rebel groups in Marea/Azaz, paving the way for a tactical compromise about this next phase of the anti-ISIL fight.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Why Iran still doesn’t trust Russia on Syria
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... z4Br0R3J9E
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/origina ... z4Br0R3J9E
Re: Levant crisis - III
white tiger - russian movie from 2012
mystic ending...hitler says war is the natural human state and there is no beginning and no end...
Re: Levant crisis - III
Russia failed to heed U.S. call to stop targeting Syrian rebels: U.S
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-strik ... html?nhp=1
https://www.yahoo.com/news/russia-strik ... html?nhp=1
Russia might as well just pull out all the stops now. Obviously these cease fires are just so US-backed terrorists can rearm; there will be no peace in Syria as long as the US has any say in the matter. Russia should just call the bluff, keep bombing and put it nuclear force on full alert, then see if the US is crazy enough to shoot down some Russian planes. It's either that or just admit defeat; retreat from Syria and let the US-backed crazies take over.WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Russia launched a second air strike on U.S.-backed Syrian fighters battling Islamic State, even after the U.S. military used emergency channels to ask Moscow to stop after the first strike, a U.S. official told Reuters on Friday.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Putin says accepts U.S. is sole superpower, dilutes Trump praise http://www.reuters.com/article/us-russi ... SKCN0Z31G4
Re: Levant crisis - III
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_O'Keefe
Singha if u listen to this guy u do not have to believe everything he says but what he says makes a lot of sense.He sure is brave as hell and a man of honor who has put his life on the line for what he believes to be true and I think he is right mostly.Plenty of u tube videos availabe about his speeches and interviews. Of course very few people in his native country have heard of him . Most palestinians know of this man and I have confirmed that myself. He was the man on the Turkish ship MV Mavi Marmara which was attacked by Israeli commandos.
Many people on this forum are unaware that gaza strip which is right on the mediterranean sea has a total sea blockade by Isreali navy for decades . What a Irony that a nation on the ocean has not seen a ship in years, think about it. Gaza is the biggest open air prison in the whole world with almost 2 million inmates.
Singha if u listen to this guy u do not have to believe everything he says but what he says makes a lot of sense.He sure is brave as hell and a man of honor who has put his life on the line for what he believes to be true and I think he is right mostly.Plenty of u tube videos availabe about his speeches and interviews. Of course very few people in his native country have heard of him . Most palestinians know of this man and I have confirmed that myself. He was the man on the Turkish ship MV Mavi Marmara which was attacked by Israeli commandos.
Many people on this forum are unaware that gaza strip which is right on the mediterranean sea has a total sea blockade by Isreali navy for decades . What a Irony that a nation on the ocean has not seen a ship in years, think about it. Gaza is the biggest open air prison in the whole world with almost 2 million inmates.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Hassan Ridha @sayed_ridha 12h12 hours ago
#SDF reportedly storm #Manbij city from the west side
#SDF reportedly storm #Manbij city from the west side
Re: Levant crisis - III
Fallujah has fallen to Iraqi govt forces , clearing ops in progress.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Parts of Fallujah is still with IS but they are mostly on the run. Right through the attack on Fallujah, ISF was trying to get the people out of city safely. As the population cleared the areas, it became easier to target the Daesh. Many Daesh worms were caught escaping and some escaped.

Video in the link below shows huge number of people swimming across the Euphrates to escape Daesh at Fallujah.
https://twitter.com/IraqiSecurity/statu ... 3256514561
As usual the Coalition support came after the ISF had done most of the work to quickly take credit.

Video in the link below shows huge number of people swimming across the Euphrates to escape Daesh at Fallujah.
https://twitter.com/IraqiSecurity/statu ... 3256514561
As usual the Coalition support came after the ISF had done most of the work to quickly take credit.
UK Against DaeshVerified account
@UKagainstDaesh
Confirmed: Iraqi forces have seized Falluja central city hall. The fight to take it from #Daesh was supported by multiple @coalition strikes
Re: Levant crisis - III
In Syria, the whole US effort to save Al Nusra from Russia seems to be a lost cause. Poor good terrorists are getting it bad from Putin. Obama care for Nusra not working.
Lina Arabi @LinaArabii now10 hours ago
US asks Russia to stop bombing al-Qaeda in #Syria. Evil Russians refuse. US is angry.
Re: Levant crisis - III
So SD is full of 'wars for Israel' minions. I wonder at staffing and recruitment policies in State Dept. Usually US & Canadian govt posts job applications can be seen posted on notice boards of college campuses. Maybe these Rand Corporation & Ford Foundation types monopolized recruitment process and posted lackeys into State Dept.
anyways, at present it is a thoroughly compromised 'wars for Israel' organization. No ethics, no morals and no ideas, just global terrorists wearing suits & ties and specializing in organizing wars on Israel's periphery.
this lot is now very frustrated.
The State Department’s Collective Madness - June 17, 2016
Exclusive: More than 50 U.S. State Department “diplomats” sent a “dissent” memo urging President Obama to launch military strikes against the Syrian army, another sign that Foggy Bottom has collectively gone nuts, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/17/t ... e-madness/
Over the past several decades, the U.S. State Department has deteriorated from a reasonably professional home for diplomacy and realism into a den of armchair warriors possessed of imperial delusions, a dangerous phenomenon underscored by the recent mass “dissent” in favor of blowing up more people in Syria.
Some 51 State Department “diplomats” signed a memo distributed through the official “dissent channel,” seeking military strikes against the Syrian government of president Bashar al-Assad whose forces have been leading the push back against Islamist extremists who are seeking control of this important Mideast nation.
The fact that such a large contingent of State Department officials would openly advocate for an expanded aggressive war in line with the neoconservative agenda, which put Syria on a hit list some two decades ago, reveals how crazy the State Department has become.
The State Department now seems to be a combination of true-believing neocons along with their liberal-interventionist followers and some careerists who realize that the smart play is to behave toward the world as global proconsuls dictating solutions or seeking “regime change” rather than as diplomats engaging foreigners respectfully and seeking genuine compromise.
