Tectonic Shifts in the Middle East Due to US State Department's Warmongering

After the abrupt end of a weeklong Syrian ceasefire, the Russian led coalition raised the ante against Daesh terrorists who are still holding 275,000 Aleppo residents hostage.
Rightly so, as the US State Department are just wasting time of the Syria-Russian side over and over again by agreeing to multiple ceasefires that they can’t uphold, but actively sabotage to the advantage of the Daesh terrorists.

We are expecting the doubling of efforts to remove all Daesh terrorists from the Aleppo and Raqqa area from hereon, while the Russian foreign affairs department is anticipating “tectonic shifts” on Russian policy in Syria, and for the entire region.
Another devastating leak from the US State Department was the audio conversation between Sec. John Kerry and Syrian opposition groups illustrating that while Kerry was negotiating with Russian FM Lavrov for a Syrian ceasefire, Kerry was actually for military intervention all along, using the false flag chemical attack as the basis.
This leak occurred after the US State Department spokesman John Kirby threatened Russia with more body bags, and attacks on Russian cities if the latter would not give in to the US demand for the cessation of attacks against their “moderate rebels” in Syria, which are now exposed to having demanded US military intervention instead of participating in a peaceful transition of power through a transparent Syrian election.
New York Times reports,
Audio Reveals What John Kerry Told Syrians Behind Closed Doors
Anne Barnard
BEIRUT, Lebanon — Secretary of State John Kerry was clearly exasperated, not least at his own government.
Over and over again, he complained to a small group of Syrian civilians that his diplomacy had not been backed by a serious threat of military force, according to an audio recording of the meeting obtained by The New York Times.
“I think you’re looking at three people, four people in the administration who have all argued for use of force, and I lost the argument.”
The 40-minute discussion, on the sidelines of last week’s United Nations General Assembly in New York, provides a glimpse of Mr. Kerry’s frustration with his inability to end the Syrian crisis [with serious military force]. He veered between voicing sympathy for the Syrians’ [5th Columnists’’] frustration with United States policy and trying to justify it.
The conversation took place days after a brief cease-fire he had spearheaded crumbled, and as his Russian counterpart rejected outright his new proposal to stop the bombing of Aleppo. Those setbacks were followed by days of crippling Russian and Syrian airstrikes in Aleppo that the World Health Organization said Wednesday had killed 338 people, including 100 children.
At the meeting last week, Mr. Kerry was trying to explain that the United States has no legal justification for attacking Mr. Assad’s government, whereas Russia was invited in by the government.
“The problem is the Russians don’t care about international law, and we do.”
New York Times is, of course, notorious for twisting facts in favor of the Khazarian bankers who are deeply invested in the military industrial complex and in the mainstream media itself. The same media that is in concert in promoting the “Russian scare” position of Hillary Clinton, the US presidential candidate responsible for the murder of Libyan strongman Muammar Gadhafi.
Mr. Kerry has been hamstrung by Russia’s military operations in Syria and by his inability to persuade Washington to intervene more forcefully. He has also been unable to sell Syrian opponents of Mr. Assad, like the ones in that room, on a policy he does not wholeheartedly believe in.
His frustrations and dissent within the Obama administration have hardly been a secret, but in the recorded conversation, Mr. Kerry lamented being outmaneuvered by the Russians, expressed disagreement with some of Mr. Obama’s policy decisions and said Congress would never agree to use force.
“We’re trying to pursue the diplomacy, and I understand it’s frustrating. You have nobody more frustrated than we are.”
The meeting took place at the Dutch Mission to the United Nations on Sept. 22. There were perhaps 20 people around a table: representatives of four Syrian groups that provide education, rescue and medical services in rebel-held areas; diplomats from three or four countries; and Mr. Kerry’s chief of staff and special envoy for Syria. The recording was made by a non-Syrian attendee, and several other participants confirmed its authenticity.
… Several of the Syrian participants said afterward that they had left the meeting demoralized, convinced that no further help would come from the Obama administration. One, a civil engineer named Mustafa Alsyofi, said Mr. Kerry had effectively told the Syrian opposition, “You have to fight for us, but we will not fight for you.”
… As time ran short, Mr. Kerry told the Syrians that their best hope was a political solution to bring the opposition into a transitional government. Then, he said, “you can have an election and let the people of Syria decide: Who do they want?”
A State Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, said later that Mr. Kerry was not indicating a shift in the administration’s view of Mr. Assad, only reiterating a longstanding belief that he would be ousted in any fair election.
At one point, Mr. Kerry astonished the Syrians at the table when he suggested that they should participate in elections that include President Bashar al-Assad, five years after President Obama demanded that he step down.
Mr. Kerry described the election saying it would be set up by Western and regional powers, and the United Nations, “under the strictest standards.” He said that the millions of Syrians who have fled since the war began in 2011 would be able to participate.
“Everybody who’s registered as a refugee anywhere in the world can vote. Are they going to vote for Assad? Assad’s scared of this happening.”
But the Syrians were skeptical that people living under government rule inside Syria would feel safe casting ballots against Mr. Assad, even with international observers — or that Russia would agree to elections if it could not ensure the outcome. And that is when the conversation reached an impasse, with Ms. Shehwaro, an educator and social media activist, recalling hopes for a more direct American role.
“So you think the only solution is for somebody to come in and get rid of Assad?” Mr. Kerry asked.
“Yes,” Ms. Shehwaro said.
“Who’s that going to be?” he asked. “Who’s going to do that?”
“Three years ago, I would say: You. But right now, I don’t know.”
The above carefully twisted article would like us to believe that the people of Syria really hates incumbent President Assad, and that Russia will never allow any peaceful election to be held unless it has a chance of having Assad as the winner.
We don’t think that Vladimir Putin would even risk putting Russian military resources if it was not clear from the very beginning that Assad has the loyalty of the majority of the Syrian people. This is in fact the conclusion reached by the US Peace Council delegates upon their return from Syria.

The same thing with Crimea when the people there decided overwhelmingly to reintegrate themselves back to the Russian Federation instead of joining Ukraine before Vladimir Putin officially annexed the province through an open referendum.
The multiple US airdropping of military support to Daesh terrorists, and the number of ceasefires allowing the rearming and regrouping of the same terror groups, are more than enough proof that both Obama and Kerry have no control whatsoever about the US forces movements in Syria, and that the US State Department and the CIA will never end their Oust Assad ambition in Syria.
For the Syrians, they will never allow that their country be turned into another Iraq, or Libya. In short, the only way to end all conflicts in the Middle East is for the US military personnel to cease following orders from the military industrial complex, but that is next to impossible at this point.
In another front, Saudi Arabia has also agreed to OPEC’s oil production cut, officially ending the 2-year oil war among oil producing countries, including Russia and Iran, which saw the massive closures of shale gas extraction everywhere.
Is Saudi Arabia joining Turkey in pivoting away from Washington warmongers, after the US Congress defeated Obama’s veto on JASTA bill allowing any US citizen to sue the kingdom for its alleged participation in the WTC 911 attacks in 2001?
This will trigger a proportionate response from the House of Saud through the naming of the primary participants now enjoying their undeserved retirement at Camp David and elsewhere.

You can actually participate in the global efforts to cripple the Deep State organized criminal cabal's ability for genocide, while enjoying healthcare freedom at the same time, by boycotting Big Pharma for good.

3 thoughts on “Tectonic Shifts in the Middle East Due to US State Department's Warmongering”

  1. I am not sure what this last statement implies “This will trigger a proportionate response from the House of Saud through the naming of the primary participants now enjoying their undeserved retirement at Camp David and elsewhere.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *