Voices from Russia

Sunday, 1 October 2017

1 October 2017. This is Syria’s Response to Warmongering America

******

******

________________________

Syria is winning the war against American-backed terrorists, with the aid of its allies (Russia, Iran, and Hizbullah). This angers the Anglo toddlers to no end. They’re exceptional! They’re unique! They’re all-powerful! Well… Syria proved all of that to be unhinged bullshit. Far from succumbing to American pressures, the Syrian people came together to resist terror… which almost always comes with the label “Made in the USA”. The USA is destroying its bases in Syria in an attempt to erase their blame for this war. It won’t work. Everyone sees “Made in the USA” and “Made in Israel” on this conflict.

Syria responded to the USA. It withstood the test and trial. God bless Syria… God bless the Syrian people, of all faiths and nationalities… God bless Dr Bashar al-Assad, who stood tall when he had to. May we all do as well when a crisis comes…

BMD

Advertisements

Tuesday, 18 April 2017

Lavrov sez US Aggression in Syria Hampers Search for Peaceful Solutions

____________________________________

On Monday, Minister of Foreign Affairs S V Lavrov said after talks with his Senegalese counterpart Mankeur Ndiaye:

We again stated the need to consolidate efforts of the entire international community in the fight against this universal evil, as President Putin said some 18 months ago addressing the UN General Assembly. We should carry out all steps based on international law and the UN Charter. In this context, we discussed the illegal and aggressive steps of US aviation when they carried out strikes on an airbase in Syria, which only exacerbated the situation and hindered, maybe on purpose, the search for a political settlement.

On April 7, the US military fired 59 Tomahawk cruise missiles from warships in the Mediterranean Sea on al-Shayrat Airbase located in Syria’s Homs Governate. Reportedly, the US attack on Syrian government forces came in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons in Syria’s Idlib Governate on 4 April. According to Minoborony data, Syrian warplanes carried out airstrikes on 4 April that hit workshops where terrorists were producing chemical munitions supplied to Iraq and used in Aleppo. However, Washington concluded that Damascus used chemical weapons.

Russia Demands Explanation on OPCW Investigation

Lavrov said:

Moscow will demand an explanation on the investigation into the alleged chemical weapons attack in Syria conducted by the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW). Recently, British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson put the blame on the Syrian government, as well as on Russia and Iran who support Damascus, but failed to provide any evidence, only saying that British experts already studied the samples collected on the scene and came to the conclusion that sarin or some similar substances had been used. It’s an interesting coincidence that the British representatives heading the fact-finding mission didn’t say anything to anyone but British experts were able to study the samples. Today, we’ll file a request demanding an explanation on what’s going on. I expect that there’ll be an answer. The situation isn’t easy, but let’s hope that the majority of countries understand what’s happening. We won’t allow anyone to disrupt efforts aimed at settling the Syrian crisis based on a UN Security Council Resolution.

“We’re Convinced that the Pace Shouldn’t be Lost”

Lavrov stated:

As for the upcoming meeting on Syria in Geneva, we plan it for a period after 3-4 May, that is, after a new round of talks in Astana. We hope that UN Special Envoy for Syria Staffan de Mistura would find an appropriate date because some hints say that the holy month of Ramadan is beginning in late May, and perhaps it’d be appropriate to wait until it is over. We’re convinced that the pace shouldn’t be lost, especially in a situation when the political process is endangered. I mean, the strike against the al-Shayrat aerodrome and the desire of many actors both inside Syria and from amongst the external opposition to exploit this situation to switch the blame fully to the Assad régime and take up a course of a departure from a political settlement to unilateral actions to overthrow the Syrian government.

17 April 2017

TASS

http://tass.com/politics/941697

The Astounding Hubris, Incoherence, and Dysfunction of the Trump Administration

Note well that Trump lied about the Syrian strike. What else is he lying about? He had better not break out the bubbly, yet…

____________________________________

In decades to come, historians will identify this past week as one of the most seminal in postwar history, placing particular emphasis when they do on the actions of one of the most unstable, unpredictable, and capricious presidents ever to occupy the White House. Prior to his election, those who allowed themselves to believe that Trump’s lack of political experience and ideologically driven worldview were strengths that’d go a long way to giving birth to the multipolar world that’s long overdue, those people have reason to be nursing a sense of crushing disappointment over the political disaster that is currently unfolding, one that may well translate into a military disaster if allowed to continue on its current trajectory.

