by Scott Creighton
UPDATE: On Nov. 1, 2015, Finian Cunningham writes:
In those boots are feet and attached to those feet are someone’s father, mother, son, daughter… soldiers who trust they will never be placed in harm’s way without really good cause.
Last time I checked, protecting the lives of the CIA’s (and John McCain’s) terrorists… is not a “good cause”… and it is certainly not a valid reason to send 50 or so of our soldiers into Syria in this illegal expansion of our immoral regime change operation.
But make no mistake about it, that is why they are there “with no combat mission”
Unnamed U.S. officials reportedly “stressed” to Reuters that the new boots-on-the-ground in Syria were “not meant to engage in front-line combat but rather to advise and assist moderate rebels.” One official told Reuters the key role of the troops would be “logistical” and designed, the news agency reported, to “ensure that weapons and other supplies are delivered to the moderate forces whom the United States supports.” Common Dreams
It’s funny watching White House spokesman Josh Earnest dance around at the podium trying his best to explain why President Obama has enacted this mission creep move without being able to mention the highly successful Russian bombing campaign itself. It’s as if he thinks no one on the planet connects those particular dots. Or if they do in the press corps, no one will be indelicate enough to mention it.
But someone in congress mentioned it yesterday in a letter he sent to the White House. Sen. Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.) said in a letter written to the president, that this was “a mistake” which could obviously have grave consequences.
“Imagine the scenario in which American forces are deployed alongside Syrian opposition forces and come into combat with ISIL, who are also being targeted by Russian and Syrian military forces via land and air,” Heinrich wrote in a letter to the president. “The margin for error diminishes considerably, and the consequences of either accidental or intentional fire on our ground forces — or Russian and Syrian forces — expand greatly.”
“The resulting desire or need to retaliate against the other would be inevitable,” he added. “The ‘fog of war’ in this situation appears too great and the risks significantly outweigh the potential benefits.” Huffington Post
Unfortunately Sen. Heinrich does not understand the full implications of this calculated move by the administration. If he did, he would realize the futility of his sending this letter.
Yes, the margin for error diminishes considerably and that’s the whole purpose behind the “human shield” tactic.
Any thug knows this. That’s why they take a hostage and hide behind them as they try to make it past the waiting cops to their getaway car.
It’s the same thing here.
For weeks now, the CIA and their apologists in the MSM and congress (that’s YOU Sen. McCain) have been weeping over the fact that the Russians are being so successful in their efforts to drive destabilization terrorists out of Syria. Over and over these guys have lamented the fact that Russia treats “ISIS” and our “moderate” terrorists in exactly the same manner: they bomb the shit out of them.
They’ve been so successful, these irregular warfare assets have been fleeing the country in droves or being airlifted out of the country to start a new campaign in Yemen on behalf of their CIA paymasters.
The contradiction in outcomes between Russia’s bombing of “ISIS” and the US’s version of the same is quite staggering.
As Obama has been bombing in Syria for just over a year now, “ISIS” grew in power and control especially of the area in northern Syria where Obama and Petreaus and a few others hope to break off a piece of the country and give it to the fascist Kurds we seem to love so much.
Yet, when Russia starts bombing, the little CIA cockroaches start to flee in a matter of a few weeks.
You wonder why that is? That’s because the US has been bombing civilian infrastructure in Syria, not “ISIS”, in support of their “moderate” terrorist’s regime change operation and Russia is actually bombing the terrorists.
A year compared to a couple of weeks. It’s pretty obvious what’s going on.
What’s also obvious is the fact that these soldiers, not “boots”, are going to be placed on the ground, in Syria, illegally (not only by international law, but also by US law since Obama has no authorization from congress to engage forces in Syria) for the sole purpose of making targeting harder for the Russians.
The idea behind this move is that Russian pilots and generals directing combat flights will not be able to determine where these 50 US soldiers are at any given time in northern Syria. This is a kind of psychological warfare utilizing US soldiers as pawns on the Grand Chessboard.
The mission is supposedly for our troops to be there advising the CIA’s regime change terrorists with tactical information, munitions procurement and other such logistical assistance. They aren’t sent in for combat.
Well, there is a good reason for that. Our terrorists over there aren’t targeting the fictional “ISIS” but rather civilian infrastructure and Syrian military personnel. By specifically stating they aren’t there in a combat role, the Pentagon is trying to absolve US forces of whatever crimes against humanity our terrorists commit in country, if and when those crimes ever see the light of day in an international court of law.
It’s called plausible deniability and it’s not just for the president anymore.
The mission they describe is pretty much the exact same thing they’ve already been doing for these Wahhabist mercenaries for years. The only difference is now, they claim, they have to be embedded with the al Qaeda-linked terrorists in order to accomplish it.
We’ve been dropping munitions and weapons to these clowns for quite a while now (with much of it “accidentally” ending up in the hands of “ISIS”) and some of them are equipped with hi-tech GPS locators with which they can even call in airstrikes from the coalition bombers and drones.
So why do they need US soldiers standing next to them in order to accomplish these things?
The troops are going to be standing next to them in order to keep Russian planes from targeting the “moderate” terrorists. And that’s it. That’s the ONLY possible explanation for this deployment.
Now, there is another way to look at this and I hinted at it earlier and that is, they wont send a single soldier over there to stand with al Qaeda in Syria. I mean, as deranged as these guys are, the guys who do things like deliberately target hospitals in Afghanistan, it is possible that simply announcing this move will achieve their desired goal.
The Russians wont have any way of knowing which terrorist attackers have US troops embedded with them. Effectively, that would protect ALL of the CIA’s (and John McCain’s) beloved terrorists.
In fact, if they don’t stand out in a crowd, it serves the Pentagon’s interests even better.
It’s also possible that all they intend to do is put US military uniforms on some of our terrorists in the region. That might be problematic in terms of what those guys do while wearing them.
However you look at it, this is a despicable move by the Obama administration.
What they want to do is force Russia’s hand in the ongoing negotiations by essentially embedding US troops with these terrorists in the northern, Kurdish controlled area of Syria.
Eventually they will put forward a “compromise” which will allow for the creation of a Kurdish Syria in that area, much like Iraqi Kurdistan. Basically, breaking off a piece of a sovereign state in order to build a Greater Kurdistan, is the desired result. That way they can leave Assad in power, let them hold whatever election they want, and still get the oil rich territory, handing it over to the corrupt Barzani clan in Kurdistan.
Now all they have to do is bust off a chunk of Turkey after the upcoming election is deemed “rigged” and they got their ultimate prize: Greater Kurdistan.
Nation building 101.
Filed under: Uncategorized