angelburst29
The Living Force
US Department of State spokesperson John Kirby said that the department has no plans to make public an internal memo calling for the United States to take military action against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government.
State Dept: ‘No Plans’ to Make Public Memo Urging Strikes on Syrian Gov't
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160617/1041541184/usa-no-plans-urge-syria-strikes.html
US Department of State has no plans to make public an internal memo calling for the United States to take military action against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government, US Department of State spokesperson John Kirby said in a briefing on Friday.
"There’s no plans to make it public," Kirby stated when asked when the State Department would release the dissent letter.
Furthermore, Kirby said there will be no investigation as to how the letter ended up in the public domain.
Kirby also said that the United States has not made a proposal for members of the opposition in Syria to join government of President Bashar Assad.
"No," Kirby stated when asked whether there is a US proposal to add members of the opposition to the active government in Damascus.
Earlier on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the US proposal to consider a possibility of incorporating representatives of the opposition into the Syrian government is "absolutely reasonable."
US Diplomats Used Memo to Compel Russia to Work With Them on Assad
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160617/1041505182/us-russia-assad.html
The internal memo signed by some 50 US diplomats, a draft of which was obtained by The New York Times from a US State Department official on Thursday, calls for "a judicious use of stand-off and air weapons," against Assad forces.
"All these statements are games that we have already seen in the past. This is the way to put pressure on the Russians. They are saying: ‘Look, we have the opposition that demands actions against Assad and calls on the government to change the current political position toward the Syrian regime, so you [the Russians] need to work with us [the current US administration] and we need to move fast’," the source said.
US-Led Intervention in Syria 'Would be Worse than Libya'
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160617/1041537702/us-intervention-syria-libya.html
On Friday the New York Times revealed a leaked internal memo, in which dozens of US diplomats expressed disagreement with US President Barack Obama's foreign policy.
The letter is signed by 51 US State Department officials and calls for the US to carry out military strikes in Syria against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces. This, they hope, would enable Washington to ultimately change the Syrian government.
Fred Fleitz, Senior Vice President for Policy and Programs at the Center for Security Policy, told Radio Sputnik that a Libya-style intervention in Syria would worsen the situation there.
"What happened in Libya is that no-one gave any consideration as to what would happen after Gaddafi left power, and the same thing could happen in Syria. If we just knock out Assad who would take over? I think Syria would get worse, because it could become taken over by a government run by al-Qaeda or ISIS) Daesh," Fleitz said.
However Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and State Department official, is one of those in the US who believes that with the right planning and substantial military support NATO could carry out an intervention.
"My solution is that we have to have an international coalition led by NATO, with regional states to resolve the situation with the Assad government, ISIS and the al-Nusra Front. I don't think just attacking Assad is the solution."
"What was done in Libya was half-hearted," the US expert believes.
"This is where the phrase 'leading from behind' came for the US. It was mostly a bombing campaign, run by the British and the French. You may remember that they bombed so much they ran out of bombs."
Despite his belief that a NATO plan might work, Fleitz nevertheless doubts that the political will in the region exists to support another regime change project.
"I think that if we had an intervention like this, it would have to have significant regional support, and frankly we're nowhere near that right now," he said.
In the Face of Russian Warnings, US Says It Will Remain in Black Sea
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160617/1041538563/uss-porter-ignores-warnings.html
The USS Porter, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, entered the Black Sea last month, sparking criticism from Moscow as being yet another example of the US military encroaching on Russia’s borders.
"American warships do enter the Black Sea now and then. Certainly, this does not meet with [Russia’s] approval and will undoubtedly lead to planning response measures," said Andrey Kelin, head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s European Cooperation Department.
"If a decision is made to create a permanent force, of course, it would be destabilizing, because this is not a NATO sea."
But the US Navy has no intention of leaving the region. Speaking from the USS Mason in the Mediterranean, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told reporters that the Western presence is necessary to prevent "Russian aggression."
"We’re going to be there," he said. "We’re going to deter. That’s the main reason we’re there – to deter potential aggression."
"We’re going to be there," he said. "We’re going to deter. That’s the main reason we’re there – to deter potential aggression."
Referring to the deployment of two US Navy aircraft carriers to the Mediterranean ahead of the NATO Summit in Warsaw next month, Mabus added that the Pentagon plays an important role in maritime security.
"We’ve been in the Mediterranean continuously for 70 years now, since World War II," he said. "We’ve been keeping the sea lanes open…It’s what we do."
With its own Black Sea Fleet operating out of Sevastopol, Russia views these maneuvers as the latest example of NATO’s eastward expansion. The alliance plans to station four new battalions in the Baltics and Poland, and has installed a new missile defense system in the region.
Any permanent stationing of a US warship in the waterway would be a violation of the Montreux Convention, which states that countries without a Black Sea coastline cannot keep military ships in the region for more than 21 days.
