Islamic State gaining ground in… Afghanistan

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 3,959 other followers

Source Article from https://theuglytruth.wordpress.com/2015/09/26/islamic-state-gaining-ground-in-afghanistan/

The other Al Qaeda: Turkish-Uyghur Terror Inc.

    

It is no longer tenable for the United States and its regional allies in and near the Middle East to claim they are backing “moderate rebels” in the proxy war raging in Syria, Iraq, and parts of Lebanon. There is the Syrian government on one side, and terrorists including Al Qaeda and its various franchises such as the Al Nusra Front and the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS/ISIL) on the other.

If one is not supporting the Syrian government, it is very clear they are supporting Al Qaeda. So obvious is this fact, that the Western press and the corporate-financier think tanks that produce for them their talking points, have begun a campaign to re-brand Al Qaeda as a lesser evil vis-a-vis ISIS. In reality, there is virtually no difference, with the US and its regional allies clearly arming, funding, and supporting both.

The most recent and obscene manifestation of this re-branding was US Army General and former CIA Director David Petraeus’ open calls to use Al Qaeda to “fight” ISIS. In the Daily Beast‘s article, “Petraeus: Use Al Qaeda Fighters to Beat ISIS,” it was reported that:

Members of al Qaeda’s branch in Syria have a surprising advocate in the corridors of American power: retired Army general and former CIA Director David Petraeus.

The former commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has been quietly urging U.S. officials to consider using so-called moderate members of al Qaeda’s Nusra Front to fight ISIS in Syria, four sources familiar with the conversations, including one person who spoke to Petraeus directly, told The Daily Beast.

Within this rhetorical shift we find an admission that there is indeed no “moderate rebel” force to speak of. All that exists, admittedly, are extremists operating under the various banners of Al Qaeda and ISIS.

Revelations of America’s support behind Al Qaeda may not have ever been so overt, but are certainly nothing new. It is admitted that the US and its Saudi allies first created Al Qaeda as a proxy mercenary force to fight the Soviet Union in a proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In 2007, long before the current war in Syria broke out, it was warned by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh in the pages of the New Yorker that under the then Bush administration, support already began to flow to the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria and other extremists groups including Al Qaeda for the purpose of violently undermining the Syrian government in Damascus.

Hersh’s article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” it is explicitly stated:

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

Past and present, it is clear that Al Qaeda was and still is a central instrument of the United States in achieving geopolitical objectives – particularly where Western forces cannot immediately or in any practical sense intervene directly.

But Al Qaeda and its various affiliates are only one faction among many terrorist groups minding the vast interests of American global hegemony. A recent bombing in the heart of Bangkok, capital of Southeast Asia’s nation of Thailand, and ongoing violence in China’s Xinjiang region expose another vast network of US-sponsored terrorism operating in tandem with Al Qaeda and in fact stretching from Asia all the way to frontiers of America’s proxy war with Syria.

Turkish-Uyghur Terror – the Other Al Qaeda

Because it relatively poorly understood and under-reported in comparison to other more notorious terrorist groups, the Turkish-Uyghur terror network is perhaps more dangerous and of greater utility to the United States and its allies presently versus their increasingly exposed Al Qaeda legions.

The genesis of modern Turkish-sponsored terrorism, like Al Qaeda, also originates from the Cold War. Part of the wider stay-behind networks known as “Gladios” created by NATO to allegedly fight Soviet forces in the event of a Soviet invasion and occupation of Western Europe, these terrorist groups were instead turned against the population of NATO member states and engaged in violence, terrorism, mass murder, and assassinations. A group of ultra-nationalists known as the “Grey Wolves” would be cultivated for this task within Turkey.

In a 1998 LA Times article titled, “Turkish Dirty War Revealed, but Papal Shooting Still Obscured,” it would be reported that (emphasis added):

In the late 1970s, armed bands of Gray Wolves launched a wave of bomb attacks and shootings that killed hundreds of people, including public officials, journalists, students, lawyers, labor organizers, left-wing activists and ethnic Kurds. During this period, the Gray Wolves operated with encouragement and protection of the Counter-Guerrilla Organization, a section of the Turkish Army’s Special Warfare Department. Working out of the U.S. Military Aid Mission building in Ankara, the Special Warfare Department received funds and training from U.S. advisors to establish “stay behind” squads of civilian irregulars who were set up to engage in acts of sabotage and resistance in the event of a Soviet invasion. Similar Cold War counter-guerrilla units were created in every member state of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But instead of preparing for foreign enemies, these operatives often set their sights on domestic targets.

Another LA Times piece titled, “Turkey’s Gray Wolves Nip at Heels of Power,” would reveal the extent of the Grey Wolves reign of terror (emphasis added):

At the height of the Cold War, the army used the Gray Wolves as a violent counterweight to Turkish Communists. The party’s coffers swelled with secret contributions from the government.

By the late 1970s, the Gray Wolves had spun out of state control. Their paramilitary wing fought a campaign against leftist rivals that killed nearly 6,000 people. Ali Agca, who shot Pope John Paul II in a 1981 assassination attempt, is alleged to have been affiliated with the party.

The article would also reveal that despite this horrific past, the Grey Wolves and their political allies were still a very potent political force in Turkey. Today, the Grey Wolves function as a paramilitary wing of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which holds the third largest number of seats in Turkey’s parliament.

As troubling as this should be to Turks who may find themselves on the receiving end of a politically powerful terrorist organization apparently tolerated, even sponsored by NATO for decades and in particular, supported by the United States, the Grey Wolves’ terrorism has branched out far beyond Turkey’s borders.

NATO Gladio Goes Global

According to a 2009 New American Media report titled, “Behind the China Riots — Oil, Terrorism & ‘Grey Wolves’,” Turkey’s Grey Wolves have established militant training camps as far as China’s western Xinjiang region, helping produce violent terrorists who have carried out a series of deadly attacks across China. The report would state (emphasis added):

Enter the Grey Wolves, one of the world’s most notorious terrorist organizations. Founded in the 1960s, the Wolves are a pan-Turkic paramilitary group with 1 million followers across the Near East, Central Asia and inside Xinjiang. During the decade of political violence in Turkey in the 1980s, the military-backed activists launched a wave of assassinations, massacres of ethnic minorities, and extortions of businesses. By official count, the Turkish government holds the Wolves responsible for more than 600 murders, while leftists estimate the victims numbered in the many thousands.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Grey Wolves set up training camps in Central Asia for youths from Turkic language groups, including Uighur. Their indoctrination program embraces the goal of establishing Turan, a Turkish empire across Euro-Asia, subjugating non-Turkish races and unleashing violence to achieve their ends. Out of the limelight, the Wolves provided commando training and material support for the East Turkestan Independence Movement.

