CIA Interventions in Syria - any parallels with Ukraine?

CIA Interventions in Syria - any parallels with Ukraine?

Greg Krasovsky: When the U.S. government uses the CIA, the State Department and/or the Pentagon to support radicals (including nationalists, neo-Nazis and heirs of Nazi collaborators and war criminals like the Ukrainian SS Division Galitsiya) - by providing them with money, training, weapons, safe passage, political support and media support - in order to topple a foreign regime that's not friendly (subservient?) to US interests, civil war is often around the corner.

After the end of WWII, the US Government actively hid from justice and relocated to the U.S. (against U.S. laws!) Ukrainian Nazi war criminals in order to use them in the cold war against the Soviet Union. 

We're talking about war criminals who either killed themselves or aided the Nazi SS troops in killing hundreds of thousands (perhaps over  a million) of Poles and Jews in Ukraine, Poland and Byelorussia.
   
What was the justification? In case WWIII broke out with the Soviet Union, the U.S. would have loyal Ukrainian and Russian speaking troops to help wage war against the Soviets.

Actually, OSS, CIA and its European partners provided Ukrainian Nazi collaborators and war criminals with weapons, communications logistics and training bases as they waged an insurgency and terrorism in Ukraine and the Baltics up to the early 1950s. Most of their victims were local civilians, including many women and children, who dared support new Soviet rule.
  
So when Ukraine became an independent country in 1991, is it surprising that the CIA began to fund and develop Ukrainian nationalists, including radical xenophobes and neo-Nazis, to bring about a Ukrainian government that would be anti-Russia and controlled (politically, economically and eventually militarily when it joined NATO or had enough NATO bases & troops on its soil) by the USA?

Unfortunately, the history of CIA work against the anti-US Assad government in Syria since 2010 is a pertinent example of how the CIA has operated since its inception to force regime change and install pro-US regimes (even authoritarian and totalitarian ones!) when necessary by covert action, false flag operations, assassinations and military support to radical insurgents.
   
When the US government and its agencies - CIA, NSA, Department of Defense, Department of State - exploit and/or inflame political, ethnic and religious tensions (conflicts) to enact regime change, the consequences can be utterly devastating for any country.
  
What's the worse case scenario for a country? Let's look at Syria, Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan. 
  
As I've written before many times, as an American of Ukrainian and Russian heritage, I don't want Ukraine to join this club of failed states. 

I have always been for a truly for truly independent and democratic Ukraine - but not for a country where radical nationalists and ant-Russian xenophobes beat, detain, torture, kidnap and even kill their opponents (normal Ukrainian people who don't share the radicals' hate of everything Russian) with impunity, de facto and de jure legal immunity from prosecution.

So let's look at Syria and try to do everything in our power to prevent the US and its NATO allies from doing the same thing in Ukraine - namely, supporting pr-US hate-spewing radical extremists who will eventually create either a totalitarian state or a failed state embroiled in civil war with an endless outflow of refugees seeking peace in neighboring countries. 

BTW, these failed states always become breeding grounds, staging areas and refuge for radical terrorists bent on committing terrorist acts in neighboring countries. 

Who do you think the militarization of Ukrainian society will produce, especially when there are no jobs available for these newly trained radicals who've already tasted blood and overcome any hesitation at killing civilians (pro-Russian separatist-supporting scum, as they call them)? These people have been taught to hate Russian and  trained to kill any Pro-Russian who does not agree with their vision of a pure Ukraine for Ukrainians.

So guess what? The natural target for anti-Russian radical Ukrainian nationalists will be Russia. If you think that Israel was ruthless in stomping out Palestinian bases in neighboring countries (like Lebanon in 1985), then I've got some bad news for you - Russia will be just as ruthless as Israel with all ensuing consequences for Ukraine and its innocent civilian population that's been taken hostage in the very dangerous geopolitical game. 

Judging by the US response to Al Qaeda attacks on US soil in 2001 - the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq - if a major terrorist act is committed on Russian soil by anti-Russian Ukrainian radicals, then Russia's response is likely to exceed the US response, as Ukraine is literally next door unlike Afghanistan or Iraq.

