Thursday, June 23, 2016

U.S. Seeks Direct Confrontation With Russia In Syria, Russia Ready To Push Back On NATO Aggression







The US has recently accused Russia of bombing what it calls “US-backed rebels” in southern Syria. CBS News in their article, “Russia ignores warnings, bombs U.S.-backed Syrian rebel group,” would claim: 
On Friday, Defense Secretary Ash Carter called out Russia for bombing a Syrian rebel group that’s backed by the U.S.

The attack by Russian fighter bombers on American-backed opposition forces appeared to be deliberate and to ignore repeated U.S. warnings.


More alarming is what the US claimed happened next. CBS News would further claim:


Two American F-18 jet fighters were dispatched to provide air cover for the troops on the ground as they tried to evacuate their casualties. By the time the F-18s arrived, the Russian planes were headed away, but were still close enough to see.
But when the F-18s broke away to refuel, the Russians returned for a second bombing run. Another call went out to the Russian command center in Syria, demanding that the planes wave off.
The crew of an airborne command post tried to contact the Russian pilots directly but got no response. The Su-34s conducted another bombing run, leaving a small number of opposition fighters dead on the ground.

Neither CBS News nor the US Department of Defense ever explained why the US believes it is entitled to send armed militants over the borders and into a sovereign nation, or why it believes a sovereign nation and its allies are not entitled to confront and neutralize them or why US aircraft are entitled to fly over Syrian airspace without the authorization of the Syrian government.

In other words, the US is vocally complaining about its serial violations of international law and norms finally (allegedly) being confronted and put to an end by Russian military forces.


Russia however, has denied US accusations. CNN’s article, “Russia denies bombing U.S.-backed Syrian rebels near Jordan border,” states:

Russia’s Defense Ministry denied bombing U.S.-backed Syrian opposition forces in a recent military operation near the Jordania border, according to a statement released on Sunday. 

The Kremlin response comes after U.S. and Russian military officials held a video conference to discuss Thursday’s strikes. 

But when one considers a recent US State Department “internal memo” calling for more direct US military action to oust the Syrian government from power, it is clear such a call cannot be answered without an accompanying justification or provocation. It appears that the US-Russian row in southern Syria conveniently constitutes just such a provocation.


In other words, the US desire for “regime change” in Syria will create another Libya, but on a scale larger than that in North Africa, all while compounding the chaos in North Africa further.






Is The Syrian War About To Experience A Major Escalation?




We’re going to war — either hybrid in nature to break the Russian state back to its 1990s subordination, or a hot war (which will destroy our country). Our citizens should know this, but they don’t because our media is dumbed down in its “Pravda”-like support for our “respectable,” highly aggressive government. We are being led, as C. Wright Mills said in the 1950s, by a government full of “crackpot realists: in the name of realism they’ve constructed a paranoid reality all their own.” Our media has credited Hillary Clinton with wonderful foreign policy experience, unlike Trump, without really noting the results of her power-mongering. She’s comparable to Bill Clinton’s choice of Cold War crackpot Madeleine Albright as one of the worst Secretary of States we’ve had since … Condi Rice? Albright boasted, “If we have to use force it is because we are America; we are the indispensable nation. We stand tall and we see further than other countries into the future.”

Hillary’s record includes supporting the barbaric “contras” against the Nicaraguan people in the 1980s, supporting the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia, supporting the ongoing Bush-Iraq War, the ongoing Afghan mess, and as Secretary of State the destruction of the secular state of Libya, the military coup in Honduras, and the present attempt at “regime change” in Syria. Every one of these situations has resulted in more extremism, more chaos in the world, and more danger to our country. Next will be the borders of Russia, China, and Iran. Look at the viciousness of her recent AIPAC speech (don’t say you haven’t been warned). Can we really bear to watch as Clinton “takes our alliance [with Israel] to the next level”? Where is our sense of proportion? Cannot the media, at the least, call her out on this extremism? The problem, I think, is this political miasma of “correctness” that dominates American thinking (i.e. Trump is extreme, therefore Hillary is not).


The risk of a very serious escalation to the hostilities in Syria has increased materially in recent days. A huge concern to all Americans should be the insane cable in which 51 State Department war hawks recently urged President Obama to bomb government forces of Bashar al-Assad.