In essence, NATO’s stay-behind networks had become NATO’s “go-abroad” networks, projecting the same sort of violence, terrorism, and political coercion abroad after the Cold War that these networks carried out domestically during the Cold War.

The alleged “struggle” by the Uyghur people in Xinjiang, referred to by the terrorists and their foreign sponsors as “East Turkistan,” consists of two essential components – a foreign harbored political front including the Washington D.C. and Munich-based World Uyghur Congress (WUC) and a militant front clearly backed by the US and NATO through intermediary groups like Turkey’s Grey Wolves.

Like the Grey Wolves, the World Uyghur Congress is a creation and perpetuation of Western special interests. WUC is directly funded by the US State Department via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) over a quarter of a million dollars (on record) a year. The NED admittedly organizes and underwrites all of WUC’s events, and their annual meetings usually feature almost exclusively US representatives reaffirming their commitment to support WUC’s objectives which, as stated on their official website, include:

The WUC declares a nonviolent and peaceful opposition movement against Chinese occupation of East Turkestan and an unconditional adherence to the international accepted human rights standard as laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and adherence to the principals of democratic pluralism and rejection of totalitarianism, religious intolerance, and terrorism as an instrument of policy.

And while WUC claims to stand for a “peaceful opposition” to resist what it calls “Chinese occupation,” it regularly justifies, defends, or covers up violence. Perhaps the most appalling example of this was when it failed to condemn the 2014 brutal murder of prominent Uyghur imam, 74 year old Jume Tahir, in front of China’s biggest and oldest mosque. WUC would denounce him as a “tool” of the Chinese government and even go as far as denounce China for sentencing his killers – Uyghur terrorists – to death for the horrific murder.

Clearly WUC not only finds it impossible to denounce terrorism, it willfully serves as rhetorical cover for it.

Looking at a map of China it is clear that this campaign of separatism directly serves the long-standing plans of the United States to encircle and contain China’s rise – a campaign that has been openly and repeated outlined in US policy papers for decades – the most recent of which was published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and was titled, “Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China.” It states in no uncertain terms:

Because the American effort to ‘integrate’ China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

Encouraging separatism in China’s western Xinjiang region, if successful, would carve off a substantial amount of territory. In conjunction with US-backed separatism in China’s Tibet region, an immense buffer region stands to be created that would virtually isolate China from Central Asia. And while the Grey Wolves and their Uyghur proxies are working hard to create this barrier to China’s west, with their involvement in a recent bombing in Bangkok, it appears the US is now using them to augment efforts to create a similar encirclement across Southeast Asia.

NATO Terror Expands into Southeast Asia

The Turkish-Uyghur terror network, in addition to fomenting violence across China, has more recently been trafficking terrorists from Xinjiang, through Southeast Asia, and onward to Turkey where they are staged, armed, trained, and then sent to fight NATO’s proxy war in Syria. This trafficking network apparently snaked its way through Thailand – exposed when Thailand detained over 100 Uyghurs which it then deported upon Beijing’s request back to China in July.

On the same day the deportations occurred WUC and NATO’s Grey Wolves organized violent protests in Turkey both in Ankara and at the Thai consulate in Istanbul during which the consulate was invaded and destroyed.

A month later, a devastating bomb would detonate in the heart of Bangkok, killing 20 mostly Chinese tourists and injuring over 100 more. In addition to the BBC already being on site before the blast, the British network would conclude even before bodies were cleared from the site that Uyghurs were likely behind the blast. This was done specifically to deflect blame from another US proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, who has been attempting for years to regain power in Thailand.

In reality, Shinawatra and the Uyghur terrorists are both functions of the same Westesrn agenda to encircle and contain China by building up a “wall” of proxy states around Beijing, and if nothing else, to create chaos in which Beijing finds it nearly impossible to prosper.

What is perhaps most concerning regarding these two Western proxies is the fact that many past bombings associated with Shinawatra’s terrorist networks – networks which are extensive – match the methods used by Turkish-Uyghur terrorists making it likely that NATO’s extraterritorial networks New American Media reported on in 2009 being set up in China, are likely now dotting Uyghur trafficking routes throughout Southeast Asia as well.

The blast in Bangkok likely took place for a number of reasons. Not only did Thailand ignore US demands to release the detained Uyghurs to Turkey, as well as oust a long-cultivated US proxy – Thaksin Shinawatra – but it has been cultivating unmistakably closer ties to Beijing including the signing of major joint-infrastructure development projects, closer military cooperation, and even the potential procurement of 3 Chinese-made submarines – all of which US policymakers have been decrying with increasing indignation.

Turkish-Uyghur Terror Beyond Asia

And while the US is using Turkish-Uyghur terror to extort concessions from Southeast Asia and to destabilize China, it is likely that this “other Al Qaeda” will turn up still in other regions – most predictably, Russian Crimea.

Crimea rejoined Russia after a NATO-backed, violent Neo-Nazi coup overthrew the government of Ukraine, creating a cascade of anti-Russian violence across the country. Eager to avoid the fate of many cities across Ukraine, the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted in a referendum to rejoin Russia. Since then, Crimea has enjoyed peace and prosperity just across the border from a Ukraine now mired in civil war and economic catastrophe, all compounded by an illegitimate regime beholden to the US and NATO who thrust it into power.

The fact that the border between Russian Crimea and Ukraine also represents the border between peace and pandemonium highlights the criminal chaos fostered by US-NATO meddling in Ukraine. A peaceful, stable Crimea serves as a constant reminder to all in Eastern Europe that where ever NATO goes, chaos follows.

If the US and its NATO allies could destabilize Crimea, thus creating chaos within newly repatriated Russian territory, the West could make a compelling case that dealing with Russia is at least as undesirable as dealing with NATO.

US-NATO backed Turkish terrorism would be the key to accomplishing this. Crimea’s proximity to Turkey and a sizable Turkish Tatar minority serves as a potential medium for the West to carry this out. Already the Western media has invested heavily in a narrative centered around “disenfranchised Tatars” and has begun working with opposition groups to stir up confrontations. Like in Xinjiang, those willing to participate in such an opposition constitute a fractional minority – but through the power of Western media, are inflated in the minds of impressionable audiences.