Step-by-Step: How NATO is Creating Its 'Military Schengen' Zone in Europe
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160617/1041527653/nato-europe-military-schengen.html
Although the NATO bloc had to be disbanded following the collapse of its major adversaries, the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, in the early 1990s, the Cold War relic is seemingly catching a second wind.
"Under the guise of deterring Russian 'aggression,' the US is pushing for a deepening of the alliance, and further undermining the sovereignty of each member state. NATO is also attempting to expand once again, trying to formally secure Montenegro as a member state in the near future, in addition to pulling Georgia closer to the imperial alliance," Steven MacMillan, a geopolitical analyst and editor of The Analyst Report, writes in his article for New Eastern Outlook.
There is only one stumbling block in the way of NATO's "triumphant march": travel restrictions on the movement of US-NATO troops and equipment in Europe.
"We need a Schengen area for American tanks," former Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Radosław Sikorski said back in October 2015.
The idea was echoed by Elisabeth Braw of the Atlantic Council in her June opinion piece for Foreign Affairs.
"NATO's member states are willing to defend one another, and they have the troops and the equipment to do so. But quickly getting those troops and equipment to their destination is a different matter altogether. In some new NATO member states, bridges and railroads are simply not suitable for large troop movements. But one thing frustrates commanders even more: the arduous process of getting permission to move troops across borders," she wrote.
Therefore, the bloc desperately needs a "military Schengen" zone in Europe, Braw argued.
"With a military Schengen in place, NATO troops and equipment would be able to cross NATO borders to their destination the same way EU citizens do: without having to show permits," she underscored.
However, under the false pretext of the so-called "Russian threat" the US-led Alliance is seeking more control over the continent.
Meanwhile the Baltic States have signaled their willingness to ease travel restrictions on the passage of NATO troops and equipment in Europe.
"We support NATO's open-doors policy," Estonian Defense Minister Hannes Hanso told the national Err.ee broadcaster in late May 2016, ahead of the bloc's largest joint Anaconda-16 and BALTOPS-2016military drills in the region.
But that is half the story: to expand its influence in Europe NATO is actively engaging new states in its fold.
On May 19 NATO Foreign Ministers inked the accession protocol for Montenegro.
This spring Finnish and Swedish leaderships reportedly signaled their willingness to discuss the issue of their potential NATO membership, Foreign Policy Magazine reported.
Furthermore, on May 25 Sweden's parliament ratified an agreement granting NATO more access to the country for both training exercises and in the event of a war.
Earlier, in February 2016 Serbia signed a logistical support agreement with the bloc. The agreement gives NATO logistical support staff the right to move freely across the state.
The latest developments show clearly that the NATO bloc is serious about boosting its military presence in Europe. In addition to 4,000 forward-stationed troops in the Baltic States and Poland, NATO is likely to deploy an additional 40,000-strong contingent in the region — in close proximity to Russia's borders.
"NATO is a threat to world peace. Its incessant war games and its addiction to antagonizing the Russian bear are putting the future of the world in jeopardy… The abolition of NATO is what is needed to move the world closer to peace," MacMillan underscores.
Rain of Fire: Russian Airforce Strikes Terrorist Ammunition Warehouse in Aleppo (VIDEO)
http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/06/rain-of-fire-russian-airforce-strikes.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWGTRnBl7rM (Looks like a 4th of July Party?)
The camera gets another shot of an incendiary ammunition warehouse of militants from "Jabhat al-Nusra" in the village of Hayan in Aleppo province.
In the footage, captured by the media with several cameras, exploding shells are seen flying into the sky from the conflagration.
Advocates of illegal armed formations (IAF) continue to convince the world that the attack was on a civilian area.
As has been reported, the civilians left the area because of the constant fierce fighting and reprisals by armed groups.
In the area of illegal armed groups under the leadership of the Syrian wing of "al-Qaeda" - the group "Jabhat al-Nusra" -concentrate their attack on nearby settlements.
In the last 2 days, terrorists attacked the settlement of Halas using VBEID, mortars, and tanks. The militants are trying to take the village by storm. The Syrian Army is trying to hold their position by fighting inside the city.
Recall that on 8th June, military aircraft of the Russian airforces destroyed the headquarters and ammunition depot of militants in nearby Anadan.
On 12th June, cameras also filmed an airstrike by Russian aviation on terrorist targets in the area.
State Dept: ‘No Plans’ to Make Public Memo Urging Strikes on Syrian Gov't
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160617/1041541184/usa-no-plans-urge-syria-strikes.html
US Department of State has no plans to make public an internal memo calling for the United States to take military action against Syrian President Bashar Assad’s government, US Department of State spokesperson John Kirby said in a briefing on Friday.
"There’s no plans to make it public," Kirby stated when asked when the State Department would release the dissent letter.
