While the global powers involved in the Syrian conflict strive to resolve the crisis through diplomatic means, it appears that the US may resort to some rather risky tactics to achieve the desired results.
All participants of the international ministerial meeting on the Syrian settlement in the Swiss city of Lausanne have apparently confirmed their commitment to preserve Syria's integrity.
However, Gregory Copley, editor of Defense & Foreign Affairs and President of the parent organization, the International Strategic Studies Association, warned that the stance currently adopted by the US on Syria may in fact yield some rather risky and unpleasant outcomes.
"I believe that the Obama administration will be reckless about this and will basically push for a risky outcome. We could see how regardless of the good intentions stated the US is about to do something risky, I believe, in Syria," Copley said.
He also predicted that if Hillary Clinton gets elected as the next US president, she’s likely to pursue the "risky confrontation with Russia", in no small part due to her commitment to the anti-Russian policies espoused by people like George Soros.
Also, he ventured a guess that any new agreement reached on the Syrian conflict between the parties involved is unlikely to be a long-lasting arrangement due to the US agenda.
"I think that the US will be forced to get along with things that should sound moderate and supportive of consensus… But the reality is that the United States is now looking for active ways to increase its military engagement in Syria and has just done a number of things which have been extremely provocative," Copley remarked.
At the same time, he added, if the Syrian army continues to make steady progress in Aleppo and stabilize the situation in the city then it might in fact help "remove some of the apparent legitimacy of Washington’s claims that it must intervene."
"The US labeled any of its strikes against Syrian government or Russian positions as accidents and labeled anything that Syrian or Russian forces do which might have a civilian impact as being war crimes – this isn’t really a path to achieve any meaningful settlement. However, if the situation stabilizes because the government takes control over east Aleppo, then I think it might remove some of the opportunity for Washington to push ahead with a military solution," Copley surmised.
Commenting on the US plans to deploy its anti-missile systems in Europe and South Korea with an announced purpose of countering the threats of North Korea and Iran, Russian military experts say the true purpose is to gain military superiority over Russia and China and that Moscow and Beijing have every means to stand against it.
Washington's decision to deploy its anti-missile defense system in Europe is aimed at gaining military superiority over Russia and China, according to first deputy chief of the General Staff's Main Operational Department, Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir.
He noted that the US intention to deploy the system in Europe has no connection to the much talked about Iranian or North Korean threats. Pyongyang is physically unable to pose any real threat to the West, while it is absolutely irrelevant to talk about the Iranian threat after the agreements reached on its nuclear program.
The high-ranking military official promised that Russia won’t leave the US plans unanswered and will take adequate measures not to allow the US to alter the balance of strategic armaments.
Meanwhile Viktor Baranets, a military expert from the Russian newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda, told Sputnik that the deployment of the US anti-missile system in Europe is part of Washington's geopolitical strategy.
"The US is undermining the system of global strategic stability to be able to pursue its globalist doctrine of worldwide superiority," he said.
He further noted that Russia is quite capable of answering the US plan.
"Russia has missile systems which are able to determine the location of the most powerful computers of the US anti-missile defense system. These are hypersonic nuclear warheads which maneuver height-wise and course-wise," he said.
"The US should rapidly understand that it has brought the situation into a strategic stalemate and the way out should be sought not through new anti-missile systems but through dialogue with Moscow at the diplomatic table," the expert said.
- Russia called the US's threat to perform a cyber attack 'unprecedented'
- Vice president Joe Biden said America will 'send a message' to Russia
- Kremlin responded by saying it'll do what it must to protect itself from US
- CIA could prepare cyber attack to stop interference with election
- Tensions between US and Russia at their worst levels since the Cold War
- Russia accused of posturing to the world by prepping civilians for conflict
- State-controlled media explains what do should war break out in Russia
As tensions continue to escalate between the U.S. and Russia, the Kremlin has called Vice President Joe Biden's threat to 'send a message' through America's own cyber strike 'unprecedented'.
Russia said it would protect itself from a potentially unpredictable attack from the U.S., the New York Post reported.
'The threats directed against Moscow and our state’s leadership are unprecedented because they are voiced at the level of the US vice president.
'To the backdrop of this aggressive, unpredictable line, we must take measures to protect (our) interests, to hedge risks,' a Kremlin spokesman said, according to RIA Novosti news agency.
Hillary Clinton Supplied Cash, Weapons, Tanks, Training to Al-Qaeda to Kill Gaddafi & Weaponize “ISIS” in Syria
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton created a secret military alliance between the United States and Al-Qaeda generals to assassinate Libyan strongman Muammar Gaddafi and distribute weapons to terror factions in Libya and ultimately “ISIS” fighters in Syria.
True Pundit has documented this expose with interviews from intelligence assets, Hillary Clinton’s personal emails, Wikileaks emails, secret Pentagon intelligence audio recordings and previously classified cables from the Defense Intelligence Agency.
The intelligence garnered from these sources depict devastating overt and covert revelations of how the United States, under Clinton’s Dept. of State, secretly colluded with terrorist organizations and its leaders to implement America’s foreign policy, including:
- Clinton directly aligned and forged a State Dept. partnership with Al-Qaeda and its extremist fanatics to overthrow, assassinate Gaddafi.
- Clinton directly armed and commissioned known terrorists and publicly sworn U.S. foes with weapons in Libya, a secret reversal of U.S. policy and direct violation of UN Security Council resolution 1973, which called for a complete arms embargo on Libya.
- Clinton and President Barack Obama together financed Al-Qaeda to overthrow Libyan government and stockpile weapons, including tanks and heavy artillery, which were ultimately shipped from Libya to “ISIS” factions in Syria and elsewhere.
- Clinton struck a deal with known senior military officials in Al-Qaeda to implement her U.S. foreign policy master plan in Libya, including shipping weapons to the surrounding region.
- According to intelligence sources, many of the weapons supplied to Al-Qaeda factions were believed to have be used against Americans in the Sept. 11 2012 Benghazi attacks that killed U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens, Information Officer Sean Smith, and two CIA operatives, Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, both former Navy SEALs. Stevens is the first U.S. ambassador killed in an attack since Adolph Dubs was killed in 1979.
- Libyan officials were deeply worried that weapons were being funneled to U.S.-backed rebels with ties to Al-Qaeda via Clinton’s State Dept., which they feared would ultimately create a vacuum and thereby a safe harbor for well-armed terrorists.
- Libyan officials cut off diplomatic talks with Clinton’s State Department and instead, worked with the Pentagon to avoid Clinton. Incredibly, the Pentagon initiated the diplomatic end-run around Clinton because uniformed top brass, along with the Libyans, no longer trusted her.