Indeed, it’s hard at this stage to avoid the feeling that Trump and his administration are actually itching for a military confrontation with Russia. Like a child discovering matches for the first time, the 45th president appears a leader who after ordering a missile strike for the first time can’t wait to order more. It’s a feeling reinforced by the meeting between US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, which sadly wasn’t the success a planet desperate for peace and stability was hoping for. Despite the cordial tone and atmosphere surrounding the talks, they ended with no resolution and no serious moves towards de-escalation.

The Trump administration continues to assert that its intelligence leaves no room for doubt when it comes to the allegation that President Assad authorised a sarin gas attack on civilians in Syria’s opposition-held Idlib Governate. Assad denies the allegation, and Russia supports this denial while calling for an independent UN-led investigation in order to ascertain the facts. So far, Washington refused to countenance such an investigation, while at the same time failing to produce the intelligence or evidence it claims to possess in support of its allegations. Even without factoring in the cooked-up and falsified intelligence used to unleash hell on Iraq in 2003, a conflict the after-effects of which lie at the root of the current crisis… and even without factoring in the destruction of Libya in 2011, driven by the same régime change fanaticism… the stance of the Trump administration is both unconscionable and contemptuous in its arrogance. It begs the question of what the US Government is afraid of when it comes to an independent investigation? Why the refusal to reveal its evidence and the intelligence that points to Syrian government responsibility for this alleged attack?

The most optimistic analysis we can make at this point is that Trump believes he can wheel and deal in the political arena as he has throughout his years in the business arena. However, the consequences of having his bluff called in the game he’s playing now, as opposed to the game he cut his teeth in, are of an entirely different dimension. The game his administration is playing now carries with it the strong possibility of unleashing catastrophic consequences. Thus far, they’ve dismissed the growing number of voices within the USA that question the conclusions being peddled by the White House over this alleged Syrian chemical weapons attack as the product of conspiracy theory and pro-Assad propaganda. On the other hand, one can’t so easily ignore the latest intervention by MIT professor Theodore Postol. Professor Postol, whose exhaustive rebuttal of the case against the Syrian government over the alleged sarin attack of 2013 should be required reading for anyone interested in drawing fact-based conclusions rather than those rooted in ideology, raised his voice again, this time challenging the intelligence behind these allegations and the intelligence used to support them.

Despite the lack of UN authorisation or congressional approval for the strike launched by Trump against Syria, the mainstream media in the USA, almost to a newspaper and network, lined up behind their President with their by now customary Pavlovian cheerleading for war and régime change. Their ranks have swelled by what one can best describe as a left-wing of US imperialism in the form of a hodgepodge of soi-disant socialists and progressives, whose metamorphosis into the most passionate of régime change fanatics and cranks has been stunning to behold.

Moscow, nobody should need to be reminded, won’t accept its implied status of Carthage to Washington’s Rome, with the cards Trump has dealt Russia this past week those of a leader who has made the mistake of allowing himself become dizzy with the questionable success of one limited military action. Yet, regardless, overnight, this missile strike transported Trump from bête noire of the neocon establishment to its Man of the Hour. This is despite the fact that the incoherence and mixed messages that ensued during the course of this crisis from Rex Tillerson, Nikki Haley, and Trump’s woefully under-qualified press secretary, Sean Spicer, reveals a level of dysfunction commonly associated with satire rather than the serious business of government.

The result is that Washington is currently a lumbering giant staggering blindly towards the edge of a cliff with no sign of stopping. This is why it’s such a pity that we have in the White House a President who takes pride in never reading books. For if he did, and if he took the time to dip into the works of Napoleon Bonaparte, he might learn something. For instance:

We mustn’t allow international incidents to shape foreign policy; foreign policy must shape the incidents.