Furthermore, Kirby said there will be no investigation as to how the letter ended up in the public domain.
Kirby also said that the United States has not made a proposal for members of the opposition in Syria to join government of President Bashar Assad.
"No," Kirby stated when asked whether there is a US proposal to add members of the opposition to the active government in Damascus.
Earlier on Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that the US proposal to consider a possibility of incorporating representatives of the opposition into the Syrian government is "absolutely reasonable."
An internal memo on Syria advocating for military strikes against President Bashar Assad's forces, signed by dozens of US diplomats, is a way to force Moscow to cooperate with the US leadership regarding the future of Assad as the Syrian leader, a source in the Syrian opposition told Sputnik Friday.
US Diplomats Used Memo to Compel Russia to Work With Them on Assad
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160617/1041505182/us-russia-assad.html
The internal memo signed by some 50 US diplomats, a draft of which was obtained by The New York Times from a US State Department official on Thursday, calls for "a judicious use of stand-off and air weapons," against Assad forces.
"All these statements are games that we have already seen in the past. This is the way to put pressure on the Russians. They are saying: ‘Look, we have the opposition that demands actions against Assad and calls on the government to change the current political position toward the Syrian regime, so you [the Russians] need to work with us [the current US administration] and we need to move fast’," the source said.
Many in the State Department believe a Libya-style intervention could work in Syria if they put NATO boots on the ground there, former CIA analyst Fred Fleitz told Radio Sputnik.
US-Led Intervention in Syria 'Would be Worse than Libya'
http://sputniknews.com/middleeast/20160617/1041537702/us-intervention-syria-libya.html
On Friday the New York Times revealed a leaked internal memo, in which dozens of US diplomats expressed disagreement with US President Barack Obama's foreign policy.
The letter is signed by 51 US State Department officials and calls for the US to carry out military strikes in Syria against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces. This, they hope, would enable Washington to ultimately change the Syrian government.
Fred Fleitz, Senior Vice President for Policy and Programs at the Center for Security Policy, told Radio Sputnik that a Libya-style intervention in Syria would worsen the situation there.
"What happened in Libya is that no-one gave any consideration as to what would happen after Gaddafi left power, and the same thing could happen in Syria. If we just knock out Assad who would take over? I think Syria would get worse, because it could become taken over by a government run by al-Qaeda or ISIS) Daesh," Fleitz said.
However Fleitz, a former CIA analyst and State Department official, is one of those in the US who believes that with the right planning and substantial military support NATO could carry out an intervention.
"My solution is that we have to have an international coalition led by NATO, with regional states to resolve the situation with the Assad government, ISIS and the al-Nusra Front. I don't think just attacking Assad is the solution."
"What was done in Libya was half-hearted," the US expert believes.
"This is where the phrase 'leading from behind' came for the US. It was mostly a bombing campaign, run by the British and the French. You may remember that they bombed so much they ran out of bombs."
Despite his belief that a NATO plan might work, Fleitz nevertheless doubts that the political will in the region exists to support another regime change project.
"I think that if we had an intervention like this, it would have to have significant regional support, and frankly we're nowhere near that right now," he said.
Russia has warned that the presence of the USS Porter in the Black Sea is a provocation, but the United States says it intends to stay.
In the Face of Russian Warnings, US Says It Will Remain in Black Sea
http://sputniknews.com/us/20160617/1041538563/uss-porter-ignores-warnings.html
The USS Porter, an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer, entered the Black Sea last month, sparking criticism from Moscow as being yet another example of the US military encroaching on Russia’s borders.
"American warships do enter the Black Sea now and then. Certainly, this does not meet with [Russia’s] approval and will undoubtedly lead to planning response measures," said Andrey Kelin, head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s European Cooperation Department.
"If a decision is made to create a permanent force, of course, it would be destabilizing, because this is not a NATO sea."
But the US Navy has no intention of leaving the region. Speaking from the USS Mason in the Mediterranean, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus told reporters that the Western presence is necessary to prevent "Russian aggression."
"We’re going to be there," he said. "We’re going to deter. That’s the main reason we’re there – to deter potential aggression."
"We’re going to be there," he said. "We’re going to deter. That’s the main reason we’re there – to deter potential aggression."
Referring to the deployment of two US Navy aircraft carriers to the Mediterranean ahead of the NATO Summit in Warsaw next month, Mabus added that the Pentagon plays an important role in maritime security.
"We’ve been in the Mediterranean continuously for 70 years now, since World War II," he said. "We’ve been keeping the sea lanes open…It’s what we do."
With its own Black Sea Fleet operating out of Sevastopol, Russia views these maneuvers as the latest example of NATO’s eastward expansion. The alliance plans to station four new battalions in the Baltics and Poland, and has installed a new missile defense system in the region.