Do we want the US, EU and NATO to face such a scenario? Only a madman would want to risk a potentially (likely) nuclear WWIII in the geographic center of Europe..
  
Would you?
  
Here's a compilation of articles about how those radical insurgents in Syria, like ISIS (DAESH), al-Nusra Front and the so-called "moderate opposition" got their start, funding, weapons and other logistical help that helped them gain control by the summer of 2015 of at least half of Syria. 

*******************

CIA Interventions in Syria: A Partial Timeline
Michael S. Rozeff

"This partial timeline provides evidence that the U.S. government and Obama in particular bear a significant responsibility for the Syrian war and the results of that war. Obama approved elements of CIA plans that go back over 65 years. The CIA meddling is distinct from the Pentagon’s failed plan to train moderate rebels, not covered in this timeline.
...
In my opinion, the most serious U.S. meddling is what the Wikileaks cables reveal, which is the State Department’s organization of domestic opposition to its elected government. This provoked the revolution that started in Daraa, and that provided an opening for radical and armed Muslim elements to enter the battle. Next in importance is Obama’s position that Assad must go, because this guides the entry of the CIA and Pentagon into the war while committing the U.S. to a politically untenable and impossible course of attempting to reconstitute a new government among radical and rival forces if and when Assad falls or rebel forces gain control. Undetermined but significant amounts of arms and training have ended up flowing to ISIS and other radical groups that the U.S. cannot control, and these forces can’t be dislodged without bigger military commitments by the U.S. Neither the CIA’s activities nor the Pentagon’s failed training program have resulted in control over the battlefield or those groups, which have expanded control over Syrian territory.

Why did Obama intervene in Syria? There are four main reasons and they are not mutually exclusive. One reason is “democracy promotion”. This appears again and again in his rhetoric and that of the State department, where “democracy” is taken to mean “rights” among other things. Obama viewed Assad as standing in the way of the Syrian people. Obama’s intention to bomb Syria when he accused Assad of using chemical weapons brought out a version of this position in his concern for violations of international law. Obama has an idea of world order and the U.S. role in enforcing it. Obama’s position on the Arab Spring also showed this democracy promotion concern. The second reason is to thwart Iran in order to maintain U.S. dominance in the region. Related to this is U.S. support for Saudi Arabia and Gulf states who have also supported rebel elements in Syria as well as support for Turkey. The U.S. leads a coalition. The third reason is Israel’s influence in administration circles and on Capitol Hill. The fourth reason is to thwart Russia’s influence in Syria and deny it access to the Mediterranean. This appears to have backfired.
...
Why would I or many sane Americans want to bother with who rules Syria or how they rule it? It’s not my province. It’s none of my business. How in the world can I know whether I’m doing any good if I decide to butt in?

The government doesn’t think this way. It’s composed of people who want to meddle and run for office for that very reason. They are arrogant enough to think that they know what’s good for everyone when they don’t know diddly-squat. Who are they but pompous babbling fools? The CIA attracts smart people who love to work by schemes and subterfuges behind the scenes. These are power freaks who love playing byzantine games and relish manipulations. Why should any sane American want to allow these kinds of people to have access to ungodly amounts of money and power that they waste on their futile and very dangerous schemes that kill, maim and destroy?"

Please read the rest at https://www.lewrockwell.com/lrc-blog/cia-interventions-in-syria-a-partial-timeline/


Daraa 2011: Syria’s Islamist Insurrection in Disguise.