Napoleon, it should be borne in mind, was a leader who also made the fatal mistake of allowing hubris to cloud his judgement.

14 April 2017

John Wight

Sputnik International

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/201704131052609162-trump-administration-russia-syria/

Busted! US Mainstream Media Ends Up Supporting Daesh in Syria

__________________________________________

A recent New York Times’ opinion editorial went even so far as to suggest that Washington should treat Daesh in Syria “the same way” the USA “encouraged the mujahideen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan”. Believe it or not, after unfounded accusations of chemical weapons’ use in Khan Sheikhoun by Bashar al-Assad the US mainstream media ended up supporting Daesh (ISIS/ISIL) in Syria. On April 12, the New York Times published an op-ed piece by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Thomas Friedman entitled “Why Is Trump Fighting ISIS in Syria?” He asked:

Why should our goal right now be to defeat the Islamic State [Daesh] in Syria?

As if Daesh hadn’t conducted a series of genocidal terror attacks in the Middle East and beyond, Friedman argued:

The real goal of the terrorist group is to defeat Bashar al-Assad’s régime in Syria… plus its Russian, Iranian, and Hizbullah allies… and to defeat the pro-Iranian Shiite regime in Iraq.

However, back in February 2017, CNN highlighted that since declaring its “caliphate” in June 2014, Daesh had already gone global, conducting and inspiring 143 attacks in 29 countries around the world. At least eight of the assaults were on American soil by attackers who pledged allegiance to the terrorist group. It appears that didn’t embarrass Friedman:

We could simply back off fighting territorial ISIS [Daesh] in Syria and make it entirely a problem for Iran, Russia, Hizbullah, and Assad. After all, they’re the ones overextended in Syria, not us.

Guided by this flawed logic he continued:

Trump should want to defeat ISIS in Iraq… but in Syria? Not for free, not now. In Syria, Trump should let ISIS [Daesh] be Assad’s, Iran’s, Hizbullah’s and Russia’s headache… the same way we encouraged the mujahideen fighters to bleed Russia in Afghanistan.

As usual, the devil is in the details. It’s no secret that the game-changer of the US Operation Cyclone aimed at supporting Afghani jihadi warriors from 1979 to 1989, was providing them with FIM-92 Stingers… portable lightweight anti-aircraft defence systems. Did we mishear? Did Friedman actually mean arming Daesh militants by saying “the same way”? Let’s not forget that the USA’s covert operation in Afghanistan resulted in the emergence of the terrorist Taliban. Seth Frantzman, a Jerusalem-based political commentator, busted Friedman’s arguments on his blog:

What evidence is there that ISIS [Daesh] spent its main resources fighting Assad? The terrorist organisation spent most of its resources fighting the Kurds in Syria and persecuting minorities, blowing up religious shrines and historical sites, and committing crimes against humanity. Has everyone forgotten that Daesh beheaded James Foley and Steven Sotloff, burned people to death, and murdered 1,700 people at Camp Speicher in Iraq? It’s hard to believe this appeared in a major mainstream newspaper; it’s even harder to believe it appeared in the New York Times. Of all the groups in the world to argue for letting it be someone else’s problem, why should ISIS, after its years of genocidal crimes, be let off the hook? Suggesting that it should be allowed to “be” in order to make Syria, Iran, Hizbullah, and Russia “bleed” isn’t merely cynical but tantamount to saying that the USA should have reduced pressure on the Nazis to keep the Soviets bleeding.

To add to the embarrassment, the recent US missile strike on Shayrat Airbase, used by the Syrian forces to launch attacks against Daesh and al-Nusra Front, de facto played into the terrorist groups’ hands. Kremlin spokesman D S Peskov commented:

The fact is that we no longer know what goals Washington pursued when deciding to carry out these strikes, but it is unequivocal that they launched them de facto in the interests of Daesh, al-Nusra Front, and other terrorists. In this connection, we can only express regret.

The question then arises whether the US Establishment’s obsession with toppling Bashar al-Assad will finally eclipse common sense and distract Washington right off the road.

17 April 2017

Sputnik International

https://sputniknews.com/politics/201704131052613111-us-syria-daesh/

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com.