US Soldiers to be used as Human shields, to protect terrorists.

"Those Russians are killing all of our terrorists in Syria. I have a cunning plan to put a stop to that"
“Those Russians are killing all of our terrorists in Syria. I have a cunning plan to put a stop to that”

Well in case it isn’t obvious already, the US isn’t pleased with how successful Russia has been in dealing with ISIS. The idea of anyone helping President Assad to take back control of his country from the US trained “moderate terrorists” is something they clearly don’t want to see. Who cares of course, that these “moderate terrorists” are fighting side by side with ISIS, a far greater threat to the world, than the Assad regime? Who cares, if they seem virtually indistinguishable from ISIS themselves, to the untrained eye? They’re clearly very different, and are worthy of our support.



"Learn the difference"
“Learn the difference”

No clearly, something needs to be done to protect these terrorists, who only want to bring democracy, and human rights to Syria. Luckily, the US government has thought of a brilliant idea. Using some of their own soldiers as human shields against Russian airstrikes.

From RT

Obama’s decision to send Special Forces into Syria is being widely viewed as a US military escalation in the country. The troop dispatch also signals that the US trying to forestall Russian successes in wiping out Washington’s regime-change assets in Syria.

In short, the US Special Forces are being used as “human shields” to curb Russian air strikes against anti-government mercenaries, many of whom are instrumental in Washington’s regime-change objective in Syria.

Russia is too damn good at killing extreme, Islamic terrorists. We need them to change the regime in Syria for… reasons that are never clearly stated. It worked out so well in Iraq and Libya after all.

First of all, we need to view a host of developments, including the hastily convened “peace talks” in Vienna, as a response by the US and its allies to the game-changing military intervention by Russia. That intervention, beginning on September 30, has not only dealt massive blows to militants, it has completely changed the balance of forces to give the Assad government the upper hand in the war against foreign-backed extremists. That, in turn, has sent the US-led powers trying to topple Damascus into disarray.

This is terrible news. Assad is so evil. Remember when he gassed his people for absolutely no reason? No? Well probably because that story was never backed up with evidence and was quietly dropped down the memory hole. But still, he’s evil because… reasons.

Recall the scattered reactions from Washington and its allies, including Britain, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. At first, Washington tried to rubbish Vladimir Putin’s order to aid his Syrian ally with airstrikes as “doomed to fail”.

Then there were overblown, unverified, claims of civilian casualties from Russian strikes, plus there were American claims that Russian cruise missiles had gone wildly astray, hitting Iran. There was also much angst over Russia striking “moderate rebels” instead of the Islamic State terror network. All such accusations, encouraged with Western media amplification, were designed to undermine Russia’s military operation.

And we know of course that if the Western media and intelligence says something, they must be right. Just like how they were right about the weapons of mass destruction being built in Iraq.

Then there were threats from Saudi Arabia and Qatar that they would launch direct military action in Syria to “protect” the populace from the joint firepower of Assad and Putin. That idea was quickly shelved (one wonders by whom?).

But they wouldn’t protect the population from ISIS, or take in any Syrian refugees. I’m starting to suspect that they don’t actually care about the population. They just want to topple Assad. Well it makes sense. I mean, Saudi Arabia is such a shining example of democracy and human rights. How could they tolerate a monster like Assad, when he’s clearly a greater evil than ISIS?

This is a monster.
This is a monster.
These guys are the lesser evil.
These guys are the lesser evil.

Another seeming knee-jerk response came from Turkey and rightwing politicians and pundits in the US which revived talks about the creation of “safe havens” in northern Syria, ostensibly to protect civilian refugees, but also tacitly and more importantly, to give cover to “rebel” groups from Russian air strikes and Syrian government ground troops.

None of these reactions have gained credibility despite Western media hype. On the contrary, it soon became clear that Russia’s military intervention in Syria was a masterstroke by Putin, wiping out large swathes of the anti-government mercenaries, stabilizing the Assad government, and winning much popular support both within Syria and across the Middle East, and indeed around the world.

No this must surely be propaganda. Why would people around the world be happy at the idea of ISIS getting crushed by Russia? The world clearly loves Islamic terrorists, and wants them to conquer Syria, the rest of the Middle East, and eventually all of the world. It would make the world far more exciting to live in.

Last week, America’s top military official, General Joseph F Dunford, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told a Senate committee that Russia’s air support had changed everything. “The balance of forces right now are in Assad’s advantage,” he said. 

