3 Facts That Will Change Everything You Believe About U.S. Foreign Policy.

Greg Krasovsky: If you want to find out or confirm the truth, always follow the money trail...'cause money don't lie, especially in global arms sales.

Selected excerpt:

"(ANTIMEDIA) The Unites States has the world’s most powerful military — and a huge budget to match it. In fact, the U.S. spends more on defense than the next seven countries’ military budgets combined. America’s navy has been branded a “Global Force for Good,” and U.S. military operations around the world are sold to the public as freedom-by-force operations (see: Operation Iraqi Freedom).

But what is the truth about America’s foreign policy? Is America truly a benevolent empire hell-bent on raining democracy-by-drone strikes around the world? To answer this question, we looked at America’s arms global deals and came to a rather disappointing  conclusion.

The United States is the largest exporter of freedom-promoting military weaponry in the world, accounting for 33 percent of total sales. This is not really surprising considering the U.S. is the world’s strongest superpower with a technological advantage in military equipment over every other country. What is surprising, however, is which countries the U.S. is exporting these arms to. The top three beneficiaries of American arms sales from 2011-2015 raise some serious red flags that may change the way people think about U.S. foreign policy."

Please read rest of this article at: http://theantimedia.org/3-facts-us-foreign-policy/

An please don't forget to check out our Facebook page: http://www.facebook.com/URA.Observer/

Syria: Another Pipeline War?

Syria: Another Pipeline War. 
By Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

"The fossil fuel industry’s business model is to externalize its costs by clawing in obscene subsidies and tax deductions—causing grave environmental costs, including toxic pollution and global warming. Among the other unassessed prices of the world’s addiction to oil are social chaos, war, terror, the refugee crisis overseas, and the loss of democracy and civil rights abroad and at home.

As we focus on the rise of ISIS and search for the source of the savagery that took so many innocent lives in Paris and San Bernardino, we might want to look beyond the convenient explanations of religion and ideology and focus on the more complex rationales of history and oil, which mostly point the finger of blame for terrorism back at the champions of militarism, imperialism and petroleum here on our own shores."

https://ecowatch.com/2016/02/25/robert-kennedy-jr-syria-pipeline-war/

Also consider reading:

The Red Line and the Rat Line.
Seymour M. Hersh on Obama, Erdoğan and the Syrian rebels

"In 2011 Barack Obama led an allied military intervention in Libya without consulting the US Congress. Last August, after the sarin attack on the Damascus suburb of Ghouta, he was ready to launch an allied air strike, this time to punish the Syrian government for allegedly crossing the ‘red line’ he had set in 2012 on the use of chemical weapons.​＊ Then with less than two days to go before the planned strike, he announced that he would seek congressional approval for the intervention. The strike was postponed as Congress prepared for hearings, and subsequently cancelled when Obama accepted Assad’s offer to relinquish his chemical arsenal in a deal brokered by Russia. 

Why did Obama delay and then relent on Syria when he was not shy about rushing into Libya? The answer lies in a clash between those in the administration who were committed to enforcing the red line, and military leaders who thought that going to war was both unjustified and potentially disastrous."

http://www.lrb.co.uk/v36/n08/seymour-m-hersh/the-red-line-and-the-rat-line

Research Paper: ISIS-Turkey List. By David L. Phillips
INSTITUTE FOR THE STUDY OF HUMAN RIGHTS
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

"Is Turkey collaborating with the Islamic State (ISIS)? Allegations range from military cooperation and weapons transfers to logistical support, financial assistance, and the provision of medical services. It is also alleged that Turkey turned a blind eye to ISIS attacks against Kobani."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-l-phillips/research-paper-isis-turke_b_6128950.html

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/

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/

WHY are Israeli commandos risking their lives saving their sworn enemy - rescuing wounded Islamic militants from Syria?

This is Greg Krasovsky's Facebook post on the following Daily Mail article

"Saving their sworn enemy: Heartstopping footage shows Israeli commandos rescuing wounded men from Syrian warzone - but WHY are they risking their lives for Islamic militants?"

The United States, other NATO countries, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Israel have been supporting (both openly and covertly) anti-Assad insurgents in Syria, including fundamentalist Islamic groups, Al Qaeda and ISIS (DAESH) supporters.

As they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. In this case, the "good" intentions were overthrowing a dictator who is supported by Iran and Russia (not to mention the majority of Syrian citizens).

So what's the result?

A country destroyed by war, hundreds of thousands killed and a perfect breeding, training & financing opportunity for ISIS, Al Qaeda, Al Nusra and all sorts of other terrorists (sorry, "freedom-fighting 'moderate' insurgents," according to the Defense and State Departments, the White House and U.S. Intelligence Community) who will eventually take their fight to the countries of their enemy -- the infidels living in Europe, US and Israel.

When will this madness stop? Where's the outrage?

Did Assad present a terrorist threat to the U.S. and Europe? Did Saddam Hussein in Iraq until the U.S. invaded under false pretenses in 2003?

No! These secular dictators kept a tight ship in their country against all opposition, especially the armed fundamentalist Islamic variety.

In my humble opinion, if we want to get rid of ISIS and other Al Qaeda related groups in Syria and Iraq, all we have to do is

1. Stay out of those countries -- that means no ground troops, special forces, military advisors and/or bombings without the permission of and coordination with the legitimate governments in these countries, as well as UN Security Council approval;

2. Stop providing political, financial, logistical and military support (both active and passive) to these fundamentalist/radical insurgents

3. Force Turkey to seal the border with Syria and Iraq to stop the transit of these insurgents and their recruits & agents in and out of Turkey.

4. Stop all income to these terrorist groups by eradicating oil exports & purchases (mostly via/in Turkey) and prohibiting suspicious money transfers from Arab & Gulf states.