BEIRUT—Dozens of State Department officials this week protested against U.S. policy in Syria, signing an internal document that calls for targeted military strikes against the Damascus government and urging regime change as the only way to defeat Islamic State.

The “dissent channel cable” was signed by 51 State Department officers involved with advising on Syria policy in various capacities, according to an official familiar with the document. The Wall Street Journal reviewed a copy of the cable, which repeatedly calls for “targeted military strikes” against the Syrian government in light of the near-collapse of the ceasefire brokered earlier this year.

Obama administration officials have expressed concern that attacking the Assad regime could lead to a direct conflict with Russia and Iran.

Of course, it’s no surprise that the typical terrorist-supporting “allied” states in the region are pushing for more war.
Meanwhile, for some perspective on just how disastrous U.S. strikes against the Assad regime would be, and how utterly illogical the thought process of these State Department “dissenters” really is, let’s turn to Al-Monitor:







Russia must boost its combat readiness in response to NATO’s “aggressive actions” near Russia’s borders, President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday.
Addressing parliament on the 75th anniversary of Nazi Germany’s attack on the Soviet Union, Putin berated the West for being unwilling to build “a modern, non-bloc collective security system” with Russia.

“Russia is open to discuss this crucial issue and has more than once shown its readiness for dialogue,” he said. “But, just as it happened on the eve of World War Two, we do not see a positive reaction in response.”
“On the contrary, NATO is strengthening its aggressive rhetoric and its aggressive actions near our borders. In these conditions, we are duty-bound to pay special attention to solving the task of strengthening the combat readiness of our country.”

The U.S.-led military alliance is increasing its defenses in Poland and the three Baltic nations of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, as part of a wider deterrent that it hopes will discourage Russia from any repetition of its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in 2014.
Russia sees NATO’s deterrence plans as hostile.
Drawing historic parallels with the 1930s, Putin said humanity now faced a danger of failing to withstand the fast-spreading threat of terrorism, just as it once failed to unite against the rising power of Nazi Germany.







Two American aircraft carriers conducted practice drills in the waters not far from thecoast of the Philippines islands in recent daysJohn MRichardsonChief of NavalOperations let it be known on June 20 during a meeting at the Center for a New AmericanSecurity that it was not at all ordinary for the United States to dispatch two aircraftcarriers to one single ocean regionand that it represents the commitment of the U.Stomaintain security in this regionand that it also serves as “deterrence” for relatedcountries.

Conveying a so-called message about security through the exhibition of military mightand furthermore describing the events as an act of deterrence is something that the U.Shas done far too many timesRegardless of how many times it may have gone smoothly inother parts of the world the U.Shas chosen the wrong opponent by selecting China forthis type of gameBehind all of this is lack of patience and brassy moves and it also revealsa nature of hegemony beneath the surface.

Statements from high ranking officials in the U.Smilitary as well as the aircraft carrierdrills themselves once again demonstrate that the U.Sis definitely not a regional securitysafeguardand instead precisely a trouble makerIn the regard of the South China Seaissuethe U.Sis playing an extremely destructive role.

For a period of timethe U.S., by making what appears to be a show being very much inearnest to advertise militarization dangers in the South China Sea is putting the hat thatbalances regional peace and stability onto Chinas head in a sly manner . Yet in realitywhat people see is that the U.Saircraft carriers have arrivedthat the U.Sstrategicbombers have arrivedthat the U.Sguided missile destroyers sailing with a flagrepresenting “freedom of navigation” have not only approached near to Chinese islandsthe Americans together with allies have conducted military drills one after anotherso thequestion is who is promoting the militarization of the South China Seawho is trying toturn the South China Sea into a gunpowder bucket?


The United States is a country outside the territory of the South China Seacoming fromone side of the Pacific Ocean all the way to the other side of the Pacific Ocean todemonstrate their military power is for the purpose of intensifying the situation and toprovoke disturbances and break peaceful stability and then to fish in troubled water andmake an effort to maintain hegemony thereat at all costsThis deceitful business isdespised in the regard of international lawand it is also harmful to the security benefits ofthe country.




























No comments: