Thursday 14th of December 2017

full-on US bad will...

badwill

The situation in Syria demands some careful attention, especially in regard to the US interventionist fucups in Libya (above), Iraq and even as far back as Kosovo, which now is a hotbed of ISIS sympathisers. It seems the US has a master plan: destroy some Arabic countries, steal the oil while letting everyone fight each other and let the Saudis take over to mop up. 

 


Well it may not be the official plan or even the secret plan. May as well be. All the US is doing in Syria is going to leave more dead and more pain for the people — and of course Assad and the Russians will be blamed for it — all under the guise of "democratic" "freedom" alla USdom, which in the end only means one thing — let the Sunni Al Qeada/Al Nusra/ISIS rule that country, for the pleasure of removing Assad, the present ruler. And the UN here has been conned into believing the shit promoted by the US diplomacy and through the US "liberal" press, which is no other instrument than the voice of the Empire.
Presently, The Assad Syrian government with the help of Russian air cover is liberating Aleppo from Al Nusra, Al Qaeda, ISIS and some "moderate" rebels. It's not easy, due to the various fighting factions and the population in between. They all have been offered a "surrender" option while the people of Aleppo have been offered humanitarian escape routes before the final assault. Of course these have to be monitored to avoid terrorists getting away as "ordinary folks".

Here comes the Washington Post bullshit:

 

FOR MORE than a month, Secretary of State John F. Kerry has been pressing the regime of Vladimir Putin to accept what, for Moscow, would be a sweetheart deal on Syria. The United States would grant Russia’s long-standing request to carry out joint operations against Syrian rebels deemed to be terrorists, in exchange for another Kremlin promise to restrain bombing by the regime of Bashar al-Assad in some parts of the country. This cave-in to Mr. Putin would be so sweeping that some senior Obama administration officials have not concealed their doubts: In an interview with The Post’s David Ignatius, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. questioned whether Russia could be expected to deliver on any promise it made in Syria.

Sure enough, it turns out that Mr. Putin had other ambitions.


So what are Russia's "other ambitions"? Putin has always stated that he wants Assad to stay on. Full stop. Putin supports the government of Syria. Putin says that without the support of the Americans for the rebels ("moderates", Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS-by-default), the situation in Syria would have been sorted out long time ago. 

So what are the American saying? That Assad has to go. They blame him for the civil war which was REALLY started by the US/Saudi destabilising the Syrian ethnic mix and encouraging the Sunnis to revolt, promising support. What are the Sunni sides of the street?: some "moderate rebels" which are also supported by Al Qaeda, Al Nusra and ISIS. The US idea here is to blame Assad for all the crap.

All of these rebels are supported by Saudi Arabia (and Qatar), our "friends", but in the West, we really don't like ISIS because they fight dirty and have gone a bit too far in religious inspired barbarism... So we have been conned into going into Syria and Iraq to fight ISIS, while the real reason is to provide support to the "moderate rebels" who are fighting ISIS a bit but are fighting Assad a lot.

In America many Christian organisations are horrified at the way the Christians are treated in Syria, by the "moderate" rebels and their allied Muslims, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra, ISIS, etc. The only hope for Christians to survive in Syria is to let Assad stay on. Full stop. But the American government does not want this, because this would mean a failure of their policy which is to eventually gift Syria to rabid Sunnis (they're the one responsible for 9/11, aren't they?) — hence to align Syria with the Saudis rather than having Syria aligned with Iran. Yes.

-----------------

In regard to Libya, even Obama has just admitted he did not keep his eyes on the ball! Cripes! What does this mean? It means that the Libyan oil sacred sites have been protected from the crap, that ISIS is fighting the puppet government installed by the US in Tripoli, that the former forces loyal to Gaddafi are gaining momentum and want to return to government and that the US in order to appear doing something are today bombing the city of Sitre, killing all what's left in this city — mostly women, children and old folks, while the ISIS forces have moved on, probably warned that the place was going to get bombed, since the US tend to flag their intent ahead of crapping. A mess? Oh yes... Wonderful mess... And the oil is cheap. So the US government's "plan" has been, is and will be lauded by the Western press as the only way to go. Sorry folks, this is crap, CRAP, CRAP.

Even the "humanitarian" aspect of Assad and the Russians is viewed suspiciously sarcastically by the Western press because "only the US has a pure heart". Bullocks. The US is creating crap, CRAP, CRAP to suit the Empire. Full stop. It does not care what people want and/or the US will manipulate what people want in order to deliver crap, CRAP, CRAP... that the people really don't want, but which suits the Empire.