Even some State Department officials, whom I personally know and who are not neocons/liberal-hawks per se, act as if they have fully swallowed the Kool-Aid. They talk tough and behave arrogantly toward inhabitants of countries under their supervision. Foreigners are treated as mindless objects to be coerced or bribed.
So, it’s not entirely surprising that several dozen U.S. “diplomats” would attack President Barack Obama’s more temperate position on Syria while positioning themselves favorably in anticipation of a Hillary Clinton administration, which is expected to authorize an illegal invasion of Syria — under the guise of establishing “no-fly zones” and “safe zones” — which will mean the slaughter of young Syrian soldiers. The “diplomats” urge the use of “stand-off and air weapons.”
These hawks are so eager for more war that they don’t mind risking a direct conflict with Russia, breezily dismissing the possibility of a clash with the nuclear power by saying they are not “advocating for a slippery slope that ends in a military confrontation with Russia.” That’s reassuring to hear.
Risking a Jihadist Victory
There’s also the danger that a direct U.S. military intervention could collapse the Syrian army and clear the way for victory by Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front or the Islamic State. The memo did not make clear how the delicate calibration of doing just enough damage to Syria’s military while avoiding an outright jihadist victory and averting a clash with Russia would be accomplished.
Presumably, whatever messes are created, the U.S. military would be left to clean up, assuming that shooting down some Russian warplanes and killing Russian military personnel wouldn’t escalate into a full-scale thermonuclear conflagration.
In short, it appears that the State Department has become a collective insane asylum where the inmates are in control. But this madness isn’t some short-term aberration that can be easily reversed.
It has been a long time coming and would require a root-to-branch ripping out of today’s “diplomatic” corps to restore the State Department to its traditional role of avoiding wars rather than demanding them.
Though there have always been crazies in the State Department – usually found in the senior political ranks – the phenomenon of an institutional insanity has only evolved over the past several decades. And I have seen the change.
I have covered U.S. foreign policy since the late 1970s when there was appreciably more sanity in the diplomatic corps. There were people like Robert White and Patricia Derian (both now deceased) who stood up for justice and human rights, representing the best of America.
But the descent of the U.S. State Department into little more than well-dressed, well-spoken but thuggish enforcers of U.S. hegemony began with the Reagan administration. President Ronald Reagan and his team possessed a pathological hatred of Central American social movements seeking freedom from oppressive oligarchies and their brutal security forces.
During the 1980s, American diplomats with integrity were systematically marginalized, hounded or removed. (Human rights coordinator Derian left at the end of the Carter administration and was replaced by neocon Elliott Abrams; White was fired as U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, explaining: “I refused a demand by the secretary of state, Alexander M. Haig Jr., that I use official channels to cover up the Salvadoran military’s responsibility for the murders of four American churchwomen.”)
The Neocons Rise
As the old-guard professionals left, a new breed of aggressive neoconservatives was brought in, the likes of Paul Wolfowitz, Robert McFarlane, Robert Kagan and Abrams. After eight years of Reagan and four years of George H.W. Bush, the State Department was reshaped into a home for neocons, but some pockets of professionalism survived the onslaughts. (wolfowitz, Kagan, Abrams are part of 'wars for israel' lobby and will fight for Israel till last american)
While one might have expected the Democrats of the Clinton administration to reverse those trends, they didn’t. Instead, Bill Clinton’s “triangulation” applied to U.S. foreign policy as much as to domestic programs. He was always searching for that politically safe “middle.”
As the 1990s wore on, the decimation of foreign policy experts in the mold of White and Derian left few on the Democratic side who had the courage or skills to challenge the deeply entrenched neocons. Many Clinton-era Democrats accommodated to the neocon dominance by reinventing themselves as “liberal interventionists,” sharing the neocons’ love for military force but justifying the killing on “humanitarian” grounds.
This approach was a way for “liberals” to protect themselves against right-wing charges that they were “weak,” a charge that had scarred Democrats deeply during the Reagan/Bush-41 years, but this Democratic “tough-guy/gal-ism” further sidelined serious diplomats favoring traditional give-and-take with foreign leaders and their people.
So, you had Democrats like then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (and later Secretary of State) Madeleine Albright justifying Bill Clinton’s brutal sanctions policies toward Iraq, which the U.N. blamed for killing 500,000 Iraqi children, as “a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.” (Madeleine Albright is another 'wars for israel' prominent personality, what goes of hers, you americans go die and fight wars on israels' border, i will cheerlead from my home types)
Bill Clinton’s eight years of “triangulation,” which included the brutal air war against Serbia, was followed by eight years of George W. Bush, which further ensconced the neocons as the U.S. foreign policy establishment.
By then, what was left of the old Republican “realists,” the likes of Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft, was aging out or had been so thoroughly compromised that the neocons faced no significant opposition within Republican circles. And, Official Washington’s foreign-policy Democrats had become almost indistinguishable from the neocons, except for their use of “humanitarian” arguments to justify aggressive wars.
Media Capitulation
Before George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq, much of the “liberal” media establishment – from The New York Times to The New Yorker – fell in line behind the war, asking few tough questions and presenting almost no obstacles. Favoring war had become the “safe” career play.
But a nascent anti-war movement among rank-and-file Democrats did emerge, propelling Barack Obama, an anti-Iraq War Democrat, to the 2008 presidential nomination over Iraq War supporter Hillary Clinton. But those peaceful sentiments among the Democratic “base” did not reach very deeply into the ranks of Democratic foreign policy mavens.
So, when Obama entered the White House, he faced a difficult challenge. The State Department needed a thorough purging of the neocons and the liberal hawks, but there were few Democratic foreign policy experts who hadn’t sold out to the neocons. An entire generation of Democratic policy-makers had been raised in the world of neocon-dominated conferences, meetings, op-eds and think tanks, where tough talk made you sound good while talk of traditional diplomacy made you sound soft.
By contrast, more of the U.S. military and even the CIA favored less belligerent approaches to the world, in part, because they had actually fought Bush’s hopeless “global war on terror.” But Bush’s hand-picked, neocon-oriented high command – the likes of General David Petraeus – remained in place and favored expanded wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama then made one of the most fateful decisions of his presidency. Instead of cleaning house at State and at the Pentagon, he listened to some advisers who came up with the clever P.R. theme “Team of Rivals” – a reference to Abraham Lincoln’s first Civil War cabinet – and Obama kept in place Bush’s military leadership, including Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, and reached out to hawkish Sen. Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State.