“I have seen from the beginning armed protesters in those demonstrations … they were the first to fire on the police. Very often the violence of the security forces comes in response to the brutal violence of the armed insurgents” – Jesuit priest Father Frans Van der Lugt, January 2012, Homs Syria

“The claim that armed opposition to the government has begun only recently is a complete lie. The killings of soldiers, police and civilians, often in the most brutal circumstances, have been going on virtually since the beginning.” – Professor Jeremy Salt, October 2011, Ankara Turkey

“The protest movement in Syria was overwhelmingly peaceful until September 2011” – Human Rights Watch, March 2012, Washington

A double story began on the Syrian conflict, at the very beginning of the armed violence in 2011, in the southern border town of Daraa. The first story comes from independent witnesses in Syria, such as the late Father Frans Van der Lugt in Homs. They say that armed men infiltrated the early political reform demonstrations to shoot at both police and civilians. This violence came from sectarian Islamists. The second comes from the Islamist groups (‘rebels’) and their western backers, including the Washington-based Human Rights Watch. They claim there was ‘indiscriminate’ violence from Syrian security forces to repress political rallies and that the ‘rebels’ grew out of a secular political reform movement.

Careful study of the independent evidence, however, shows that the Washington-backed ‘rebel’ story, while widespread, was part of a strategy to delegitimise the Syrian Government, with the aim of fomenting ‘regime change’. To understand this it is necessary to study the outbreak of the violence in Daraa, in March 2011. Central to that insurrection were shipments of arms from Saudi Arabia to Islamists at the al Omari mosque.
...
After months of media manipulations, disguising the Islamist insurrection, Syrians such as Samer al Akhras, a young man from a Sunni family, who used to watch Al Jazeera because he preferred it to state TV, became convinced to back the Syrian government. He saw first-hand the fabrication of reports on Al Jazeera and wrote, in late June 2011:

‘I am a Syrian citizen and I am a human. After 4 months of your fake freedom … You say peaceful demonstration and you shoot our citizen. From today … I am [now] a Sergeant in the Reserve Army. If I catch anyone … in any terrorist organization working on the field in Syria I am gonna shoot you as you are shooting us. This is our land not yours, the slaves of American fake freedom’ (al Akhras 2011).

Please read the rest at http://www.globalresearch.ca/daraa-2011-syrias-islamist-insurrection-in-disguise/5460547


Logistics 101: Where Does ISIS Get Its Guns?

The current conflict consuming the Middle East, particularly in Iraq and Syria where the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS) is operating and simultaneously fighting and defeating the forces of Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Iran, we are told, is built upon a logistical network based on black market oil and ransom payments.
...
While many across the West play willfully ignorant as to where ISIS truly gets their supplies from in order to maintain its impressive fighting capacity, some journalists have traveled to the region and have video taped and reported on the endless convoys of trucks supplying the terrorist army.

Were these trucks traveling to and from factories in seized ISIS territory deep within Syrian and Iraqi territory? No. They were traveling from deep within Turkey, crossing the Syrian border with absolute impunity, and headed on their way with the implicit protection of nearby Turkish military forces. Attempts by Syria to attack these convoys and the terrorists flowing in with them have been met by Turkish air defenses.

Germany’s international broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) published the first video report from a major Western media outlet illustrating that ISIS is supplied not by “black market oil” or “hostage ransoms” but billions of dollars worth of supplies carried into Syria across NATO member Turkey’s borders via hundreds of trucks a day.

The report titled, “‘IS’ supply channels through Turkey,” confirms what has been reported by geopolitical analysts since at least as early as 2011 – that ISIS subsides on immense, multi-national state sponsorship, including, obviously, Turkey itself.

Looking at maps of ISIS-held territory and reading action reports of its offensive maneuvers throughout the region and even beyond, one might imagine hundreds of trucks a day would be required to maintain this level of fighting capacity. One could imagine similar convoys crossing into Iraq from Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Similar convoys are likely passing into Syria from Jordan.

Please read the rest at http://journal-neo.org/2015/06/09/logistics-101-where-does-isis-get-its-guns/


How The Hell Does ISIS Get All Those Tanks, Weapons And Shiny New Toyota Trucks? 

CNBC reported that so far we’ve accidentally furnished the Islamic State with at least $219.7 million worth of weapons, vehicles and other military supplies and gear — and that’s just the stuff we know about. 

Based on various reports, CNBC came up with the following laundry list of supplies the U.S. has so kindly provided to ISIS so far. 