The crap won't have a chance to stop until we, in the west, realise we are not fighting against Islam, but we have to deal with the political terrorists of the Salafi/Wahhabi/Sunni/Saudi organisations ("moderate" Sunnis, Al Qaeda, As Nusra, ISIS), who fight for political gain under the cover of general Islam. Islam is not united as such. But this realisation would mean to come to term with and tell our friends, the Saudis, to put a sock in it.

The crafted words used by The Washington Post editorial smell of obvious deceit. An article written by a young female journalist, Hafsa Kara-Mustapha, on Libya makes far more sense and exposes far more truth than all the lengthy analysis promoted by the political arms of the Empire and their lackey scribes. It is embarrassing to be swimming in this American propaganda. But fear not, these scribes warn us about not believing "the Russians"... Sure.

Words like "sweetheart deal" are appalling. "... questioned whether Russia could be expected to deliver on any promise it made in Syria" is a twisted sentence like a rattle-snake biting itself.

 

"Rather than settle for the partial victory offered by Mr. Kerry, Russia has joined with the Assad regime in a new campaign to drive all anti-regime forces out of Aleppo, the country’s largest city — a feat that would essentially win the war." the Washington Post tells us...

Yes, this is the idea. Win the war. Win the war for Assad and for MANY people in Syria. It has always been the intent of the Russians, while the US have hidden their real motives while crapping in Assad's front yard. The idea usually is that when a war is won, people stop fighting — though do not expect this luxury in Syria when the Salafi/Wahhabi/Sunni/ISIS/Saudi organisations have the distinct backing of Washington, directly, indirectly, by carelessness or by default.

Which bring us to the US Presidential elections. A savage crafty woman, eager to go to war, whose intent frightens the Sanders supporters, or a mad man who seems to be more intent on stopping the crap of the Empire to the horror of the Neocons. The Neocons have more chance of having more wars to fight in, with La Clinton than with El Trumpo. The Neocons are now going to sleep with La Clinton, and the rest of the world will be stuffed. At least the rest of the world would be stuffed out of its own ineptitude rather than being stuffed by the Empire, for profit. At least the people of the world would have a chance to find their own solutions because in general this is the way things go rather than fester forever under the thumb of an Empire full of its own savage hubris. 

What is annoying is that we know the American people can be better served and are better than this CRAP dished by their deceitful government.

Picture at top: Libyan forces allied with the U.N.-backed government fire weapons during a battle with IS fighters in Sirte, Libya, July 21, 2016. © Goran Tomasevic / Reuters


 

 

read on... then read above...

 

Situation  in  Syria


RUSSIA
11:04 03.08.2016(updated 11:51 03.08.2016) Get short URL

The United States has called on Russia and the Syrian government to roll back their military operations against Syrian armed opposition groups. In an interview with Sputnik, military analyst Ivan Konovalov explained this by the complete failure of Washington’s and its allies’ actions in Syria and elsewhere in the Middle East.

In exchange, US Secretary of State John Kerry promised to pressure on the Syrian opposition, while Russia should do the same, urging similar restraint from Damascus.

"Their policy is an across-the-board failure, primarily because they have no clear-cut action plan to act upon, while Russia’s goals are clear, just like the means of achieving them – the Aerospace Forces, the Syrian Army and the negotiating process. Our [Western] ‘colleagues’ are simply jealous of Russia’s successes,” Ivan Konovalov said.

Russian and Syrian military authorities have established a number of humanitarian corridors around Aleppo for civilians and terrorist fighters willing to surrender as part of a humanitarian operation launched on July 28.

Commenting on the US criticism of this humanitarian operation around Aleppo, Konovalov said that it reflected the peaceful intentions of Moscow and Damascus who want to give the militants holed up in the besieged city a chance to move out and end the war in which everyone wants to kill each other.


"Killing everyone is exactly what al-Nusra, Daesh and their allied militant groups the Americans describe as ‘moderate opposition’ really want, and the recent downing of the Russian helicopter proved what this so-called ‘moderate opposition’ is all about,” Ivan Konovalov told Sputnik.
He said the US calls for Russia and Damascus to refrain from any further advances against the terrorist forces stemmed from Washington’s desire to prevent these forces from taking Aleppo, which would change the course of the war in Syria.

“If Aleppo falls, this would deal a serious blow to Turkey, which had supported these terrorists groups. This would also mean the complete failure of the Americans’ plans to influence the situation in Syria,” Ivan Konovalov said in conclusion.

Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said last week that Moscow and Damascus had launched a large-scale humanitarian operation in Aleppo, opening three escape routes for civilians and one for militants wishing to lay down arms.