5. Let the legitimate governments of Syria and Iraq and their state armies eradicate these groups with foreign military support (including from Russia and Iran) provided in compliance with all applicable international law and related UN resolutions.

Am I wrong?

What's the alternative?

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

Selected excerpts:

"WHY are they risking their lives for Islamic militants?

- Elite Israeli troops rescue wounded Syrians from the world's worst war almost every night

- They have saved more than 2,000 people since 2013, at a cost of 50 million shekels (£8.7million)

- Many are enemies of Israel and some may even be fighters for groups affiliated to Al Qaeda

- MailOnline embedded with Israeli commandos stationed on the border between Israel and Syria

- Dramatic video filmed by MailOnline and the Israeli army shows these operations taking place

- Israel says that the operation is purely humanitarian but analysts believe Israel also has strategic reasons.
...
Israel insists that these treacherous nightly rescues are purely humanitarian, and that it can only hope to 'win hearts and minds' in Syria. But analysts suggest the Jewish state has in fact struck a deadly 'deal with the devil' – offering support to the Sunni militants who fight the Syrian ruler Assad in the hope of containing its arch enemies Hezbollah and Iran.
...
Another rebel, 20-year-old Mohammed, whose leg had been all but destroyed by fire from a Russian-made 'Dushka' heavy machine gun, agreed. 'Thanks to Israel for letting me in,' he said, eyeing the surgical frame supporting his shattered leg.

'The butcher Assad is my enemy. Israel is not my enemy. The one who treats you is not your enemy.' As soon as he was well enough, he added, he too intended to go back to Syria to take up arms again.

The Israeli doctor in charge of their treatment, Russian-born Professor Alexander Lerner – a leading expert in treating war injuries – did not disguise his delight at these responses.

'We are trying to build peace with our neighbours and win their hearts and minds,' he said. 'There are now 2,000 Syrians who have had their lives saved by Israel. We hope that this will change their life position. In the future, they will be more friendly to Israel and they won't want to fight us.'

Other medical staff, however, believe that the militants were lying. Issa Peres, 36, a Christian Israeli Arab social worker, said that many hospital staff resented having to treat them.

'I work with the Syrians all the time, I see and hear bad things,' he said. 'Many of them said bad words to me, that they are going to kill me, they are going to fight with the Christian community, when they are safe they will fight against Israel.

'They have destroyed churches and Christian communities in Syria. I have to care for them, it is my job. But if I'm sitting with myself, I say no, it is not right for Israel to treat them.'

Asked about the fighters' promises not to fight against Israel in the future, he said: 'I don't trust any one of them. They grew up believing Israel is their enemy, Israel is the devil. You can't change their minds by taking care of them for two weeks.'

Other Israelis are more bitter. In June, two wounded Syrian jihadis were attacked by a lynch-mob while they were being transported to hospital by ambulance. One was beaten to death, while the other suffered serious injuries.

Six weeks later, two members of the Israeli Druze community – an Arabic-speaking people found in Israel and across the Levant – were charged with murder. It emerged that the militants were suspected members of Jabhat al-Nusra, an Al Qaeda affiliate who had attacked Druze villages in Syria.
...
According to one senior Israeli army officer, Israel's humanitarian mission may also be part of a security strategy, aiming to 'keep the northern border quiet and our soldiers safe' by using medical treatment as an 'insurance policy'.

'The Syrians will not strike us because they know we'd stop helping them,' Lieutenant Colonel Malka told MailOnline.

'They are desperate for our medical help. They have no doctors, not even a vet. Once we treated a man who had been stitched up by a friend with a needle and thread.

'If they want our help to continue, they know they must stop anybody from attacking our soldiers and civilians.'"

Please read the rest at:  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3315347/Watch-heart-pounding-moment-Israeli-commandos-save-Islamic-militants-Syrian-warzone-risking-lives-sworn-enemies.html

Putin’s “Endgame” in Syria.

Putin’s “Endgame” in Syria.

Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization.

Russia doesn’t want to fight a war with Turkey, so Russian generals devised a simple, but effective plan to discourage Turkey from taking any action that could lead to a clash between the two nations.

Last week, Russian warplanes intruded into Turkish airspace twice. Both incidents caused consternation in Ankara and send Turkish leaders into a furor. 

On both occasions, officials in Moscow politely apologized for the incursions claiming they were unintentional (“navigational errors”) and that they would try to avoid similar intrusions in the future.

Then there was a third incident, a more serious incident, that was not a mistake. It was clearly intended to send a message to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. 

Here’s a short summary of what happened from an article at the World Socialist Web Site:

Turkish officials claimed a third incident on Monday, when an unidentified MiG-29 fighter jet locked its radar for four and a half minutes on eight Turkish F-16 jets that were on patrol on their side of the border, in apparent preparation to open fire.

(“US, NATO step up threats to Russia over Syria“, World Socialist Web Site)
 
This was no mistake. The only time a fighter pilot adopts these protocols is when he plans to take down an enemy plane. This was a message, and while it might have been over-the-heads of the politicians and the media but, I assure you, every general in the Turkish High-Command knows what’s it means.

This is a wake-up call.  Moscow is indicating that there’s a new sheriff in town and that Turkey had better behave itself or there’s going to be trouble.
 
There’s not going to be any US-Turkey no-fly zone over North Syria, there’s not going to be any aerial attacks on Syrian sites from the Turkish side of the border, and there certainly is not going to be any ground invasion of Turkish troops into Syria. 

The Russian Aerospace Defence Forces now control the skies over Syria and they are determined to defend Syria’s sovereign borders.

That’s the message. Period.

Please read the rest of the article at:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/putins-endgame-in-syria/5481482