The US State Department’s Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty media outlet in an article deceptively titled, “Putin Warns Crimean Tatars Not To Seek Special Status,” indicated that Russia was well aware of the ruse:

Putin suggested that foreign countries were funding rights activists in an effort to “destabilize the situation” by playing up problems faced by Crimean Tatars, the third-largest ethnic group after Russians and Ukrainians on the peninsula, and said that Moscow would not allow this.

“You and I know full well who we are talking about. There are a number people who consider themselves professional fighters for rights,” he said, adding that “they want to receive foreign grants and acknowledgement and realize their ambitions, including political ambitions.”

Already in Kiev, these Tatar opposition fronts have begun organizing and attempting to fan the flames of conflict in Crimea. This includes ATR – a Tatar media channel with opaque funding, now based in Kiev and now what US NED funded “Human Rights in Ukraine” (KhPG) calls fighting “to counter the psychological and propaganda influence from Russia.”

Understanding the scope of Turkish-Uyghur terrorism, their rhetorical supporters, and the function both serve toward maintaining US global hegemony helps disarm the West of its various volatile narratives and criminal conspiracies aimed at creating and leveraging terrorism. If when each bomb goes off, or when any consulate is attacked, the public points the finger not at America’s proxies, but directly at the special interests upon Wall Street and lining Washington instead, all benefits of carrying out a proxy campaign of global terrorism to begin with will evaporate before the West.

As is already happening in Syria where Western plans have been frustrated by growing global awareness of the West’s true involvement in the conflict and its role behind groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, by exposing their “other Al Qaeda,” their plans elsewhere around the globe will likewise be confounded.

And while the US has attempted for years to galvanize the world behind its global agenda through the use of terrorism, it is ironic that now China, Russia, and even nations like Thailand all now find themselves on common ground, having reason to cooperate closer together in facing a common threat – America’s global terror enterprise.

Source Article from http://www.sott.net/article/302523-The-other-Al-Qaeda-Turkish-Uyghur-Terror-Inc

Turkish-Uyghur Terror Inc. – America’s Other Al Qaeda

Uyghur-e1427207545894

It is no longer tenable for the United States and its regional allies in and near the Middle East to claim they are backing “moderate rebels” in the proxy war raging in Syria, Iraq, and parts of Lebanon. There is the Syrian government on one side, and terrorists including Al Qaeda and its various franchises such as the Al Nusra Front and the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS/ISIL) on the other.

If one is not supporting the Syrian government, it is very clear they are supporting Al Qaeda. So obvious is this fact, that the Western press and the corporate-financier think tanks that produce for them their talking points, have begun a campaign to re-brand Al Qaeda as a lesser evil vis-a-vis ISIS. In reality, there is virtually no difference, with the US and its regional allies clearly arming, funding, and supporting both.

The most recent and obscene manifestation of this re-branding was US Army General and former CIA Director David Petraeus’ open calls to use Al Qaeda to “fight” ISIS. In the Daily Beast’s article, “Petraeus: Use Al Qaeda Fighters to Beat ISIS,” it was reported that:

Members of al Qaeda’s branch in Syria have a surprising advocate in the corridors of American power: retired Army general and former CIA Director David Petraeus. 

The former commander of U.S. forces in Iraq and Afghanistan has been quietly urging U.S. officials to consider using so-called moderate members of al Qaeda’s Nusra Front to fight ISIS in Syria, four sources familiar with the conversations, including one person who spoke to Petraeus directly, told The Daily Beast.

Within this rhetorical shift we find an admission that there is indeed no “moderate rebel” force to speak of. All that exists, admittedly, are extremists operating under the various banners of Al Qaeda and ISIS.

Revelations of America’s support behind Al Qaeda may not have ever been so overt, but are certainly nothing new. It is admitted that the US and its Saudi allies first created Al Qaeda as a proxy mercenary force to fight the Soviet Union in a proxy war in Afghanistan in the 1980s. In 2007, long before the current war in Syria broke out, it was warned by Pulitzer Prize winning journalist Seymour Hersh in the pages of the New Yorker that under the then Bush administration, support already began to flow to the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria and other extremists groups including Al Qaeda for the purpose of violently undermining the Syrian government in Damascus.

Hersh’s article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” it is explicitly stated:

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

Past and present, it is clear that Al Qaeda was and still is a central instrument of the United States in achieving geopolitical objectives – particularly where Western forces cannot immediately or in any practical sense intervene directly.

But Al Qaeda and its various affiliates are only one faction among many terrorist groups minding the vast interests of American global hegemony. A recent bombing in the heart of  Bangkok, capital of Southeast Asia’s nation of Thailand, and ongoing violence in China’s Xinjiang region expose another vast network of US-sponsored terrorism operating in tandem with Al Qaeda and in fact stretching from Asia all the way to frontiers of America’s proxy war with Syria.

Turkish-Uyghur Terror – the Other Al Qaeda 

Because it relatively poorly understood and under-reported in comparison to other more notorious terrorist groups, the Turkish-Uyghur terror network is perhaps more dangerous and of greater utility to the United States and its allies presently versus their increasingly exposed Al Qaeda legions.

The genesis of modern Turkish-sponsored terrorism, like Al Qaeda, also originates from the Cold War. Part of the wider stay-behind networks known as “Gladios” created by NATO to allegedly fight Soviet forces in the event of a Soviet invasion and occupation of Western Europe, these terrorist groups were instead turned against the population of NATO member states and engaged in violence, terrorism, mass murder, and assassinations. A group of ultra-nationalists known as the “Grey Wolves” would be cultivated for this task within Turkey.

In a 1998 LA Times article titled, “Turkish Dirty War Revealed, but Papal Shooting Still Obscured,” it would be reported that (emphasis added):

In the late 1970s, armed bands of Gray Wolves launched a wave of bomb attacks and shootings that killed hundreds of people, including public officials, journalists, students, lawyers, labor organizers, left-wing activists and ethnic Kurds. During this period, the Gray Wolves operated with encouragement and protection of the Counter-Guerrilla Organization, a section of the Turkish Army’s Special Warfare Department. Working out of the U.S. Military Aid Mission building in Ankara, the Special Warfare Department received funds and training from U.S. advisors to establish “stay behind” squads of civilian irregulars who were set up to engage in acts of sabotage and resistance in the event of a Soviet invasion. Similar Cold War counter-guerrilla units were created in every member state of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. But instead of preparing for foreign enemies, these operatives often set their sights on domestic targets.