At the present time the center of Aleppo is controlled by Syrian government forces, while some 250,000 civilians are feared to be trapped in the rebel-held eastern districts of the city.

Meanwhile, fighting has intensified in the contested city in the past few days as jihadist militants mounted an offensive to break through government cordons.


http://sputniknews.com/russia/20160803/1043886802/us-syria-failure.html



From the Washington Rag (Post)... 

 

FOR MORE than a month, Secretary of State John F. Kerry has been pressing the regime of Vladimir Putin to accept what, for Moscow, would be a sweetheart deal on Syria. The United States would grant Russia’s long-standing request to carry out joint operations against Syrian rebels deemed to be terrorists, in exchange for another Kremlin promise to restrain bombing by the regime of Bashar al-Assad in some parts of the country. This cave-in to Mr. Putin would be so sweeping that some senior Obama administration officials have not concealed their doubts: In an interview with The Post’s David Ignatius, Director of National Intelligence James R. Clapper Jr. questioned whether Russia could be expected to deliver on any promise it made in Syria.

Sure enough, it turns out that Mr. Putin had other ambitions. Rather than settle for the partial victory offered by Mr. Kerry, Russia has joined with the Assad regime in a new campaign to drive all anti-regime forces out of Aleppo, the country’s largest city — a feat that would essentially win the war. Last week, Moscow unilaterally declared that it was creating four evacuation corridors out of rebel-held districts and invited the 300,000 civilians and armed combatants in them to evacuate. Anyone who remained, the Russians suggested, would be mercilessly targeted. That assault is already underway: Having cut off the last road into the rebel-held area nearly three weeks ago, regime forces have been systematically bombing its remaining hospitals and other medical facilities.

As even State Department spokesmen were obliged to acknowledge, the Russian operation, which the Kremlin cynically described as a humanitarian mission, was little more than a preemptory demand for the opposition’s unconditional surrender that ignored the ongoing U.N.-sponsored political process and violated a Security Council resolution. For their part, the rebels responded with a major offensive to break the Aleppo siege. On Monday, the deadline set by U.N. Resolution 2254 for an agreement on a political transition in Syria, some of the heaviest fighting of the year was underway.

Once again, the Obama administration appears to have been blindsided by Mr. Putin, just as it was when Russia dispatched its forces to Syria in September. On Friday, Mr. Kerry said he had been on the phone to Moscow seeking clarification about the Aleppo move, which he said posed the “risk, if it is a ruse, of completely breaking apart the level of cooperation.” By Monday, he had no answers. “These are important days to determine whether or not Russia and the Assad regime are going to live up to the U.N.,” he said, adding, “the evidence thus far is very, very troubling.”

Unfortunately, Mr. Putin has no reason to respect such warnings from Mr. Kerry. Time and again, the secretary has declared that Russia must deliver or suffer consequences, such as a U.S. “Plan B” for Syria. Each time, Moscow has disregarded the jawboning — and Mr. Kerry has responded not with consequences but with new appeals for cooperation and more U.S. concessions. On Monday, he said, “We will see in the course of the next hours, few days, whether or not that dynamic” with Russia “can be changed.” But then, he spoke nearly the same words six months ago.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/stop-trusting-putin-on-syria/2016/08/02/4908146e-58c3-11e6-9aee-8075993d73a2_story.html?hpid=hp_no-name_opinion-card-b%3Ahomepage%2Fstory

 

 

US air raids in Libya: Who really benefits?




Hafsa Kara-Mustapha is a journalist, political analyst and commentator with a special focus on the Middle East and Africa. She has worked for the FT group and Reuters and her work has been published in the Middle East magazine, Jane's Foreign report, El Watan and a host of international publications. A regular pundit on TV and radio, Hafsa can regularly be seen on RT and Press TV.

Published time: 2 Aug, 2016 11:16

Last month protests erupted in Libya over French military operations conducted inside the country without local authorities' consent. On Monday, Libyan officials said with much fanfare and pride the US had started bombing Sirte.

The coastal Libyan city - Gaddafi's hometown - turned into an IS stronghold following his forceful removal in 2011.

What a mess Libya truly is in. Its corrupt leadership, placed at the helm of the country on the back of a brutal NATO onslaught that transformed the formerly stable country into one of the most troubled spots in Africa, is now welcoming bombing raids on the destroyed town.

While the aim of the operation is hard to predict since IS fighters have dispersed, the raid does come at an interesting time. 