In other words, Obama not only didn’t take control of the foreign-policy apparatus, he strengthened the power of the neocons and liberal hawks. He then let this powerful bloc of Clinton-Gates-Petraeus steer him into a foolhardy counterinsurgency “surge” in Afghanistan that did little more than get 1,000 more U.S. soldiers killed along with many more Afghans.
Obama also let Clinton sabotage his attempted outreach to Iran in 2010 seeking constraints on its nuclear program and he succumbed to her pressure in 2011 to invade Libya under the false pretense of establishing a “no-fly zone” to protect civilians, what became a “regime change” disaster that Obama has ranked as his biggest foreign policy mistake.
The Up-and-Comers
The new State Department star – expected to receive a high-level appointment from President Clinton-45 – is neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, (wife of Kagan and by extension another 'wars for israel' jaw jaw type who used funds from George Soros, another 'wars for israel' *democracy* proponent and funder) who orchestrated the 2014 putsch in Ukraine, toppling an elected, Russia-friendly president and replacing him with a hard-line Ukrainian nationalist regime that then launched violent military attacks against ethnic Russians in the east who resisted the coup leadership.
When Russia came to the assistance of these embattled Ukrainian citizens, including agreeing to Crimea’s request to rejoin Russia, the State Department and U.S. mass media spoke as one in decrying a “Russian invasion” and supporting NATO military maneuvers on Russia’s borders to deter “Russian aggression.”
Anyone who dares question this latest “group think” – as it plunges the world into a dangerous new Cold War – is dismissed as a “Kremlin apologist” or “Moscow stooge” just as skeptics about the Iraq War were derided as “Saddam apologists.” Virtually everyone important in Official Washington marches in lock step toward war and more war. (Victoria Nuland is married to Robert Kagan, making them one of Washington’s supreme power couples.)
So, that is the context of the latest State Department rebellion against Obama’s more tempered policies on Syria. Looking forward to a likely Hillary Clinton administration, these 51 “diplomats” have signed their name to a “dissent” that advocates bombing the Syrian military to protect Syria’s “moderate” rebels who – to the degree they even exist – fight mostly under the umbrella of Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front and its close ally, Ahrar al Sham.
The muddled thinking in this “dissent” is that by bombing the Syrian military, the U.S. government can enhance the power of the rebels and supposedly force Assad to negotiate his own removal. But there is no reason to think that this plan would work.
In early 2014, when the rebels held a relatively strong position, U.S.-arranged peace talks amounted to a rebel-dominated conference that made Assad’s departure a pre-condition and excluded Syria’s Iranian allies from attending. Not surprisingly, Assad’s representative went home and the talks collapsed.
Now, with Assad holding a relatively strong hand, backed by Russian air power and Iranian ground forces, the “dissenting” U.S. diplomats say peace is impossible because the rebels are in no position to compel Assad’s departure. Thus, the “dissenters” recommend that the U.S. expand its role in the war to again lift the rebels, but that would only mean more maximalist demands from the rebels. (QeD)
Serious Risks
This proposed wider war, however, would carry some very serious risks, including the possibility that the Syrian army could collapse, opening the gates of Damascus to Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front (and its allies) or the Islamic State – a scenario that, as The New York Times noted, the “memo doesn’t address.”(but 'wars for israel' team loves this possibility, murder all of damascus so that Israel can stretch it's borders, steal their water, what do we lose, we still sit in our homes and sip our fine wines)
Currently, the Islamic State and – to a lesser degree – the Nusra Front are in retreat, chased by the Syrian army with Russian air support and by some Kurdish forces with U.S. backing. But those gains could easily be reversed. There is also the risk of sparking a wider war with Iran and/or Russia.
But such cavalier waving aside of grave dangers is nothing new for the neocons and liberal hawks. They have consistently dreamt up schemes that may sound good at a think-tank conference or read well in an op-ed article, but fail in the face of ground truth where usually U.S. soldiers are expected to fix the mess. (since Nuland, Kagan, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Albright, Pearl, Rahm Emmanuel etc have maximum takleef with Syria, they should be sent in battle fatigues to go fight the war themselves, - my suggestion for this eminent team)
We have seen this wishful thinking go awry in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine and even Syria, where Obama’s acquiescence to provide arms and training for the so-called “unicorns” – the hard-to-detect “moderate” rebels – saw those combatants and their weapons absorbed into Al Qaeda’s or Islamic State’s ranks.
Yet, the neocons and liberal hawks who control the State Department – and are eagerly looking forward to a Hillary Clinton presidency – will never stop coming up with these crazy notions until a concerted effort is made to assess accountability for all the failures that that they have inflicted on U.S. foreign policy.
As long as there is no accountability – as long as the U.S. president won’t rein in these warmongers – the madness will continue and only grow more dangerous.
Read More Here:
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/17/t ... e-madness/
anyways, at present it is a thoroughly compromised 'wars for Israel' organization. No ethics, no morals and no ideas, just global terrorists wearing suits & ties and specializing in organizing wars on Israel's periphery.
this lot is now very frustrated.
The State Department’s Collective Madness - June 17, 2016
Exclusive: More than 50 U.S. State Department “diplomats” sent a “dissent” memo urging President Obama to launch military strikes against the Syrian army, another sign that Foggy Bottom has collectively gone nuts, writes Robert Parry.
By Robert Parry
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/17/t ... e-madness/
Over the past several decades, the U.S. State Department has deteriorated from a reasonably professional home for diplomacy and realism into a den of armchair warriors possessed of imperial delusions, a dangerous phenomenon underscored by the recent mass “dissent” in favor of blowing up more people in Syria.
Some 51 State Department “diplomats” signed a memo distributed through the official “dissent channel,” seeking military strikes against the Syrian government of president Bashar al-Assad whose forces have been leading the push back against Islamist extremists who are seeking control of this important Mideast nation.