Another LA Times piece titled, “Turkey’s Gray Wolves Nip at Heels of Power,” would reveal the extent of the Grey Wolves reign of terror (emphasis added):

At the height of the Cold War, the army used the Gray Wolves as a violent counterweight to Turkish Communists. The party’s coffers swelled with secret contributions from the government. 

By the late 1970s, the Gray Wolves had spun out of state control. Their paramilitary wing fought a campaign against leftist rivals that killed nearly 6,000 people. Ali Agca, who shot Pope John Paul II in a 1981 assassination attempt, is alleged to have been affiliated with the party.

The article would also reveal that despite this horrific past, the Grey Wolves and their political allies were still a very potent political force in Turkey. Today, the Grey Wolves function as a paramilitary wing of the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP), which holds the third largest number of seats in Turkey’s parliament.

As troubling as this should be to Turks who may find themselves on the receiving end of a politically powerful terrorist organization apparently tolerated, even sponsored by NATO for decades and in particular, supported by the United States, the Grey Wolves’ terrorism has branched out far beyond Turkey’s borders.

NATO Gladio Goes Global 

According to a 2009 New American Media report titled, “Behind the China Riots — Oil, Terrorism & ‘Grey Wolves’,” Turkey’s Grey Wolves have established militant training camps as far as China’s western Xinjiang region, helping produce violent terrorists who have carried out a series of deadly attacks across China. The report would state (emphasis added):

Enter the Grey Wolves, one of the world’s most notorious terrorist organizations. Founded in the 1960s, the Wolves are a pan-Turkic paramilitary group with 1 million followers across the Near East, Central Asia and inside Xinjiang. During the decade of political violence in Turkey in the 1980s, the military-backed activists launched a wave of assassinations, massacres of ethnic minorities, and extortions of businesses. By official count, the Turkish government holds the Wolves responsible for more than 600 murders, while leftists estimate the victims numbered in the many thousands. 

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Grey Wolves set up training camps in Central Asia for youths from Turkic language groups, including Uighur. Their indoctrination program embraces the goal of establishing Turan, a Turkish empire across Euro-Asia, subjugating non-Turkish races and unleashing violence to achieve their ends. Out of the limelight, the Wolves provided commando training and material support for the East Turkestan Independence Movement.

In essence, NATO’s stay-behind networks had become NATO’s “go-abroad” networks, projecting the same sort of violence, terrorism, and political coercion abroad after the Cold War that these networks carried out domestically during the Cold War.

The alleged “struggle” by the Uyghur people in Xinjiang, referred to by the terrorists and their foreign sponsors as “East Turkistan,” consists of two essential components – a foreign harbored political front including the Washington D.C. and Munich-based World Uyghur Congress (WUC) and a militant front clearly backed by the US and NATO through intermediary groups like Turkey’s Grey Wolves.

Like the Grey Wolves, the World Uyghur Congress is a creation and perpetuation of Western special interests. WUC is directly funded by the US State Department via the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) over a quarter of a million dollars (on record) a year. The NED admittedly organizes and underwrites all of WUC’s events, and their annual meetings usually feature almost exclusively US representatives reaffirming their commitment to support WUC’s objectives which, as stated on their official website, include:

The WUC declares a nonviolent and peaceful opposition movement against Chinese occupation of East Turkestan and an unconditional adherence to the international accepted human rights standard as laid down in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and adherence to the principals of democratic pluralism and rejection of totalitarianism, religious intolerance, and terrorism as an instrument of policy.

And while WUC claims to stand for a “peaceful opposition” to resist what it calls “Chinese occupation,” it regularly justifies, defends, or covers up violence. Perhaps the most appalling example of this was when it failed to condemn the 2014 brutal murder of prominent Uyghur imam, 74 year old Jume Tahir, in front of China’s biggest and oldest mosque. WUC would denounce him as a “tool” of the Chinese government and even go as far as denounce China for sentencing his killers – Uyghur terrorists – to death for the horrific murder.

Clearly WUC not only finds it impossible to denounce terrorism, it willfully serves as rhetorical cover for it.

Looking at a map of China it is clear that this campaign of separatism directly serves the long-standing plans of the United States to encircle and contain China’s rise – a campaign that has been openly and repeated outlined in US policy papers for decades – the most recent of which was published by the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) and war tile`, “Revising U.S. Grand Strategy Toward China.” It states in no uncertain terms:

Because the American effort to ‘integrate’ China into the liberal international order has now generated new threats to U.S. primacy in Asia—and could result in a consequential challenge to American power globally—Washington needs a new grand strategy toward China that centers on balancing the rise of Chinese power rather than continuing to assist its ascendancy.

Encouraging separatism in China’s western Xinjiang region, if successful, would carve off a substantial amount of territory. In conjunction with US-backed separatism in China’s Tibet region, an immense buffer region stands to be created that would virtually isolate China from Central Asia. And while the Grey Wolves and their Uyghur proxies are working hard to create this barrier to China’s west, with their involvement in a recent bombing in Bangkok, it appears the US is now using them to augment efforts to create a similar encirclement across Southeast Asia.

NATO Terror Expands into Southeast Asia

The Turkish-Uyghur terror network, in addition to fomenting violence across China, has more recently been trafficking terrorists from Xinjiang, through Southeast Asia, and onward to Turkey where they are staged, armed, trained, and then sent to fight NATO’s proxy war in Syria. This trafficking network apparently snaked its way through Thailand – exposed when Thailand detained over 100 Uyghurs which it then deported upon Beijing’s request back to China in July.

On the same day the deportations occurred WUC and NATO’s Grey Wolves organized violent protests in Turkey both in Ankara and at the Thai consulate in Istanbul during which the consulate was invaded and destroyed.

A month later, a devastating bomb would detonate in the heart of Bangkok, killing 20 mostly Chinese tourists and injuring over 100 more. In addition to the BBC already being on site before the blast, the British network would conclude even before bodies were cleared from the site that Uyghurs were likely behind the blast. This was done specifically to deflect blame from another US proxy, Thaksin Shinawatra, who has been attempting for years to regain power in Thailand.