Since Gaddafi's ousting and the country's rapid descent into chaos and lawlessness, many Libyans have been eager to see a return of the old guard, known as the 'Green' Libyans in reference to the slain leader's manifesto and flag during the years of the people's republic or 'Jamahiriya'.

The return of the Greens to the political fore has been troublesome for those Libyans who are in power thanks to NATO and who have since been busy emptying the country’s coffers.

As the former leadership crumbled under the weight of a six month-long bombing campaign, banks and state-owned companies were raided by new Western approved officials brought in to take over.  In those dying days of the Gaddafi era, they endeavored to rid the country of its vast wealth, channeling much of it to foreign accounts where monies are still held today.

US launches air strikes on ISIS targets in Libya https://t.co/rE3jp0ktd3pic.twitter.com/HwX4vZPyGg

— RT (@RT_com) August 2, 2016

As Libyans demand a return of the previous leadership, the new order is nervous. No doubt a return of the Greens would lead to a purge in the government ranks of all those who collaborated with the Western-led coalition that transformed Libya into rubble and turned many of its cities into IS-held towns.

A return to the previous order would also indicate that what was hailed as a “revolution to remove a brutal tyrant” was a propaganda operation solely aimed at regime change and a chance for Western capitals to rid the African country of much of its precious commodities, namely oil.

Gaddafi's son, Saif, in captivity in Zintan for over five years, and said to have been released in April, is being touted for a prominent role in Libya's future after it was revealed his captors would pardon him after he was sentenced to death by a court in Tripoli.

The message aimed at the international community is clear: Libyans want to see a return of the Greens to power.

The presence of the French army in Libya, only revealed after three of its soldiers were killed, coupled with the bombing raid in Sirte, indicates however that the UN-backed authorities are looking to thwart efforts to see a return of Gaddafi's supporters at the helm.

There is little apparent point to the bombing raid, insists Libyan academic Mabruk Derbesh. “These bombs are redundant as ISIS has almost been defeated in that area,” he added.

Other sources in Libya insist this raid is designed to add to the ambient chaos and plunge the country further into internecine conflict.  “Isn't it strange that every time we appear to see a glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel, Western countries come and bomb us back into it?

Western intervention or escalation

The sentiment for many Libyans is that a Western military presence can only exacerbate existing tensions.  As the situation worsened, many Libyans realized the only way out would be to concentrate efforts in a common policy to root out terrorist forces coming from the outside and rallying behind one consensual leadership. The first proved popular; the second however more problematic, yet with the emergence of the Greens once again as a formidable force, many previously hostile to the old order, have been coming round, seeing it as the only credible alternative.

These attacks on Sirte will only slow down the process and derail an already fragile road map to national unity. But who benefits from a rudderless Libya?

Read more




Gaddafi’s Ghosts: Return of the Libyan Jamahiriya

The UN-approved leadership supports these blind raids that will no doubt kill and maim many on the ground leading to an inevitable inflation in IS ranks as a result.

The social collapse has already transformed the country into a safe haven for both IS terrorists and human traffickers who've doubled their efforts in the summer months to push for more sub Saharan migration into Europe.

A bombing raid on coastal towns can only push more to flee the already war-torn and unstable country.

In this ongoing turmoil, French and American armies can continue to operate concerned little by what the central government will do or say.

Only a strong authority can oppose what are clear violations of Libyan sovereignty, however with a collaborationist government with no credibility at the helm and an almost total absence of order on the ground, foreign armies can continue to operate as they see fit.

It's worth noting that the first decisions once on Libyan soil for US and British forces was to secure the oil refineries.  That the rest of the country was being ripped apart as warring militias continued to fight over the spoils was secondary; the priority was to safeguard ongoing oil output.

For Libyans there is therefore little advantage to these air raids. The current leadership clearly has no power to oppose them and has therefore agreed to go along with what appears to be an operation to re-enforce a Western presence in Libya, a country sandwiched between the Arab world's most populous nation Egypt and Africa's largest country and one of its most oil and gas wealthy: Algeria.

All in all, these operations offer advantages to Western powers while giving nothing in return to Libya which will bear the brunt of its consequences.

According to academic Derbesh, President Obama is fulfilling his Democratic Party's obligation to strengthen Hillary Clinton's campaign. “After all, Clinton was the one who convinced Obama to go along and champion the war on Libya through visits to France and England. Libya's case will come up during the election, so this is one way to combat any negative campaigning using Libya, which appears to be Clinton’s weakest link as secretary of state, considering Syria's war has the support of both parties, and so can't be used against her by her Republican opponent.”

Whichever way this latest military operation into an Arab country is viewed, it's likely to lead to a rising death toll conveniently dismissed as IS terrorists while no doubt aiding American politicians in their race to the White House.

