It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

 War Hawks Are Sensing an Opening in Syria

page: 1
10

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:21 PM
link   

With the breakdown in bilateral talks between the US and Russia, the war hawks sense an opportunity—and they have wasted no time in spinning a narrative which paints increased US intervention in benign—to say nothing of deeply dishonest, terms.

The pro-interventionist, pro-war arguments rely on euphemism to advance their arguments to an usual extent, habitually (and no doubt willfully) ignoring recent history, deriding what they see as “hypothetical” risks in favor of “doing something.”

Middle East Institute Senior Fellow Charles Lister observed (via Twitter) that “#Russia has *nothing* that could concretely prevent US military action in #Syria. S-400 & SA-23 = entirely suppressible.”
SOURCE


I realize that the article linked above was probably completed before the news revealed in the article linked directly below, but I'm getting the impression that at least some of the U.S. leadership is out of touch with reality.

Russia’s Defense Ministry warns US-led coalition not to strike Syrian army

Was Russia correct in calling some of the U.S. government "schizophrenics"? Someone on this forum claimed that just reporting that opinion was "anti-West", but I think we need to look seriously at whether the allegation is true.


Russia has warned citizens that a nuclear war with the West could be imminent - sparked by clashes in the Middle East.

Zvezda, a nationwide TV service run by the country’s Ministry of Defence, said last week, ‘Schizophrenics from America are sharpening nuclear weapons for Moscow.’
SOURCE


When reading the article linked to at the top of this post, please ask yourself one question...

What if the "cooler heads" are out of their minds this time?




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:33 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion




Was Russia correct in calling some of the U.S. government "schizophrenics"? Someone on this forum claimed that just reporting that opinion was "anti-West", but I think we need to look seriously at whether the allegation is true. 


Schizophrenics? No. That would imply that they are not cognizant of their own actions. These people know exactly what they're doing. "Sociopaths" would be a more fitting term for the people running this show.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Our American military needs to have a continuing purpose-they have been downsized and the threat of continuing downsizing is their biggest fear hence "let's make it look like Russia is trying to start a war." We citizens never get the truth-especially when reported by the media. Its all a game.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   
There are way too many sites talking about a nuclear war with Russia, in the last week or so, for comfort.

I personally am not drawing the connection, what's going on in Syria doesn't seem, I don't know, important enough to start a major war, but the fact that so many other people are seeing this is bothersome.




posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: tigertatzen
a reply to: Profusion




Was Russia correct in calling some of the U.S. government "schizophrenics"? Someone on this forum claimed that just reporting that opinion was "anti-West", but I think we need to look seriously at whether the allegation is true. 


Schizophrenics? No. That would imply that they are not cognizant of their own actions. These people know exactly what they're doing. "Sociopaths" would be a more fitting term for the people running this show.


These people know exactly what they're doing.

You're stating an assumption as a fact. What's your evidence for making that claim?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 07:50 PM
link   
I knew a guy in the military who got released because our military is downsizing. They are looking to cut the redundant people and work with more specialized units.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 08:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I think that there is a disconnect in the powers in the west .Most if not all are willing to go along with the dictates of Washington but not all are sure that DC is getting it correct .Easy for the US to war against Russia but it needs the EU as a battle ground and not the Arctic . The EU members know full well that this is not a WW2 scenario and the bombs are much much bigger . They also know that Russia can and will use counter strikes . They also know that China is the other side of the axis of evil behind Russia . I think it may boil down to the EU telling DC to take a hike and shut up .

imo :>)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

First of all, great job Profusion highlighting this potentially catastrophic period by your many posts on the subject.

What’s really scary is the utter silence of the western msm about these turn of events in the ME.

Of course the clown show election and now the hurricane in the South ( funny we seem to have huge hurricanes every presidential election lately, last time was Sandy in NJ) appears to be a perfect excuse for the msm to ignore these historical and dangerous events in the ME as America courts a World War III possibility while the US media fiddles with nonsense. The hurricane is of course not nonsense but the usual crap in the news: Kardasians and the elections are nonsense.


Of course much of the news is so manipulated to hide things like the events in Syria I’m sure



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 08:54 PM
link   
People who want to diminish the actions in Syria in relation to a third world war might be well served to examine how WWI started. Over Serbia!

One major power that was an ally of Serbia jumped on the major power that wanted to beat up Serbia. That’s how it starts. Then coalitions have to be met and all of a sudden a relatively minor incident or major single incident can proliferate into a World War very easily.

www.theweek.co.uk...

How and why did the First World War start?