The fact that such a large contingent of State Department officials would openly advocate for an expanded aggressive war in line with the neoconservative agenda, which put Syria on a hit list some two decades ago, reveals how crazy the State Department has become.
The State Department now seems to be a combination of true-believing neocons along with their liberal-interventionist followers and some careerists who realize that the smart play is to behave toward the world as global proconsuls dictating solutions or seeking “regime change” rather than as diplomats engaging foreigners respectfully and seeking genuine compromise.
Even some State Department officials, whom I personally know and who are not neocons/liberal-hawks per se, act as if they have fully swallowed the Kool-Aid. They talk tough and behave arrogantly toward inhabitants of countries under their supervision. Foreigners are treated as mindless objects to be coerced or bribed.
So, it’s not entirely surprising that several dozen U.S. “diplomats” would attack President Barack Obama’s more temperate position on Syria while positioning themselves favorably in anticipation of a Hillary Clinton administration, which is expected to authorize an illegal invasion of Syria — under the guise of establishing “no-fly zones” and “safe zones” — which will mean the slaughter of young Syrian soldiers. The “diplomats” urge the use of “stand-off and air weapons.”
These hawks are so eager for more war that they don’t mind risking a direct conflict with Russia, breezily dismissing the possibility of a clash with the nuclear power by saying they are not “advocating for a slippery slope that ends in a military confrontation with Russia.” That’s reassuring to hear.
Risking a Jihadist Victory
There’s also the danger that a direct U.S. military intervention could collapse the Syrian army and clear the way for victory by Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front or the Islamic State. The memo did not make clear how the delicate calibration of doing just enough damage to Syria’s military while avoiding an outright jihadist victory and averting a clash with Russia would be accomplished.
Presumably, whatever messes are created, the U.S. military would be left to clean up, assuming that shooting down some Russian warplanes and killing Russian military personnel wouldn’t escalate into a full-scale thermonuclear conflagration.
In short, it appears that the State Department has become a collective insane asylum where the inmates are in control. But this madness isn’t some short-term aberration that can be easily reversed.

Though there have always been crazies in the State Department – usually found in the senior political ranks – the phenomenon of an institutional insanity has only evolved over the past several decades. And I have seen the change.
I have covered U.S. foreign policy since the late 1970s when there was appreciably more sanity in the diplomatic corps. There were people like Robert White and Patricia Derian (both now deceased) who stood up for justice and human rights, representing the best of America.
But the descent of the U.S. State Department into little more than well-dressed, well-spoken but thuggish enforcers of U.S. hegemony began with the Reagan administration. President Ronald Reagan and his team possessed a pathological hatred of Central American social movements seeking freedom from oppressive oligarchies and their brutal security forces.
During the 1980s, American diplomats with integrity were systematically marginalized, hounded or removed. (Human rights coordinator Derian left at the end of the Carter administration and was replaced by neocon Elliott Abrams; White was fired as U.S. ambassador to El Salvador, explaining: “I refused a demand by the secretary of state, Alexander M. Haig Jr., that I use official channels to cover up the Salvadoran military’s responsibility for the murders of four American churchwomen.”)
The Neocons Rise
As the old-guard professionals left, a new breed of aggressive neoconservatives was brought in, the likes of Paul Wolfowitz, Robert McFarlane, Robert Kagan and Abrams. After eight years of Reagan and four years of George H.W. Bush, the State Department was reshaped into a home for neocons, but some pockets of professionalism survived the onslaughts. (wolfowitz, Kagan, Abrams are part of 'wars for israel' lobby and will fight for Israel till last american)
While one might have expected the Democrats of the Clinton administration to reverse those trends, they didn’t. Instead, Bill Clinton’s “triangulation” applied to U.S. foreign policy as much as to domestic programs. He was always searching for that politically safe “middle.”
As the 1990s wore on, the decimation of foreign policy experts in the mold of White and Derian left few on the Democratic side who had the courage or skills to challenge the deeply entrenched neocons. Many Clinton-era Democrats accommodated to the neocon dominance by reinventing themselves as “liberal interventionists,” sharing the neocons’ love for military force but justifying the killing on “humanitarian” grounds.
This approach was a way for “liberals” to protect themselves against right-wing charges that they were “weak,” a charge that had scarred Democrats deeply during the Reagan/Bush-41 years, but this Democratic “tough-guy/gal-ism” further sidelined serious diplomats favoring traditional give-and-take with foreign leaders and their people.
So, you had Democrats like then-U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations (and later Secretary of State) Madeleine Albright justifying Bill Clinton’s brutal sanctions policies toward Iraq, which the U.N. blamed for killing 500,000 Iraqi children, as “a very hard choice, but the price – we think the price is worth it.” (Madeleine Albright is another 'wars for israel' prominent personality, what goes of hers, you americans go die and fight wars on israels' border, i will cheerlead from my home types)
Bill Clinton’s eight years of “triangulation,” which included the brutal air war against Serbia, was followed by eight years of George W. Bush, which further ensconced the neocons as the U.S. foreign policy establishment.
By then, what was left of the old Republican “realists,” the likes of Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft, was aging out or had been so thoroughly compromised that the neocons faced no significant opposition within Republican circles. And, Official Washington’s foreign-policy Democrats had become almost indistinguishable from the neocons, except for their use of “humanitarian” arguments to justify aggressive wars.
Media Capitulation
Before George W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq, much of the “liberal” media establishment – from The New York Times to The New Yorker – fell in line behind the war, asking few tough questions and presenting almost no obstacles. Favoring war had become the “safe” career play.
But a nascent anti-war movement among rank-and-file Democrats did emerge, propelling Barack Obama, an anti-Iraq War Democrat, to the 2008 presidential nomination over Iraq War supporter Hillary Clinton. But those peaceful sentiments among the Democratic “base” did not reach very deeply into the ranks of Democratic foreign policy mavens.
So, when Obama entered the White House, he faced a difficult challenge. The State Department needed a thorough purging of the neocons and the liberal hawks, but there were few Democratic foreign policy experts who hadn’t sold out to the neocons. An entire generation of Democratic policy-makers had been raised in the world of neocon-dominated conferences, meetings, op-eds and think tanks, where tough talk made you sound good while talk of traditional diplomacy made you sound soft.