In reality, Shinawatra and the Uyghur terrorists are both functions of the same Westesrn agenda to encircle and contain China by building up a “wall” of proxy states around Beijing, and if nothing else, to create chaos in which Beijing finds it nearly impossible to prosper.

What is perhaps most concerning regarding these two Western proxies is the fact that many past bombings associated with Shinawatra’s terrorist networks – networks which are extensive – match the methods used by Turkish-Uyghur terrorists making it likely that NATO’s extraterritorial networks New American Media reported on in 2009 being set up in China, are likely now dotting Uyghur trafficking routes throughout Southeast Asia as well.

The blast in Bangkok likely took place for a number of reasons. Not only did Thailand ignore US demands to release the detained Uyghurs to Turkey, as well as oust a long-cultivated US proxy – Thaksin Shinawatra – but it has been cultivating unmistakably closer ties to Beijing including the signing of major joint-infrastructure development projects, closer military cooperation, and even the potential procurement of 3 Chinese-made submarines – all of which US policymakers have been decrying with increasing indignation.

Turkish-Uyghur Terror Beyond Asia

And while the US is using Turkish-Uyghur terror to extort concessions from Southeast Asia and to destabilize China, it is likely that this “other Al Qaeda” will turn up still in other regions – most predictably, Russian Crimea.

Crimea rejoined Russia after a NATO-backed, violent Neo-Nazi coup overthrew the government of Ukraine, creating a cascade of anti-Russian violence across the country. Eager to avoid the fate of many cities across Ukraine, the people of Crimea overwhelmingly voted in a referendum to rejoin Russia. Since then, Crimea has enjoyed peace and prosperity just across the border from a Ukraine now mired in civil war and economic catastrophe, all compounded by an illegitimate regime beholden to the US and NATO who thrust it into power.

The fact that the border between Russian Crimea and Ukraine also represents the border between peace and pandemonium highlights the criminal chaos fostered by US-NATO meddling in Ukraine. A peaceful, stable Crimea serves as a constant reminder to all in Eastern Europe that where ever NATO goes, chaos follows.

If the US and its NATO allies could destabilize Crimea, thus creating chaos within newly repatriated Russian territory, the West could make a compelling case that dealing with Russia is at least as undesirable as dealing with NATO.

US-NATO backed Turkish terrorism would be the key to accomplishing this. Crimea’s proximity to Turkey and a sizable Turkish Tatar minority serves as a potential medium for the West to carry this out. Already the Western media has invested heavily in a narrative centered around “disenfranchised Tatars” and has begun working with opposition groups to stir up confrontations. Like in Xinjiang, those willing to participate in such an opposition constitute a fractional minority – but through the power of Western media, are inflated in the minds of impressionable audiences.

The US State Department’s Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty media outlet in an article deceptively titled, “Putin Warns Crimean Tatars Not To Seek Special Status,” indicated that Russia was well aware of the ruse:

Putin suggested that foreign countries were funding rights activists in an effort to “destabilize the situation” by playing up problems faced by Crimean Tatars, the third-largest ethnic group after Russians and Ukrainians on the peninsula, and said that Moscow would not allow this. 

“You and I know full well who we are talking about. There are a number people who consider themselves professional fighters for rights,” he said, adding that “they want to receive foreign grants and acknowledgement and realize their ambitions, including political ambitions.” 

Already in Kiev, these Tatar opposition fronts have begun organizing and attempting to fan the flames of conflict in Crimea. This includes ATR – a Tatar media channel with opaque funding, now based in Kiev and now what US NED funded “Human Rights in Ukraine” (KhPG) calls fighting “to counter the psychological and propaganda influence from Russia.”

Understanding the scope of Turkish-Uyghur terrorism, their rhetorical supporters, and the function both serve toward maintaining US global hegemony helps disarm the West of its various volatile narratives and criminal conspiracies aimed at creating and leveraging terrorism. If when each bomb goes off, or when any consulate is attacked, the public points the finger not at America’s proxies, but directly at the special interests upon Wall Street and lining Washington instead, all benefits of carrying out a proxy campaign of global terrorism to begin with will evaporate before the West.

As is already happening in Syria where Western plans have been frustrated by growing global awareness of the West’s true involvement in the conflict and its role behind groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS, by exposing their “other Al Qaeda,” their plans elsewhere around the globe will likewise be confounded.

And while the US has attempted for years to galvanize the world behind its global agenda through the use of terrorism, it is ironic that now China, Russia, and even nations like Thailand all now find themselves on common ground, having reason to cooperate closer together in facing a common threat – America’s global terror enterprise.

Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazineNew Eastern Outlook”.

Source Article from http://www.globalresearch.ca/turkish-uyghur-terror-inc-americas-other-al-qaeda/5477683

Leader of US war effort against Islamic State stepping down

John R. Allen, the Special Presidential Envoy for the Global Coalition to Counter ISIL, will leave the job in November, according to Bloomberg, which cited four anonymous Obama administration officials when reporting on the yet-public information.

Allen is reportedly frustrated with a lack of resources to counter the jihadist group, according to US officials. Allen had unsuccessfully lobbied administration officials for increased tactical air control teams to more efficiently target IS on the ground in Iraq, Bloomberg reported. Meanwhile, administration officials have portrayed his decision as one made out of concern for his wife’s poor health.

After originally committing to six months, Allen stayed in the position for an additional six months at the request of US Secretary of State John Kerry. In the near term, his deputy, Ambassador Brett McGurk, is expected to assume his duties.

Allen has defended the Obama administration’s IS strategy, including on one occasion earlier this month when he told ABC News that airstrikes have been successful in some areas of Iraq and Syria, where IS controls large swaths of territory.

“Where we were a year ago today, I wasn’t sure how it was going to unfold,” said Allen, who took the envoy post in September 2014. “It was not clear to me even that Iraq would survive this. In the intervening months, we’ve seen remarkable progress in many respects.”

Allen’s departure comes amid comments made last month by the incoming Marine Corps Commandant, Lieutenant General Robert Neller, that the US-led coalition’s war on IS has hit a stalemate.” Also in August, the New York Times reported that characterizations of the campaign against IS may have been skewed, as intelligence assessments have been presented in an increasingly optimistic light, while real success in defeating IS jihadists is still out of sight a year after constantly bombing IS targets.