The simplest answer is that the immediate cause was the assassination of Franz Ferdinand, the archduke of Austria-Hungary. His death at the hands of Gavrilo Princip – a Serbian nationalist with ties to the secretive military group known as the Black Hand – propelled the major European military powers towards war.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 09:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I find it humorous and sad that the article targets Republicans when its a Democratic administration taking these actions.



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Willtell

Does anyone think the timing of Iran warning the United States in the way the article linked directly below describes was a coincidence in relation to what's happening in Syria?


The founder of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps warned that if America tries anything against the Islamic Republic, the regime is capable of deploying nine million troops to fight U.S. forces in a matter of days.

In a speech delivered last month in Tehran and translated this week by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Mohsen Rafighdoost, who was minister of the IRGC during the 1980s and the Iran-Iraq War, added that IRGC ground forces are “five times better” than the U.S. Army.
We Can Mobilize Nine Million Fighters Against U.S.


China is on the side of Russia/Syria.

Chinese forces are secretly helping Assad’s regime in war ravaged Syria – risking conflict with American troops, experts claim

Those stories fit with Paul Craig Roberts' analysis of why Syria is so important to Russia and the U.S. (quoting from the video below starting at about 18:30):

"And so Washington's policy is to remove secular leaders so that the whole Middle East goes into chaos of sectarian conflict, the Shia and the Sunnis. And if the whole Middle East is in sectarian conflict, there's nobody to get in Israel's way. And this conflict, this jihadism can be spread into Iran, and the same thing achieved there. And then it can be spread into the Muslim areas of the Russian Federation and into the Muslim province of China, the province that borders Kyrgyzstan. And so this is Washington's policy for destabilizing Iran, Russia, and China."

The simple reasons WW3 over Syria makes sense


www.youtube.com...
edit on 6-10-2016 by Profusion because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
The best thing we can do for syria is get the hell out!

Onama and hillary have made a mess of the ME.

No more us sponsored war in the ME!
edit on 6/10/2016 by shooterbrody because: Poor spelling



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

So is Iran going to invade Iraq in order to get to Syria or will they attack US interests in the gulf, sparking a war not only with the US but other Me countries?



posted on Oct, 6 2016 @ 10:03 PM
link   
a reply to: Profusion

I OP’d a thread of a similar theory. www.abovetopsecret.com...

That the US wants a jihadi force big enough to be able to have a big war of civilizations.

Just ISIS or Al Qaeda isn’t enough, they need a nutty Sunni jihadi state.

It doesn’t have to be a permanent one just one to spark the big war

Syria is or was the chosen one.

They mutilated Iraq and Libya and are trying to this time actually carve a nutty Sunni jihadi state out of Syria then they can swoop in with a real force to save the day.

It almost worked with ISIS but it didn’t because ISIS was too out of control, but Obama was playing along so the events could have coalesced with the advent of the Hillary administration when the big war could have been started.

Then all of a sudden Russia intervened and all their plans have come to naught

It could still happen but its kind of too sloppy now. Too out of sync...The precision is broken. The timing of the operation is off.

That's why their so pissed at Russia right now. Russia messed up their game.







edit on 6-10-2016 by Willtell because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 01:12 AM
link   
A few months ago this would have been a top thread, unfortunately it lacks partisanship so it must be boring to the election circle jerk.



posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 01:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: CriticalStinker
A few months ago this would have been a top thread, unfortunately it lacks partisanship so it must be boring to the election circle jerk.


There is partisanship involved as we see in the article. Republicans don't agree with the foreign policy direction of this President. The general consensus is he is weak and his inaction have created the very situation we are now seeing. Congressional war-hawks can rant and rave all they want and they could even issue a declaration of war on Syria but since Congress is nowhere near the military chain of command they couldn't direct the military to the bathroom, let alone ordering them into combat.

The other issue is why now? Why after all these years and only a month before the presidential elections is Obama all of a sudden considering these actions?

What changed?

On the conspiracy theory side its entirely possible Obama is only going through these motions to try and get Clinton off the front pages of the media outlets. It also allows the administration and Clinton campaign to hit Trump on his bromance with Putin.

The prospect of military engagement with Russia and Obama discussing a situation where his actions would create an armed conflict with Russia can make government corruption and candidates ineptitude pushed to the lifestyle section.

Just a thought.
edit on 7-10-2016 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 7 2016 @ 01:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Very good thought indeed.

Whatever the endgame I assure everyone our best interests are not being sought. Just house of cards BS for the gain of a few.

Sad times we live in.



new topics

top topics



 
10

log in

join