How the Pentagon sank the US-Russia deal in Syria – and the Ceasefire

Was the first ever US strike against Syrian government forces an intentional hit by the Pentagon to block military cooperation with Russia?

The Russians had a powerful incentive to ensure that the ceasefire would hold, especially around Aleppo.

In the new ceasefire agreement, US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov had negotiated an unusually detailed set of requirements for both sides to withdraw their forces from the Castello Road, the main artery for entry into Aleppo from the north.

It was understood that the “demilitarization” north of Aleppo was aimed at allowing humanitarian aid to reach the city and was, therefore, the central political focus of the ceasefire.

That crucial shift in US diplomatic position was a direct result of the aggressive opposition of the Pentagon to Obama’s intention to enter into military cooperation with Russia in Syria.

The Pentagon was motivated by an overriding interest in heading off such high-profile US-Russian cooperation at a time when it is pushing for much greater US military efforts to counter what it portrays as Russian aggression in a new Cold War.

Source: How the Pentagon sank the US-Russia deal in Syria – and the ceasefire | Middle East Eye

Audio recording shows collaboration between U.S. and ISIS

An audio recording showing cooperation between the US and ISIS during the attack on Syrian troops on Deir Ezzor would be no surprise to those who follow the Syrian conflict closely, but it might profoundly shock the Western public.

Because ISIS’s brand recognition as purveyors of death, horror and barbarism has outshone that of Al-Qaeda and its myriad of constantly name-changing affiliates, it has been easier to fool some into thinking that ISIS are worse than their fellow travelers who have less name recognition.

This however is a big myth. All of the terrorists operating in Syria are dangerous to the same degree: they share beliefs, methods, goals and are so fluid that they have the overall effect of melding into one another.

This is well known to anyone familiar with the facts of the matter in Syria, anyone who knows about the leftist opposition in the Syrian Parliament, anyone who like the anti-war American organization, New Jersey Peace Action knows that Assad remains popular among the majority of Syrians, anyone who has listened to Russian ministers and officers when they speak to the world, anyone who has listened to Syria’s ambassador to the United Nations.

Source: Audio recording shows collaboration between U.S. and ISIS

Architects of disastrous Iraq War still at large – Neil Clark

Bombs going off in Iraq? Well, it happens all the time – what’s there to see? Let’s all move along shall we?

The neocon war lobby, who, remember, couldn’t stop talking about Iraq in 2002-2003, and telling what a terrible threat the country’s WMDs posed to us, would of course like us to forget the country all together now. They’ve told us lots of times we need to move on from talking about the 2003 invasion and instead focus on more important things – like how we can topple a secular Syrian president who’s fighting the very same terrorists who are bombing Baghdad.

If Sir John does try and tell us that the war was all an honest mistake, he and his panel will be a laughing stock. Whatever Chilcot’s conclusions are, the important thing is that Iraq will be back in the news headlines, and this represents a great opportunity for those of us who opposed the 2003 invasion to ensure that justice is finally done.

It is clear to almost everyone now that we were lied into an illegal war, which not only destroyed an entire country, but which also led directly to the rise of IS and helped bring terrorism to Europe too.

We don’t need Sir John to tell us that Bush and Blair knew there were no WMDs in Iraq. Common sense and logic tells us that the deadly duo would never have invaded if they had genuinely believed the lurid claims contained in the decidedly dodgy dossiers.

Everything we were told by the neocons in the lead-up to war was false. To quote the title of a book by the antiwar British MP Peter Kilfoyle, there were Lies, Damned Lies and Iraq.

Disgustingly, obscenely, and outrageously, some of the most vociferous opponents of the Iraq war – the people who correctly predicted the disasters that would occur if Iraq was invaded – have seen their careers go into reverse because of the stance they took.

To deflect attention away from their crimes, the Iraq war clique- who have clearly read their Orwell – also encourage us to focus on the alleged crimes of Official Enemies. We’re supposed to feel outraged over a non-existent Russian invasion of the Ukraine, while forgetting about the all too real invasion of Iraq and its catastrophic consequences.

Cowardly Establishment friendly leftists, who would not retweet or cite with approval an article published by RT because of fear they’d be excommunicated from the Elite Journos Club, happily engage with unrepentant pro-Iraq war propagandists on social media.

In doing so these western faux-progressives are effectively saying that the deaths of up to 1 million Iraqis don’t matter. They’re sticking a big two fingers up at the people of the global south who have been the victims of neocon wars and destabilization campaigns.

baghdad

Read entire article: Architects of disastrous Iraq War still at large — RT Op-Edge