By contrast, more of the U.S. military and even the CIA favored less belligerent approaches to the world, in part, because they had actually fought Bush’s hopeless “global war on terror.” But Bush’s hand-picked, neocon-oriented high command – the likes of General David Petraeus – remained in place and favored expanded wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Obama then made one of the most fateful decisions of his presidency. Instead of cleaning house at State and at the Pentagon, he listened to some advisers who came up with the clever P.R. theme “Team of Rivals” – a reference to Abraham Lincoln’s first Civil War cabinet – and Obama kept in place Bush’s military leadership, including Robert Gates as Secretary of Defense, and reached out to hawkish Sen. Hillary Clinton to be his Secretary of State.
In other words, Obama not only didn’t take control of the foreign-policy apparatus, he strengthened the power of the neocons and liberal hawks. He then let this powerful bloc of Clinton-Gates-Petraeus steer him into a foolhardy counterinsurgency “surge” in Afghanistan that did little more than get 1,000 more U.S. soldiers killed along with many more Afghans.
Obama also let Clinton sabotage his attempted outreach to Iran in 2010 seeking constraints on its nuclear program and he succumbed to her pressure in 2011 to invade Libya under the false pretense of establishing a “no-fly zone” to protect civilians, what became a “regime change” disaster that Obama has ranked as his biggest foreign policy mistake.
The Up-and-Comers
The new State Department star – expected to receive a high-level appointment from President Clinton-45 – is neocon Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland, (wife of Kagan and by extension another 'wars for israel' jaw jaw type who used funds from George Soros, another 'wars for israel' *democracy* proponent and funder) who orchestrated the 2014 putsch in Ukraine, toppling an elected, Russia-friendly president and replacing him with a hard-line Ukrainian nationalist regime that then launched violent military attacks against ethnic Russians in the east who resisted the coup leadership.
When Russia came to the assistance of these embattled Ukrainian citizens, including agreeing to Crimea’s request to rejoin Russia, the State Department and U.S. mass media spoke as one in decrying a “Russian invasion” and supporting NATO military maneuvers on Russia’s borders to deter “Russian aggression.”
Anyone who dares question this latest “group think” – as it plunges the world into a dangerous new Cold War – is dismissed as a “Kremlin apologist” or “Moscow stooge” just as skeptics about the Iraq War were derided as “Saddam apologists.” Virtually everyone important in Official Washington marches in lock step toward war and more war. (Victoria Nuland is married to Robert Kagan, making them one of Washington’s supreme power couples.)
So, that is the context of the latest State Department rebellion against Obama’s more tempered policies on Syria. Looking forward to a likely Hillary Clinton administration, these 51 “diplomats” have signed their name to a “dissent” that advocates bombing the Syrian military to protect Syria’s “moderate” rebels who – to the degree they even exist – fight mostly under the umbrella of Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front and its close ally, Ahrar al Sham.
The muddled thinking in this “dissent” is that by bombing the Syrian military, the U.S. government can enhance the power of the rebels and supposedly force Assad to negotiate his own removal. But there is no reason to think that this plan would work.
In early 2014, when the rebels held a relatively strong position, U.S.-arranged peace talks amounted to a rebel-dominated conference that made Assad’s departure a pre-condition and excluded Syria’s Iranian allies from attending. Not surprisingly, Assad’s representative went home and the talks collapsed.
Now, with Assad holding a relatively strong hand, backed by Russian air power and Iranian ground forces, the “dissenting” U.S. diplomats say peace is impossible because the rebels are in no position to compel Assad’s departure. Thus, the “dissenters” recommend that the U.S. expand its role in the war to again lift the rebels, but that would only mean more maximalist demands from the rebels. (QeD)
Serious Risks
This proposed wider war, however, would carry some very serious risks, including the possibility that the Syrian army could collapse, opening the gates of Damascus to Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front (and its allies) or the Islamic State – a scenario that, as The New York Times noted, the “memo doesn’t address.”(but 'wars for israel' team loves this possibility, murder all of damascus so that Israel can stretch it's borders, steal their water, what do we lose, we still sit in our homes and sip our fine wines)
Currently, the Islamic State and – to a lesser degree – the Nusra Front are in retreat, chased by the Syrian army with Russian air support and by some Kurdish forces with U.S. backing. But those gains could easily be reversed. There is also the risk of sparking a wider war with Iran and/or Russia.
But such cavalier waving aside of grave dangers is nothing new for the neocons and liberal hawks. They have consistently dreamt up schemes that may sound good at a think-tank conference or read well in an op-ed article, but fail in the face of ground truth where usually U.S. soldiers are expected to fix the mess. (since Nuland, Kagan, Wolfowitz, Abrams, Albright, Pearl, Rahm Emmanuel etc have maximum takleef with Syria, they should be sent in battle fatigues to go fight the war themselves, - my suggestion for this eminent team)
We have seen this wishful thinking go awry in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Ukraine and even Syria, where Obama’s acquiescence to provide arms and training for the so-called “unicorns” – the hard-to-detect “moderate” rebels – saw those combatants and their weapons absorbed into Al Qaeda’s or Islamic State’s ranks.
Yet, the neocons and liberal hawks who control the State Department – and are eagerly looking forward to a Hillary Clinton presidency – will never stop coming up with these crazy notions until a concerted effort is made to assess accountability for all the failures that that they have inflicted on U.S. foreign policy.
As long as there is no accountability – as long as the U.S. president won’t rein in these warmongers – the madness will continue and only grow more dangerous.
Read More Here:
https://consortiumnews.com/2016/06/17/t ... e-madness/
Re: Levant crisis - III
saudi prince mohammad bin salman is now touring USA. Posting it in this thread, since syria & failure of their daesh minions is bound to be main topic.
Saudi Prince’s Under-the-Radar U.S. Visit Belies Big Plans
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... ious-plans
Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is making his solo Washington debut this week, pitching an economic plan to investors and trying to counter negative views among U.S. lawmakers that his country isn’t stopping terrorist financing. Just don’t expect to see much of him.