Any permanent stationing of a US warship in the waterway would be a violation of the Montreux Convention, which states that countries without a Black Sea coastline cannot keep military ships in the region for more than 21 days.
NATO is pushing ahead with its military "Schengen zone" in Europe, integrating new members and signing logistic agreements with others to ensure seamless passage for the bloc's troops through Europe.
Step-by-Step: How NATO is Creating Its 'Military Schengen' Zone in Europe
http://sputniknews.com/politics/20160617/1041527653/nato-europe-military-schengen.html
Although the NATO bloc had to be disbanded following the collapse of its major adversaries, the USSR and the Warsaw Pact, in the early 1990s, the Cold War relic is seemingly catching a second wind.
"Under the guise of deterring Russian 'aggression,' the US is pushing for a deepening of the alliance, and further undermining the sovereignty of each member state. NATO is also attempting to expand once again, trying to formally secure Montenegro as a member state in the near future, in addition to pulling Georgia closer to the imperial alliance," Steven MacMillan, a geopolitical analyst and editor of The Analyst Report, writes in his article for New Eastern Outlook.
There is only one stumbling block in the way of NATO's "triumphant march": travel restrictions on the movement of US-NATO troops and equipment in Europe.
"We need a Schengen area for American tanks," former Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs Radosław Sikorski said back in October 2015.
The idea was echoed by Elisabeth Braw of the Atlantic Council in her June opinion piece for Foreign Affairs.
"NATO's member states are willing to defend one another, and they have the troops and the equipment to do so. But quickly getting those troops and equipment to their destination is a different matter altogether. In some new NATO member states, bridges and railroads are simply not suitable for large troop movements. But one thing frustrates commanders even more: the arduous process of getting permission to move troops across borders," she wrote.
Therefore, the bloc desperately needs a "military Schengen" zone in Europe, Braw argued.
"With a military Schengen in place, NATO troops and equipment would be able to cross NATO borders to their destination the same way EU citizens do: without having to show permits," she underscored.
However, under the false pretext of the so-called "Russian threat" the US-led Alliance is seeking more control over the continent.
Meanwhile the Baltic States have signaled their willingness to ease travel restrictions on the passage of NATO troops and equipment in Europe.
"We support NATO's open-doors policy," Estonian Defense Minister Hannes Hanso told the national Err.ee broadcaster in late May 2016, ahead of the bloc's largest joint Anaconda-16 and BALTOPS-2016military drills in the region.
But that is half the story: to expand its influence in Europe NATO is actively engaging new states in its fold.
On May 19 NATO Foreign Ministers inked the accession protocol for Montenegro.
This spring Finnish and Swedish leaderships reportedly signaled their willingness to discuss the issue of their potential NATO membership, Foreign Policy Magazine reported.
Furthermore, on May 25 Sweden's parliament ratified an agreement granting NATO more access to the country for both training exercises and in the event of a war.
Earlier, in February 2016 Serbia signed a logistical support agreement with the bloc. The agreement gives NATO logistical support staff the right to move freely across the state.
The latest developments show clearly that the NATO bloc is serious about boosting its military presence in Europe. In addition to 4,000 forward-stationed troops in the Baltic States and Poland, NATO is likely to deploy an additional 40,000-strong contingent in the region — in close proximity to Russia's borders.
"NATO is a threat to world peace. Its incessant war games and its addiction to antagonizing the Russian bear are putting the future of the world in jeopardy… The abolition of NATO is what is needed to move the world closer to peace," MacMillan underscores.
Russian military aviation continues to destroy identified terrorist armories and military facilities in Syria.
Rain of Fire: Russian Airforce Strikes Terrorist Ammunition Warehouse in Aleppo (VIDEO)
http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/06/rain-of-fire-russian-airforce-strikes.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWGTRnBl7rM (Looks like a 4th of July Party?)
The camera gets another shot of an incendiary ammunition warehouse of militants from "Jabhat al-Nusra" in the village of Hayan in Aleppo province.
In the footage, captured by the media with several cameras, exploding shells are seen flying into the sky from the conflagration.
Advocates of illegal armed formations (IAF) continue to convince the world that the attack was on a civilian area.
As has been reported, the civilians left the area because of the constant fierce fighting and reprisals by armed groups.
In the area of illegal armed groups under the leadership of the Syrian wing of "al-Qaeda" - the group "Jabhat al-Nusra" -concentrate their attack on nearby settlements.
In the last 2 days, terrorists attacked the settlement of Halas using VBEID, mortars, and tanks. The militants are trying to take the village by storm. The Syrian Army is trying to hold their position by fighting inside the city.
Recall that on 8th June, military aircraft of the Russian airforces destroyed the headquarters and ammunition depot of militants in nearby Anadan.
On 12th June, cameras also filmed an airstrike by Russian aviation on terrorist targets in the area.