In the view of Paul Craig Roberts, “World War III has already begun,” we just haven’t moved into the hot stage yet. Hard to say whether Roberts is correct, and perhaps it’s mostly a matter of subjectivity, but of course there are always signs of concern. In fact, we’re seeing them on practically a daily basis.
China has just refused permission for a US aircraft carrier to enter Hong Kong, while Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has again expressed concerns over US efforts to establish military bases on its borders–this time in comments to a Swedish newspaper, where efforts are underway to bring Sweden into NATO.
There have also been reports in the past couple of days of Russia intercepting a US spy plane in the far east, near the Kamchatka Peninsula.
And then, of course, there is Syria, where terrorists presumably backed by Turkey have been raining death and destruction down upon the city of Aleppo. In the video above we see an Aleppo resident who a month ago lost his two sons as well as his hand and forearm to terrorist shelling of his neighborhood. As Eva Bartlett writes:
Two days ago, a friend in Aleppo messaged me: “Aleppo is burning. Numerous shells.”
He was not referring to the lies found in corporate media on Aleppo, but instead to the unreported reality: foreign-backed terrorists have continued mortaring, rocketing, hell-cannoning Aleppo’s residential areas.
In the past few days, Senator Richard Black has been visiting Syria. Black is not a US senator, he is only a state senator in Virginia, but he is one of the few American politicians willing to speak the truth about Syria. In the video below he states it very succinctly when he says, “There are no moderate rebels, there are simply terrorists.” He also makes some interesting comments about the Syrian elections as well as the Syrian Constitution–information you certainly will never hear in the mainstream media.
Like most decent Americans, Black is appalled–not only by what is taking place in Syria but by the responsibility our own government bears for it. You can go here to read more about Black’s visit to Syria, including additional videos as well as a gallery of photos.
I have said this before, but perhaps it can’t be repeated often enough: the conflict in Syria is not a “civil war.” It is a foreign invasion using terrorist mercenaries, in many cases trained and equipped by the US, as proxies. And now we are seeing additional US troops, special operations forces, being sent into Syria as well, this despite Obama’s earlier promise of “no boots on the ground.”
Of course, it isn’t only the US that has inserted its stick into the spokes. Israel has been yammering for the overthrow of Syria’s president for a while now. And there is abundant evidence ( here, here, here, here, here, and here, for example) that the Zionist state has been among the supporters of the terrorist invasion of Syria. Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon even said he would “prefer” ISIS to Iran.
All of this should be kept in mind in trying to evaluate the confused policies of the US government, and particularly the fickle John Kirby’s befuddled discombobulations in the video above. As the RT reporter comments, “The way many people see it when they hear these confusing statements is that the Obama administration does not want to admit that it changed its strategy in Syria.” Perhaps what it comes down to is that the Obama administration has changed its strategy in Syria because it has been ordered to do so.
In Syria, US Rejects Russia Call to Name al-Qaeda Allies ‘Terroris’
By Daniel McAdams
Originally Appeared at Ron Paul Institute
The total muddle that is US policy toward Syria continues to astonish. This week we saw the spectacle of a State Department Spokesman telling us that President Obama’s promise to not put US boots on the ground in Syria, was never a promise not to put boots on the ground in Syria. Yes, it was funny to see him squirm, but there is nothing funny about the past five years of disastrous policy in Syria. Particularly considering the thousands killed once the US decided that “Assad must go” and began sending in fighters to make that happen.
Now we see the extraordinary situation where the US government admits that the militia groups Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham are fighting alongside and are “intermingled with” al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front, but resoundingly rejects the Russian request to therefore classify these two groups terrorist.
In fact, not only does fighting alongside and “intermingling with” al-Qaeda not get a group classified “terrorist,” the US government is actually asking Russia and the Syrian government to stop shooting at such groups!
Here’s State Department Spokesman Mark Toner making the request:
So the State Department is urging the Syrians and Russians to stop bombing Aleppo because Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham are operating there, even though it also admits that the groups are “intermingling” with al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front.
But it gets even more bizarre, as Pentagon Spokesman Col. Steve Warren said last week in a press briefing that “it’s primarily al-Nusra who holds Aleppo.”
Why does the State Department urge a cessation of hostilities against the forces holding Aleppo while the Pentagon tells us that it is primarily al-Qaeda’s Nusra Front that is in charge of Aleppo?
Do either of them know what’s going on there?
State Department Spokesman John Kirby tries to explain it away by telling us that because Jaish al-Islam and Ahrar al-Sham are also present (intermingling with Nusra Front — “because they want to be near one another”), there should be no Russian or Syrian attack on Aleppo.
But in a February 22 press briefing, State Department Spokesman Mark Toner explicitly stated that groups who fight alongside al-Nusra Front or other terrorist groups in Syria would be legitimate military targets!
Asked whether the groups fighting alongside al-Nusra in Syria should be considered military targets, Toner made it clear that such actions opened them up to being targeted:
Again, that’s for them to – frankly, to resolve. I mean, if they’re going to be – I mean, they cannot – we have been very clear that – we, the ISSG, have been very clear in saying that al-Nusrah and Daesh are not part of any kind of ceasefire or any kind of negotiated cessation of hostilities. So if you hang out with the wrong folks, then you make that decision.
Is this all coming through clearly? Doesn’t it feel like they are making it up as they go?