While Prince Mohammed, who is also the Saudi defense minister, has been whisked to meetings across Washington since Monday, all of them have been closed to the press. He broke the Ramadan fast with Secretary of State John Kerry, met intelligence and congressional leaders including House Speaker Paul Ryan (this guy is another establishment lackey, gerrymanders their case in republican party and often is seen a stand independent of republican nominee Trump, what a joker and what a sell out) as and visited Defense Secretary Ash Carter at the Pentagon, all without making any public comments.
Nor did the White House publicize the president’s plans to meet with the prince. When asked by reporters, though, spokesman Eric Schultz confirmed Thursday that President Barack Obama will meet Prince Mohammed in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon. It’s a follow-up to the president’s April summit with Gulf Arab leaders in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, Schultz said.
Most of the agenda will focus on "restoring stability to the regional conflicts that we’ve seen, our cooperation with the Saudis against" Islamic State and the kingdom’s new economic plan, he said.
Details of what’s been discussed so far behind closed doors are sparse, but participants said the kingdom’s economic overhaul, regional rival Iran, the wars in Yemen and Syria and the fight against Islamic State were all on the agenda.
Sensitive Time
The visit comes at a sensitive time in a U.S.-Saudi relationship that Obama described as “complicated” in an interview published in March by The Atlantic magazine. The prince arrived two days after the killing of 49 people at an Orlando dance club by an American who proclaimed support for Islamic terrorist groups and had traveled twice to Saudi Arabia. And it takes place amid continuing demands that classified portions of a Sept. 11 report be made public and criticism among political leaders that the kingdom doesn’t do enough to stop extremism.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... ious-plans
basically what he is saying is 'saar we tried our best with our minions, but we are not able to keep our part of the deal to 'wars for israel' lobby, them russians are dirty peoples and are breaking the spirit of our poor minions, please do not hurt us economically and screw us on fuel prices saar.
Saudi Prince’s Under-the-Radar U.S. Visit Belies Big Plans
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... ious-plans
Saudi Arabia’s Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman is making his solo Washington debut this week, pitching an economic plan to investors and trying to counter negative views among U.S. lawmakers that his country isn’t stopping terrorist financing. Just don’t expect to see much of him.
While Prince Mohammed, who is also the Saudi defense minister, has been whisked to meetings across Washington since Monday, all of them have been closed to the press. He broke the Ramadan fast with Secretary of State John Kerry, met intelligence and congressional leaders including House Speaker Paul Ryan (this guy is another establishment lackey, gerrymanders their case in republican party and often is seen a stand independent of republican nominee Trump, what a joker and what a sell out) as and visited Defense Secretary Ash Carter at the Pentagon, all without making any public comments.
Nor did the White House publicize the president’s plans to meet with the prince. When asked by reporters, though, spokesman Eric Schultz confirmed Thursday that President Barack Obama will meet Prince Mohammed in the Oval Office on Friday afternoon. It’s a follow-up to the president’s April summit with Gulf Arab leaders in Riyadh, the Saudi capital, Schultz said.
Most of the agenda will focus on "restoring stability to the regional conflicts that we’ve seen, our cooperation with the Saudis against" Islamic State and the kingdom’s new economic plan, he said.
Details of what’s been discussed so far behind closed doors are sparse, but participants said the kingdom’s economic overhaul, regional rival Iran, the wars in Yemen and Syria and the fight against Islamic State were all on the agenda.
Sensitive Time
The visit comes at a sensitive time in a U.S.-Saudi relationship that Obama described as “complicated” in an interview published in March by The Atlantic magazine. The prince arrived two days after the killing of 49 people at an Orlando dance club by an American who proclaimed support for Islamic terrorist groups and had traveled twice to Saudi Arabia. And it takes place amid continuing demands that classified portions of a Sept. 11 report be made public and criticism among political leaders that the kingdom doesn’t do enough to stop extremism.
http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/artic ... ious-plans
basically what he is saying is 'saar we tried our best with our minions, but we are not able to keep our part of the deal to 'wars for israel' lobby, them russians are dirty peoples and are breaking the spirit of our poor minions, please do not hurt us economically and screw us on fuel prices saar.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Putin: Russia’s first priority in Syria is to keep the country unified
17 June، 2016
Moscow, SANA-The Russian President Vladimir Putin blamed the West for the chaos in the Middle East and other parts of the world.
Putin, who was speaking at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum on Friday, said the chaos in the Middle East is a result of Western support for colored revolutions and the so-called Arab Spring.
Russia seeks to consolidate trust among all components of the Syrian society by holding a political dialogue, the Russian president added.
He added that crisis settlement in Syria requires drafting a new constitution and holding new presidential and parliamentary elections, calling on Washington to bring pressure to bear on the Syrian opposition to move forward in the political settlement.
Putin warned that Syria’s breakup, if it happens, will contribute to destabilizing the entire region and the world, stressing that Russia’s main goal is for Syria to remain a unified country.
http://sana.sy/en/?p=80392
17 June، 2016
Moscow, SANA-The Russian President Vladimir Putin blamed the West for the chaos in the Middle East and other parts of the world.
Putin, who was speaking at the St Petersburg International Economic Forum on Friday, said the chaos in the Middle East is a result of Western support for colored revolutions and the so-called Arab Spring.
Russia seeks to consolidate trust among all components of the Syrian society by holding a political dialogue, the Russian president added.
He added that crisis settlement in Syria requires drafting a new constitution and holding new presidential and parliamentary elections, calling on Washington to bring pressure to bear on the Syrian opposition to move forward in the political settlement.
Putin warned that Syria’s breakup, if it happens, will contribute to destabilizing the entire region and the world, stressing that Russia’s main goal is for Syria to remain a unified country.
http://sana.sy/en/?p=80392
Re: Levant crisis - III
In response to 50 US SD 'diplomats' signing a petition to Obama to strike at Assad. Russia sends it's response.
It's either Assad, or entire middle east plunges in crises. And that is most likely code for message that crises will not bypass munnas, like turkey and israel.
http://orient-news.net/en/news_show/115 ... g-in-chaos
Russia: Assad or the Middle East plunging in chaos
Publication Date: 2016-06-17 15:08
http://o-t.tv/jZW
Views (635)
Share | Comments | 0
Send to a Friend
Print
Font Size A- A +A
Keywords
SyriaRussiaAssad regimeMilitary attacksUS Department of State
Russia immediately responded when more than 50 diplomats in the US Department of State requested the administration of the US President Barrack Obama to carry out military attacks against Assad regime. Moscow considered that “the Middle East will be plunged in chaos if Assad falls.”