2,300 Humvee armored vehicles at $70,000 each: $16 million 
40 M1A1 Abram tanks at $4.3 million each: $172 million 
52 M198 Howitzer mobile gun systems at $527,337 each: $2.7 million 
74,000 Army machine guns at $4,000 each: $29 million 
TOTAL: $219.7 MILLION in military weapons, vehicles, and other supplies and gear for ISIS. 

How does the Islamic State get hold of all these U.S. weapons? We deliver them, either directly or through the tattered remnants of Iraq’s military. 

[Jeremy Salt, a political analyst in Ankara, Turkey]...reminded us of our nation’s major blunders for supplying weapons to ISIS for the past couple of years. 

- Accidental air-dropping of weapons and supplies intended for the Syrian Kurds into Islamic State territory. 
- This didn’t just happen once, it happened several times. 
- Weapons and supplies seized by ISIS during the falls of Mosul (Iraq), Ramadi (Iraq), AND Palmyra (Syria). 

Salt doesn’t even bother explaining how the George W. Bush administration created ISIS by invading Iraq on false pretenses and chasing off all those heavily armed and well-trained Baathist soldiers. 

But he does ask how it’s even possible that U.S. intelligence and the military — both of which are among the most sophisticated in the world — could have possibly NOT seen what was coming. 

Please read the rest at http://reverbpress.com/news/international/isis-toyota-trucks-us-tanks-weapons/

University Study Shows that the Maidan Massacre was Planned by the Putschists.

University Study Shows that the Maidan Massacre was Planned by the Putschists.

Greg Krasovsky: A Canadian academic, Ivan Katchanovski, has dared to assert that the Euromaydan massacre (shootings of protesters and police from February 18 to February 20, 2014 "was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and executed with the aim to overthrow the government and seize power."

Sadly, I tend to agree with him from my own sources and analysis of events.

Now let's see if Mr. Katchanovski becomes as ostracized as Valentina Lisitsa, the Canadian Ukrainian pianist who dared to speak out against the war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by the post-putsch Turchinov-Yatsenyuk-Poroshenko government troops in east Ukraine.

See http://www.facebook.com/ValentinaLisitsa/ and https://twitter.com/vallisitsa

*******

Selected excerpt:

"Ivan Katchanovski, professor of political science at the University of Ottawa, conducted a study on the massacre perpetrated by snipers on the Maidan square of Kiev in February, 2014.

The paper analyzes a large amount of material available from different sources:

- about 1500 videos and recordings from the internet and television in different countries (about 150 gigabytes),
- newsletters and social media messages from a hundred journalists covering the massacre of Kiev,
- about 5000 photos, and
- nearly 30 gigabytes of radio interceptions of snipers and commanders of the Alfa unit of the Security Service of Ukraine and Ministry troops of the Interior and
- finally records of the massacre trial.

This study is also based on field research on the massacre site, witness’ reports from both camps, the commanders of the special units, the statements made by current and former government officials, approximate estimates of ballistic trajectories, bullets and weapons used and the types of injuries on both sides.

This study establishes a specific timetable for the various events of the massacre, the shooters locations and the precise timing and location of the death of nearly 50 protesters.

This university investigation concluded that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and executed with the aim to overthrow the government and seize power."

Please read the rest at http://www.voltairenet.org/article189953.html

Also please watch the following video:

Who's behind the Maidan killings of February 2014 ?

"Kiev regime lately trying to come up with different stories about the "unknown snipers" who shot "heavenly hundred"

We instead will rely solely on the facts and objectivity simply list them, without making any conclusions

- Events took place on February 18th

It was then, about at one o'clock day time, Euromaidan activists and journalists, on the Institutska street, found a car, "Honda" with state numbers AA4774SO (registered to the citizen of Ukraine Boyko Elena ), in which in the trunk was found a sniper rifle with telescopic sight and a silencer

The driver of the car (identified as Barladin Petr) hid his face behind a medical mask and to the questions of activists could not and would not give clear answers.

Almost immediately at the scene appeared MP from the party "Fatherland" Pashinsky Sergey. He prevented the activists to hold the car, and then directed the escape.