While Allen, a retired four-star general and former commander of the International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, did secure permission for the US to use Turkey’s Incirlik Air Base for Syrian bombing operations, other initiatives have not panned out. Despite US efforts, IS has maintained control of Mosul, Iraq’s second-largest city, and expanded its reach into Ramadi, the largest city in Western Iraq’s Al-Anbar Governorate.

READ MORE:  Alleged stove-piping in US-led anti-ISIS campaign investigated

In July, Allen said “ISIS is losing” the fight against the US-led coalition, even as other administration officials said Islamic State was the largest threat to the US homeland.

“As they get weaker at the core…it also makes it more difficult to influence individuals and smaller groups, so both things can happen simultaneously,” Allen told The Daily Beast at the time.

“We can see the individual threat potentially going up domestically, while we are squeezing ISIL at the strategic level in the region in Iraq and Syria, so those comments are not inconsistent.”

On September 10, 2014, Obama announced a “comprehensive and sustained counterterrorism strategy” to “degrade, and ultimately destroy” Islamic State. US drones and warplanes had already been targeting the group since early August of 2014, after IS killed two American journalists it had been holding hostage.

READ MORE: ISIS’ no. 2 killed in US military air strike on August 18 – White House

Obama outlined a four prong strategy against Islamic State in the announcement: Whileconducting a “systematic campaign of airstrikes,” the US would “increase our support to forces fighting these terrorists on the ground,” use counter-terrorism capabilities to prevent IS attacks elsewhere, and “provide humanitarian assistance to innocent civilians” displaced by the group.

Initially nameless, the campaign was dubbed “Operation Inherent Resolve” in October 2014. Since then, the US and its allies have flown more than 53,278 sorties “in support of operations” in Iraq and Syria, conducting more than 6,700 airstrikes at an expense of nearly $4 billion as of September 8, according to official information provided by the Pentagon.

Source Article from http://www.rt.com/usa/316231-john-allen-war-isis/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS

Aussies bomb ISIS targets in Iraq (VIDEO)

The 3-minute video clip published on Sunday shows four episodes that happened between April and August in Iraq. It showed the actual use of precision weapons by the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) and the aftermath of the bombings.

The targets located in and near the Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) Iraqi stronghold of Mosul and near the city of Baiji were facilities used by the militants to produce various explosive devices. The fourth airstrike targeted a mortar firing position near the Al Taqaddum Air Base, according to RAAF.

READ MORE: Australian Air Force completes first anti-ISIS mission in Syria

The Australian military has deployed eight F/A-18E Super Hornet aircraft as well as a KC-30A Tanker and an E-7A Wedgetail Airborne Early Warning and Control aircraft as part of its Operation OKRA to fight IS in Iraq.

Last week, Australian warplanes flew over neighboring Syria for the first time on a hunt for IS targets.

Source Article from http://www.rt.com/news/316051-australia-isis-strikes-footage/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS

Russia Says It May Send Troops Into Combat In Syria As A Worried Netanyahu Heads To Moscow

On Thursday evening, we detailed a Reuters report which suggested that the influx of Russian technical and logistical support to Bashar al-Assad’s depleted army at Latakia might have breathed new life into the regime as it seeks to rout Islamic State and a whole host of other armed groups fighting for control of Syria. “Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem said on Thursday Russia had provided new weapons and trained Syrian troops how to use them,” Reuters said, before describing what certainly sounds like an invigorated air campaign against the de facto ISIS capital at Raqqa.


Importantly, al-Moualem also indicated that Syria would be willing to make an official request for Russian combat troops “if needed.” 


Now clearly, it seems likely that Russian troops have already joined the battle and indeed, when the bullets start flying, the distinction between “logistical” support and “combat” support quickly becomes blurred, but through all the sabre rattling and back-and-forth banter between Kerry and Lavrov, both sides are still keen to at least pay lip service to the unwritten rules of international diplomacy which is why before Russia can admit that its troops are actually on the ground to fight, they’ll be a charade where Syria will pretend to be raising the issue with the Kremlin for the first time at which point the Kremlin will take a few days to “consider” things. As of Friday, it appears as though that process has begun. Here’s Bloomberg:


Russia said it’s willing to consider sending troops into combat operations in Syria if President Bashar al-Assad’s government requests assistance.



While the possibility is hypothetical now, “if there is a request, it will be discussed as part of bilateral contacts,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters on a conference call on Friday. “Of course it will be discussed and considered.”



The prospect of direct Russian involvement in the country’s civil war, in which more than 250,000 people have died since 2011, would mark a sharp escalation in President Vladimir Putin’s support for the embattled Assad government. The U.S. has accused Russia of increasing military aid to Syria in recent weeks by sending tanks, artillery and personnel, as well as setting up what the Pentagon says might be a forward airbase near the coastal city of Latakia. Syria also hosts Russia’s only naval facility outside the former Soviet Union at Tartus.



The possibility of troop involvement emerged before a visit to Moscow by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday for talks with Putin about Russia’s growing military involvement in Syria. Netanyahu “will present the threats posed to Israel as a result of the increased flow of advanced war material to the Syrian arena and the transfer of deadly weapons to Hezbollah and other terror organizations,” the Israeli government said in an e-mailed statement on Wednesday.


Source Article from https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/183511-2015-09-18-russia-says-it-may-send-troops-into-combat-in-syria.htm?EdNo=001&From=RSS

The delusional conspiracy theories of the State Department

In the mind of State Department spokesman John Kirby, Russia should not back Syria against the terrorists, president Assad is to blame for ISIS, Iraq is much better off because of the US invasion, and it’s ‘absolutely astounding’ anyone would dare to disagree.

That is what the press briefing at the State Department on Tuesday amounted to in a nutshell. The retired US Navy admiral, now speaking on behalf of the US foreign ministry, repeatedly blamed Syrian president Bashar al-Assad for the very existence of Islamic State terrorists.

“He is the reason ISIL, and other terrorist groups, have been allowed to fester and grow and sustain themselves inside Syria,” Kirby said. “Assad regime has allowed groups like ISIL to fester and grow inside the country.”

How, exactly, is the government in Damascus to blame for the sudden appearance and viral growth of Islamic State, Kirby did not explain. For almost three years prior to the emergence of IS, Assad has fought against an armed rebellion by a collection of rebel groups, backed by the US – currently dominated by Islamist factions like Jabhat Al-Nusra. US efforts to raise a “moderate” fighting force have so far been without success.