As is customary that race will be paved with the corpses of Arabs and Africans. A few more dead in ravaged Libya will hardly make a difference to Western audiences.

As for Libyans, the price tag of their alliance with NATO continues to rise, though the currency in use continues to lose value.

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

 

Actually, one could contemplate that the "game" for the Americans is to let the Russians win the war in Syria and then the Americans would tell their "friends" the Saudis, that they had done everything possible without escalating the conflict to a full on WORLD WAR... La Clinton, suported by the corporate democrats and the neocons, is in favour of escalation, because the US would have egg on its face for having mucked up and being shown to have mucked up... This would be pretext enough for La Clinton to declare war on anything that moves away from the Yankee clutches. May she see reason not to.

 

chlorine gas from rebels supported by US...

 


Washington dodged questions about a chemical attack in Syria, which the Russian military has blamed on US-backed militants, refusing to clarify whether the “incident” if confirmed would disqualify the group from being considered “moderate.”

Shells suspected to have contained chlorine gas were fired into the Salahuddin residential district in eastern Aleppo on Tuesday night, the Russian Defense Ministry said Wednesday, identifying the perpetrators as “militants from the Harakat Nour al-Din al-Zenki group, considered by Washington as ‘moderate opposition’.”

US-backed Syrian rebels responsible for toxic gas attack in Aleppo – Russian military

Al-Zenki has been identified as one of the groups that received TOW anti-tank missiles from the US.

Based in Aleppo, the group made headlines last month, after two videos emerged online showing what appear to be its members taunting and then decapitating the 12-year-old Abdullah Issa, a Palestinian boy.

Asked if the beheading and the chemical weapons use disqualified Al-Zenki from further US support, State Department spokesman Mark Toner dodged the question.

“We condemn strongly the use of any chemical weapons and any credible allegations of their use in Syria we’ll investigate,” he told RT’s Caleb Maupin at the press briefing Wednesday.

Regarding the investigation into the beheading, Toner said that the US was still “looking into that incident.”

“I know that the group itself said that they’d also made some arrests and set up a commission of inquiry into the incident,” he added.

read more: https://www.rt.com/usa/354540-state-department-syria-chemical/

 

 

It has to be said that Chlorine gas is easy to manufacture but a bit more difficult to capture and store in a shell. Not impossible for amateurs. Of course the first people to blame were the Syrian government but it was not...

 

still a mess and will be a mess for a long time...


Six years after a wave of violent and non-violent protests dubbed the Arab Spring engulfed the Middle East and North Africa, Libya, which once found itself in the middle of this revolutionary tide, still struggles with chaos and violence.

The North African country is divided between two major forces - a Tobruk-based parliament and the UN-backed unity government in Tripoli (GNA)– and is being further ripped apart by numerous militant groups, including Islamic State (IS, former ISIS/ISIL) and other extremist groups vying for control of the war-torn country.

read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/377750-arab-spring-anniversary-lybia/

see also: 

too much of counting on other countries to then stabilize and help support government formation...

thank god (or thor or volos) for the ruslkies...

 

Therefore, as of today, there’s no territory controlled by ISIS in Syria,” he added. Gerasimov made the announcement during an annual briefing for foreign military attachés.

After being briefed on the successful military operation on both banks of the Euphrates River in Syria by Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu, President Vladimir Putin said that the political process and organization of the Syrian people’s congress in Sochi, agreed upon by Russia, Iran, and Turkey last month, must now become the focus. Among other goals, Putin named the drafting of a new constitution, and, eventually, parliamentary and presidential elections.

“Naturally, there might be some spots of resistance, but the military work has been largely completed in the area and at the time. Completed with a full victory, I repeat, with a victory and defeat of the terrorists,”Russian leader said.

The peace process, however, will be “a very big and lengthy job,” Putin cautioned. For this to happen though, the bloodshed in Syria must stop completely, he said. Securing the recent achievements and reinforcing the fragile de-escalation zones should be the first steps to that end, Russia’s president added.

Russia began providing support to Syria following an official request from Damascus in 2015 to prevent the terrorists from overrunning the country completely. Russia’s help allowed the Syrian Arab Army to turn the tide and liberate large areas of the country previously occupied by the jihadists. Smashing the blockade of Deir ez-Zor, an IS stronghold in eastern Syria, represented a turning point in this year’s campaign against the terrorists, ultimately leading to their demise.

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/412149-syria-liberated-isis-terrorists/

 

Are the USA going to breathe life again in a Sunni revolt in Syria?  Watch this space...