Along with Pashinsky on the scene arrived trustee of Arsen Avakov [who's now Minister of Internal Affairs], special forces "Bars" team member Sobolta Yuri

By order of Sergei Pashinsky (Pashinsky commanded almost exclusively by gestures, so his leadership is obvious) Sobolta gets in the car and takes it to an unknown destination

A short time later Sobolta become the personal bodyguard of the new Interior Minister Arsen Avakov. A month later for unknown services received from him a personal award pistol "Fort 1705»

Later nether Pashinsky or other figures of the case does not really explain where sniper rifle came from to Instytutska , why it was there, why it secretly taken out and where it is gone. Nor was made proper investigation of the involvement of this rifle to subsequent events, as well as the participants did not offered any alibi. As if nothing happened and this video is simply imagination."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oW20T4bDY70

Could a Bomb Blast in Ankara Change the Outcome of the War in Syria?

Greg Krasovsky: If US policy toward the civil war in Ukraine is in any way similar to US policy in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan and Yemen, then Ukraine is headed toward the epicenter of a geopolitical disaster on world-wide proportions.

Why? Because Russia will act with greater response than in Syria to make sure that next-door Ukraine will not turn into a failed state that could (would!) be used by armed anti-Russian militants as a protected staging area in an attempt to overthrow Vladimir Putin's in Russia.

So let's keep an eye on Syria today, as the fates of Ukraine, Russia and America -- for better or for worse -- are intertwined in the resolution of the Syrian conflict. 

P.S. To see how things could spiral out of control, please read 

"Washington Asks Moscow: Please Do Not to Bomb American Troops Operating on the Ground in Northern Syria."

http://www.globalresearch.ca/washington-asks-moscow-please-do-not-to-bomb-american-troops-operating-on-the-ground-in-northern-syria/5509226

"Experts: Invasion of Syria Could Lead to Nuclear War"

http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2016/02/experts-invasion-syria-lead-nuclear-war.html

******* 

Could a Bomb Blast in Ankara Change the Outcome of the War in Syria?
by MIKE WHITNEY
Counterpunch.org
FEBRUARY 19, 2016

"The question is whether Putin will engage the Turkish military in a full-blown war just to recapture a few hundred meters of Syrian sovereign territory. I expect Putin will let the incident slide and chalk it up to “frustration” on Turkey’s part. If that’s the only victory that Erdogan requires, then it’s a price that’s worth paying. Putin has to stay focused on the big picture, and not get diverted by trivialities.

Of course, if Erdogan plans to push further into Syria, then there’s going to be trouble. After all, Moscow’s hands are tied. The only way it can hope to extricate itself from the conflict in Syria is by defeating the jihadists as quickly as possible, clearing out the hotbeds of resistance, and reestablishing security. If Turkey enters the war, that throws a wrench in everything. The tit-for-tat fighting will drag on for years, and there will probably never be a clear winner. This is exactly what Putin hopes to avoid. So, if Turkey launches an invasion and sends in ground troops, Putin will be forced to strike with everything-he’s-got to see if one, big shock and awe display of raw military power is enough to reverse the trend and send Erdogan’s legions packing. If it doesn’t work, and Turkey digs in, Syria could devolve into the mother of all quagmires, which is why we’re a little surprised that Obama is not pursuing a plan that would draw Turkey deeper into the fray, after all, Washington gains nothing strategically from its support for the YPG. In a way, the alliance makes no sense. Does Washington care about Kurdish aspirations for a homeland?

No. Does Obama want to help Putin clear the area North of Aleppo of jihadists, militants and opposition forces?

Of course not. Then what does Washington get?

Nothing.

An alliance with Erdogan, on the other hand, provides Washington with the footsoldiers it needs to fight its proxy war with Russia. It also creates a situation where Russia could get bogged down for years in a conflict that could drain its resources, undermine morale, and precipitate social unrest at home. Isn’t that exactly what Washington wants?"

Please read the rest of the article at http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/02/19/could-a-bomb-blast-in-ankara-change-the-outcome-of-the-war-in-syria/