Russian media outlets reported Dmitry Peskov, the Press Secretary of the President of Russia, commenting on a letter received from the US Department of State that calls on carrying out aerial attacks against the Assad regime and the contribution to toppling it, as saying “Moscow can in no event sympathize with the calls to toppling a regime in another state through the use of force. It might lead to spreading total chaos in the Middle East.”
Regarding the accusations against Moscow of deliberately targeting the US-backed opposition fighters, Peskov claimed that there is a big problem that lies in the “cohesion and overlapping” between “moderate opposition” and “al-Nusra Front,” stating that it is difficult to differentiate between the two.
On her part, Maria Zakharova, the Russian Director of the Information and Press Department, claimed that her country does not count on the military solution to resolve the Syrian crisis. In regards to carrying out attacks against Assad regime, she stated that “It is not a secret for us that there are certain political powers in the US which are calling on a military solution to the crisis in Syria … However, that is not our method.”
It's either Assad, or entire middle east plunges in crises. And that is most likely code for message that crises will not bypass munnas, like turkey and israel.
http://orient-news.net/en/news_show/115 ... g-in-chaos
Russia: Assad or the Middle East plunging in chaos
Publication Date: 2016-06-17 15:08
http://o-t.tv/jZW
Views (635)
Share | Comments | 0
Send to a Friend
Font Size A- A +A
Keywords
SyriaRussiaAssad regimeMilitary attacksUS Department of State
Russia immediately responded when more than 50 diplomats in the US Department of State requested the administration of the US President Barrack Obama to carry out military attacks against Assad regime. Moscow considered that “the Middle East will be plunged in chaos if Assad falls.”
Russian media outlets reported Dmitry Peskov, the Press Secretary of the President of Russia, commenting on a letter received from the US Department of State that calls on carrying out aerial attacks against the Assad regime and the contribution to toppling it, as saying “Moscow can in no event sympathize with the calls to toppling a regime in another state through the use of force. It might lead to spreading total chaos in the Middle East.”
Regarding the accusations against Moscow of deliberately targeting the US-backed opposition fighters, Peskov claimed that there is a big problem that lies in the “cohesion and overlapping” between “moderate opposition” and “al-Nusra Front,” stating that it is difficult to differentiate between the two.
On her part, Maria Zakharova, the Russian Director of the Information and Press Department, claimed that her country does not count on the military solution to resolve the Syrian crisis. In regards to carrying out attacks against Assad regime, she stated that “It is not a secret for us that there are certain political powers in the US which are calling on a military solution to the crisis in Syria … However, that is not our method.”
Re: Levant crisis - III
Totally agree with your sentiments, the whole of Turkey as you see now, is nothing but old Syria and Greece. But I believe, the Antioch which I pointed out was the right one. Anyway it doesn't matterhabal wrote:>> Antioch iirc was one of the 5 centers of early christianity, with alexandria, jerusalem, constantinople and rome. once the other 4 fell to islam one by one, rome became the top one by default.
it is an ancient centre of eastern christianity. Rome was centre of catholicism. Jersusalem was a centre for obvious reasons. Alexandria is coptic. russian goals in syria is also is to secure the christian bases like latakia, malamoun, homs etc. All coastal areas in Syria next to meditteranean was where the erstwhile crusaders used to camp out and built forts in. All the natives of such places are progeny of these crusaders and natives. This is how they motivate the troops, hey you are protecting christendom (a very powerful motivating factor). So then by progression, why not take back what was lost to the ottomans as well. But first the turks must slip up, which they will for sure under erdogan, only matter of time.
>>No gaziantep is not Antioch, its a different one
Below is the one, it is also in Turkey
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antioch
that is the town proper, but ancient antioch, which used to the entire area today known as gaziantep, which is a name given by the invaders, was always syrian land. This is like changing an Indian name of a town to ghazi-abad. That is gazi-antep.
Gaziantep was formerly known as Antep and is still sometimes referred to by that name. It’s location is approximately 100 kilometres from the Syrian Border. Called Antioch in ancient times, it is one of the longest continually inhabited cities in the world.
There is a reason for Russians to involve in Syria. It could be that they think that they can derive legitimacy for the Russian Orthodox church. Russian church was always shut out from Mediterranean by EUR for strategic reasons. Even the Crimean war a century ago started out due to restrictions for Russian pilgrims. Even after that they have wholeheartedly helped the Christians in Jerusalem. The Armenian quarter of the city explains that by its name itself
Rome was the Western Roman political capital of Christianity, Antioch the textual capital, Jerusalem the spiritual one, Alexandria the analytical one, Constantinople the Eastern Roman political one. All except Rome has fallen to Islam. By recapturing Syrian towns, they are sending a message as a guardians to Holy Land a feat only French could achieve until now (Syria was a french protectorate till recently as 1950's)
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Levant crisis - III
ISIS is counterattacking in Raqqa, Aleppo and other places.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Another nusra commander injured in ied attack.
Meantime bad news on Palmyra front.the mountains are alive with orcs
Hassan Ridha @sayed_ridha
#SAA did not control T3 Pumping Station despite a number of reports & had to withdraw from Arak village due to shelling from Mustadira mt.
Hassan Ridha
19h19 hours ago
Hassan Ridha @sayed_ridha
#SAA withdrew from outskirts of T3 area & are @ edge of Arak gas field as #IS counterattacks in attempt to regain Talaylah area E of #Tadmor
Meantime bad news on Palmyra front.the mountains are alive with orcs
Hassan Ridha @sayed_ridha
#SAA did not control T3 Pumping Station despite a number of reports & had to withdraw from Arak village due to shelling from Mustadira mt.