Meanwhile, over 80 percent of Syrians believe ISIS to be a creation of the US, reveals a recent poll cited by the Washington Post.

    

Kirby ruled out any role for the Syrian Army in battling IS, and claimed that Russian support for Damascus in that struggle would “isolate” Moscow in the world. His remarks came following the statement by Russian president Vladimir Putin that Moscow was providing military aid to the Syrian government against Islamic State (IS, formerly known as ISIS/ISIL) terrorists, and invitation to other countries to do the same.

“It is necessary to set aside geopolitical ambitions, drop so-called double standards, the policy of direct or indirect use of separate terrorist groups for achieving own goals, including removing the governments and regimes,” Putin said at the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) summit in Dushanbe, Tajikistan.

“I’ll let [Russian] comments speak for themselves on that,” Kirby countered. “We don’t want to see the Assad regime getting any support.”

“What we’re concerned about is any support that bolsters the Assad regime’s ability to continue to have within their means the capabilities of rendering further violence inside the country,” the State Department spokesman added, to the confusion of the press corps.

There was no need for another coalition against IS, he said, “when 62 nations are already aligned and having an effect” against ISIS in Syria and Iraq.

Kirby did not elaborate on the effect the coalition had achieved. According to the Pentagon’s own information, some 6,700 air strikes have been launched against the group, `lon wmth ground offensives by local proxy forces, at the cost of $4 billion, without any sign of slowing IS down.

Our bombs and theirs

“People are fleeing Syria, first of all, because of military actions … from atrocities of terrorists – we know they are committing brutalities there, and destroying cultural heritage,” President Putin said in Dushanbe on Tuesday, adding that it wasn’t Russia that destroyed government institutions and backed rebellions that created conditions for terrorists to flourish.

Yet the State Department spokesman absolutely refused to even consider the possibility that US interventions may have had anything to do with the mass displacement of people in Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Syria, or elsewhere.

“I’m not going to dignify that with an answer,” Kirby replied when a journalist brought up the issue.

“Is Iraq better off without Saddam Hussein, and with a democracy? Yes, they are,” he said. But when asked about Libya and other places, he suddenly cut the reporter off. “I’m not going to answer any more questions on this from you.”

    

While refusing to even consider the role of US bombs in destabilizing countries, Kirby repeatedly referred to Assad’s use of “barrel bombs” as the self-evident proof the Syrian president’s rule was unacceptable.

“We still see the man dropping barrel bombs on his own people,” Kirby said of Assad at one point. As for the Syrians streaming towards European countries with generous welfare programs, “They are leaving because they are being barrel-bombed.”

The term refers to low-tech, improvised projectiles, made out of barrels or similar containers (such as oil drums) and dropped from aircraft. Pioneered by Israel in 1948, these improvised bombs have also been used by the US in Vietnam, by the Sri Lankan government against the Tamil rebels, and by various factions in Sudan, among others. The devices have also been used by the US-backed Iraqi government forces, both against Sunni tribal militias and civilians in IS-held areas.

Root causes, jobs and no military solution

If Assad is such a problem, asked AP’s diplomatic correspondent Matt Lee, why doesn’t the US take him out? Kirby appeared startled by the question, saying that the US was “working hard” on achieving “a political transition inside Syria away from Assad.”

President Obama – whom Kirby referred to as the Commander-in-Chief – has been “crystal clear”that there won’t be a military solution to the conflict in Syria, only a political one, and “there has been a lot of energy applied to that,” the spokesman explained. The key to defeating IS was “good governance,” and that means replacing the government in Damascus, he maintained.

At another point, however, he insisted, “There are military solutions … and we’ve been doing it, quite effectively.”

The astounded admiral

“Frankly, I find it incredible that today, there are lines of questions being posed to me that would implicate that people actually think Bashar al-Assad is good for Syria and that his continued tenure in the country is a healthy thing,” Kirby complained at one point, calling such questions “absolutely astounding.”

AP’s Lee countered that the questions – posed by several journalists – were related to US policy and the apparent disconnect between Washington’s stated goal of opposing Islamic State while at the same time insisting on overthrowing the government in Damascus that is most opposed to it.

“I do think there is an implication in some of these questions” that the US should give up overthrowing Assad, Kirby retorted. “That’s not how we feel, have not ever felt, and have no intention of changing.”

He dismissed the notion that US weapons intended for “pro-coalition” fighters falling into the hands of Islamic State fighters could have anything to do with the refugee crisis, calling it a “huge stretch.”Sure, he said, IS has been brandishing M16s and driving around in US-made Humvees captured from the crumbling Iraqi army, but Washington cannot absolutely guarantee its aid won’t end up in the wrong hands. “I get it,” Kirby said, shrugging. “We’re doing the best we can.”

Source Article from http://www.sott.net/article/301931-The-delusional-conspiracy-theories-of-the-State-Department

US led anti-ISIS coalition ‘successful’, no need for another alliance says State Department

Image

    

There is no need for creating the new coalition against the ISIL militant group, as the US-led alliance is operating successfully both in Syria and Iraq, US State Department spokesperson said Tuesday.

The US-led coalition against the Islamic State is successfully operating in Syria and Iraq, and there is no need for another alliance against the terrorist group, US State Department spokesperson John Kirby said in a briefing.

“There is no need for another international coalition against ISIL [Islamic State], when 60 plus nations are already aligned and having an effect against ISIL [Islamic State], not just in Syria, but also in Iraq,” Kirby said.

In June, Russian President Vladimir Putin said during a meeting with Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Muallem that Moscow would support the establishment of an anti-terrorism coalition if Syria considered it appropriate and possible.

Earlier on Tuesday, Putin said Russia will continue to provide the necessary military and technical assistance to Syria to fight the Islamic State terrorists, and urged other countries to join the efforts.

Kirby has previously stated that the United States would welcome Russia’s “constructive role” in the fight against the Islamic State. He added, however, that Moscow should not try to strengthen the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad.

The US-led coalition began carrying out airstrikes against Islamic State targets in Iraq in August, expanding the air campaign to Syria in September, though without Syrian government approval. The coalition has conducted more than 6,500 airstrikes and eliminated estimated 10,000 Islamic State fighters, according to US intelligence.