Hassan Ridha
19h19 hours ago
Hassan Ridha @sayed_ridha
#SAA withdrew from outskirts of T3 area & are @ edge of Arak gas field as #IS counterattacks in attempt to regain Talaylah area E of #Tadmor
Re: Levant crisis - III
Shiogu met Assad yday in Damascus. From rus mod pic and body language he grilled Assad harshly on many topics
Re: Levant crisis - III
The Syrian Arab Army’s 104th and 137th brigades have been under siege in the Deir Ezzor Governorate for over a year now, with little to no reinforcements available to relieve their embattled and exhausted soldiers. Making matters worse in the Deir Ezzor Governorate, the Syrian Arab Army has constantly been under attack by the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS), leaving the government units on high alert almost every day. However, this situation is expected to change in the coming weeks as Hezbollah mobilizes its elite units to help protect the provincial capital of Deir Ezzor and liberate several areas under the Islamic State’s control. According to an Al-Masdar correspondent’s contact in Deir Ezzor, Hezbollah has sent its first batch of elite fighters to the military airport in the aforementioned province. These Hezbollah soldiers are expected to join forces with the Hashd Al-Sha’abi (Iraqi paramilitary) fighters that are already participating in the battle for Deir Ezzor. With their arrival in Deir Ezzor on Friday morning, Hezbollah is now positioned at nearly every province in Syria (save Al-Hasakah, Idlib, and Al-Raqqa).
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/he ... eir-ezzor/ | Al-Masdar News
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/he ... eir-ezzor/ | Al-Masdar News
Re: Levant crisis - III
Iraq column moving to attack Al-Shirqat near Baiji...it is 60km north of Baiji but still 100km south of Mosul-Tal Afar mordor axis which tells you how much slogging left to do.


Re: Levant crisis - III
good thing is lot of open desert so they can try desert storm type "armed horde" tactics and appear on the Daesh lines x-country from many directions. there are no choke points like hills and rivers
Re: Levant crisis - III
ISIS home prisons in fallujah. looks like some bugger Emir kept his yezidi and other women inside




Re: Levant crisis - III
Russia & Iran have agreed to relieve DeZ province and clean it of isis, participation of hezbollah is first step.Singha wrote:The Syrian Arab Army’s 104th and 137th brigades have been under siege in the Deir Ezzor Governorate for over a year now, with little to no reinforcements available to relieve their embattled and exhausted soldiers. Making matters worse in the Deir Ezzor Governorate, the Syrian Arab Army has constantly been under attack by the Islamic State of Iraq and Al-Sham (ISIS), leaving the government units on high alert almost every day. However, this situation is expected to change in the coming weeks as Hezbollah mobilizes its elite units to help protect the provincial capital of Deir Ezzor and liberate several areas under the Islamic State’s control. According to an Al-Masdar correspondent’s contact in Deir Ezzor, Hezbollah has sent its first batch of elite fighters to the military airport in the aforementioned province. These Hezbollah soldiers are expected to join forces with the Hashd Al-Sha’abi (Iraqi paramilitary) fighters that are already participating in the battle for Deir Ezzor. With their arrival in Deir Ezzor on Friday morning, Hezbollah is now positioned at nearly every province in Syria (save Al-Hasakah, Idlib, and Al-Raqqa).
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/he ... eir-ezzor/ | Al-Masdar News
russians seem more interested in the east-west corridor of syria.
-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 3532
- Joined: 08 Jan 2007 02:37
Re: Levant crisis - III
Turdogan is seeking rapprochement with Putin and Putin's reaction is as in this image:



Re: Levant crisis - III
Home Syria Syria Powerful blast kills top Uzbek Jihadist commander in Idlib By Leith Fadel - 18/06/20164 A powerful blast was reported from the Idlib Governorate tonight after a car bomb was detonated near Jabhat Al-Nusra’s (Syrian Al-Qaeda group) headquarters in the provincial capital. The car bombing at their headquarters resulted in the death of Jabhat Al-Nusra’s top Uzbek field commander in the Idlib Governorate. This Uzbek commander was identified as “Abu Bakr Al-Uzbeki” – a veteran jihadist that has fought alongside the Syrian opposition since Jaysh Al-Fateh’s (Army of Conquest) massive Idlib operation in April 2015. Abu Bakr Al-Uzbeki is now the sixth jihadist commander to be killed inside the Idlib Governorate in the last four days
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/po ... der-idlib/ | Al-Masdar News
https://www.almasdarnews.com/article/po ... der-idlib/ | Al-Masdar News
Re: Levant crisis - III
For iran, retaining land route via deir azzor to Hezbollah in Lebanon is important,
That's what new Syrian army raised by cia and jordan is designed to block in deserts east of Damascus
That's what new Syrian army raised by cia and jordan is designed to block in deserts east of Damascus
Re: Levant crisis - III

He who can loiter more wins

Re: Levant crisis - III
Haidar Sumeri
11h11 hours ago
Haidar Sumeri @IraqiSecurity
The betrayal has begun again:
Reports that locals northwest of Ramadi are already helping Da'ish against #Iraq's forces again.
11h11 hours ago
Haidar Sumeri @IraqiSecurity
The betrayal has begun again:
Reports that locals northwest of Ramadi are already helping Da'ish against #Iraq's forces again.
Re: Levant crisis - III
usa is wants to free palmyra using it's isis proxies because it is an important bottleneck to pump forces to east in DeZ. That's perhaps why T3 and Arak oil fields are facing isis resistance again. Also isis is withdrawing from ramadi and raqqa into DeZ and other safer zones.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Leith Abou Fadel @leithfadel
@Soroush1394 To clarify: Russians have a major disagreement with Iran regarding certain parts of Syria. They don't want Idlib; Iranians do.
@Soroush1394 To clarify: Russians have a major disagreement with Iran regarding certain parts of Syria. They don't want Idlib; Iranians do.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Drive to tabqah resumed today.
Re: Levant crisis - III
Singha wrote:![]()
He who can loiter more wins

-
- BRF Oldie
- Posts: 14045
- Joined: 11 Aug 2016 06:14
Re: Levant crisis - III
Air Marshall Smirnoff is made of stern stuff, no doubt. Must have been very reassuring for the Al Qaeda to see the planes with the Stars and Stripes zooming protectively across the sky - and then the bombs coming down. 