Source Article from http://www.sott.net/article/301910-US-led-anti-ISIS-coalition-successful-no-need-for-another-alliance-says-State-Department

BBC Defends Terrorists Posing as Refugees in Europe

The BBC defends terrorists fighting the Syrian state and posing as refugees in Europe, not a new one by the giant broadcaster, but taking warmongering to a new level.

BBC in their nasty role as propagandists for NATO trying to whitewash a new ‘refugee’ from his history as a terrorist in the ranks of the FSA as if this group is of any legitimacy. Fail and dangerous attempt.

BBC Defend Terrorists

British broadcaster defends terrorists

.

In the same post the BBC quotes the terrorist saying: “About 70 percent of the city is destroyed … In Syria, Al Qaeda want me, Daesh (Islamic State), the government – I fought them all. I don’t care. Some people are afraid. I’m not,”. So he did ‘fight them all’ including the Syrian government, the legitimate government represented in the United Nations and elected by the Syrian people against the will of western humanitarian interventionist bastards.

ISIS, a variation of US created alQaeda, fights with all other terrorist groups, just like each one of those terrorist groups fight with one another. FSA groups were always fighting each other and fighting the Syrian state unless the western propagandists think our memory is short.

As definition: Any individual or group of individuals carry arms against any sovereign state on its land is a Terrorist and they are Terrorists. If you disagree, tell us what would you call armed men attacking government facilities in your country, killing policemen and army officers, throwing post employees off rooftops and even carving out the heart of a dead soldier and eating it before cameras? Check this for a memory refreshment: With ?Moderate Rebels? Like These, Who Needs Terrorists?

Keep in mind that the US regime owns a stake in the British Empire mouthpiece BBC.

The United Kingdom has always been an asylum to and defender of anti-sovereign opposition groups, they flourish there and they vary from thinkers to actual fighters. But how many of them are against any other western NATO member state, if we would to belive they care for freedom of speech? The empire keeps using these tools against their governments for purposes of lobbying and extortion against its foes just like the United States different reports by its state department like the annual report on human rights, never calling for acts against abusers of human rights among its allies, or the Narcotics Control Strategy Report not mentioning any role of its own CIA in this ‘business’..

Sheeple

They fool you, they keep fooling you and they enjoy fooling you, not because they’re smart, it’s because you’re foolable. -Arabi Souri

Source Article from http://www.syrianews.cc/bbc-defends-terrorists-posing-as-refugees-in-europe/

Russian air calvary coming to aid Syria, Washington’s plans are up in the air

Image

    

In light of the catastrophic outcome of the “western” war on Libya the Russian government declared to oppose any further such “regime change” in the Middle East. But the U.S. continues to train, arm and finance insurgents against the Syrian Arab Republic and, under the disguise of fighting the Islamic State, prepares to take down the Syrian government. Eliminating the Syrian government would likely create a radical jihadist state in Damascus and lead to massacres and mass refugee movements.

But Russia means what it says and will now use its military capabilities to confront the U.S. plans:

Elijah J. Magnier

#Russia is providing #Syria with precision military and destructive equipment. #Russia will start soon operating n #Syria sky to hit rebels+

The participation of the #Russian Air Force in #Syria worries #Israel that won’;t be able to have a free sky to hit Syrian troops.+

This is THE major change in #Russia approach and support to #Damascus regime, to prevent game change on the ground in #Syria +

The decision of #Russia comes mainly from regional support 2rebels, not satisfy w/ d north f #Syria (#Idlib) and aiming to #Hama & #Damascus

Russian air-support for Syria against the various forces attacking the state will allow for additional air attacks against those forces. The Syrian air force is today already flying more than 100 sorties per day against it enemies. The Russian forces will add to that but not necessarily in a decisive amount.

The main support for Syria by Russian air assets will come by keeping away those foreign air forces forces that threaten the Syrian government under disguise of “fighting terror”. With Russian fighters in Syrian skies Israel will no longer be able to use its air force in support of Jabhat al-Nusra (and for its oil stealing endeavors in the Syrian Golan heights).

The U.S., Britain, France and others announced to enter Syrian skies to “fight the terror” of the Islamic State. Russia will use just the same claim to justify its presence and its air operations flying from Latakia. Simply by being there it will make sure that others will not be able to use their capabilities for more nefarious means. Additional intelligence from Russian air assets will also be helpful for Syrian ground operations.

The Russian air capabilities will be supplemented with air defense cover from Russian naval assets on the Syrian coast. Russia announced several air defense drills with live missile launches off the Syrian coast near Tartus. New land based air defense assets are said to be on their way. I would not be surprised to see, over time, some Chinese naval assets joining the Russian presence.

Secretary of State Kerry whined to Russia that its intervention in Syria might intervene with the U.S. intervention in Syria. Well, yes sir, that is the sole purpose:

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Friday coordination was needed between Russia’s military and the Pentagon to avoid “unintended incidents” around Syria, where both countries have a military presence.

Lavrov said Russia would continue to supply weapons to Syrian President Bashar Assad to help the Syrian armed forces fight against ISIS militants.

He told a news conference Russia was conducting military exercises in the Mediterranean Sea, that it had been for some time, and that they were in line with international law.

The neoconned State Department childishly pressured Greece and Bulgaria to disallow Russian military air transport over their countries. But Russian planes can just as well fly via Iran and Iraq and both countries are very unlikely to ever block such flights. As Russian ground forces will not be involved in any fighting the supply needs can be kept limited.

Any attempt by Turkey, pressured by State Department lunatics, to block the Bosporus sea route between Russia and Syria would be in breach of the Montreux Convention and could be interpreted as hostile act against Russia on which Turkey depends for a large amount of its energy supplies. After losing control over the predominantly Kurdish south-eastern city Cizre Turkey also has to take care of its own civil war which Erdogan foolishly ignited to regain a parliamentarian majority. That internal war will hinder resupplies for the Islamic State through Turkey.

The U.S. plan to use the fight against the Islamic State as cover to remove the Syrian government is now in tatters. The months long U.S. supported “Southern Front” attack in south Syria failed to make any gains against the government. The Islamic State attack against Syrian government forces in Deir ez-Zor was repelled and further moves against Syria in the north will have to defy Russian air power.

Washington will now have to decide to risk war against Russia or to shelf the Syria regime change project.

Source Article from http://www.sott.net/article/301736-Russian-air-calvary-coming-to-aid-Syria-Washingtons-plans-are-up-in-the-air