This is so terrible. We might end up with country becoming stable again at some point.

This is the context in which to interpret the latest, surprise move by Obama to send Special Forces into Syria. It is more about inhibiting Russian success in destroying the sundry anti-regime forces on the ground than about either “helping the fight against Islamic State” as claimed, or about misgivings of a large-scale American invasion.

The troop contingent that Obama has ordered amounts to 50 Special Forces personnel. That is hardly going to be a decisive blow to Islamic State militants, even if we believe the official rationale for their deployment.

Can’t say I’m surprised. I don’t tend to trust anything that America says about its foreign policy. They always seem to have an ulterior motive.

The White House, in its announcement, was at pains to emphasize that the troops would not be in a combat role and would only be acting to “advise and train” Kurdish fighters and others belonging to the little-known Syrian Arab Coalition.

But here is perhaps the significant part of the story. “The move could potentially put the American troops in the cross hairs of Russia,” reports the New York Times. Significantly, too, the Pentagon will not be informing the Russian military of the exact whereabouts of its ground personnel.

That suggests that the real purpose for Obama sending in the troops is to restrict Russian offensive operations by introducing the risk of bombing American forces. In effect, the US Special Forces are being used as human shields to protect American regime-change assets on the ground.

And of course, when American Soldiers do get killed, it will be said to be Russia’s fault, not America’s.

These assets include an array of jihadist mercenary brigades, which the US and its allies have invested billions of dollars in for the objective of regime change in Syria. The misnomer of “moderate rebels” belies abundant evidence that the mercenaries include Al Qaeda-linked terror groups, including Islamic State. CIA supplies of anti-tank TOW missiles as well as Toyota jeeps are just a glimpse of the foreign covert-sponsorship.

Russia’s devastating air campaign over the past month – over 1,600 targets destroyed according to Moscow – has no doubt caused apoplexy in Washington, London, Paris, Ankara, Riyadh and Doha. An urgent stop to their “losses” had to be invoked. But the foreign sponsors can’t say it openly otherwise that gives the game away about their criminal involvement in Syria’s war.

This perspective most likely explains the hastily convened “peace conference” in Vienna. US Secretary of State John Kerry’s apparent concern to “stop the bloodshed” does not seem credible as the primary motive. Why the concern now after nearly five years of bloodshed?

Because they’re losing now.

It is not about a “quest for peace” as the BBC reported. The move is more credibly about Washington and its allies maneuvering to give their regime-change assets in Syria a reprieve from Russia’s firepower. One of the main points agreed in Vienna this weekend is the implementation of a “nation-wide ceasefire”.

Another indicator of what is really going on are reports this week of the large-scale airlifting of jihadist mercenary groups out of Syria. According to senior Syrian army intelligence, up to 500 mercenaries were flown to Yemen onboard Turkish, Qatari and Emirati planes. The fighters were brought to Yemen’s southern city of Aden from where they were dispatched to battle zones inside Yemen by the American-coordinated Saudi coalition. The US-Saudi coalition is waging war in Yemen to reinstall the regime of exiled President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi ousted by Houthi rebels earlier this year.

Aden is under the military control of Saudi and Emirati forces and Yemen’s airspace has been closed off by the coalition coordinated by US and British military planners based in Saudi capital Riyadh. It is inconceivable that plane loads of jihadists could be flown into southern Yemen without the knowledge of Washington.

So what we are seeing here is a concerted effort by Washington and its allies to stem their covert military losses in Syria. Sending in American Special Forces – a seemingly dramatic U-turn by Obama to put boots on the ground in Syria – is just one part of a wider effort to forestall Russian success in stabilizing Syria. These US forces are not about a “deepening of American involvement in a war [Obama] has tried to avoid”, as the New York Times would have us believe. They are being sent in to act as human shields against Russian airstrikes.

The putative ceasefire under a so-called peace process is another element of the US-led salvage operation. The real agenda is about giving Western, Turk and Arab-sponsored jihadists a space to regroup, and if needs be flown out of the Syrian theatre to resume their imperialist function in Yemen and, no doubt, elsewhere when required.

Well I think it’s an insane idea to go ahead with this if it’s true. Russia is not like Afghanistan or Iraq. Russia can actually fight back effectively. It isn’t wise to try and start trouble with them over this. Does any ordinary US citizen really like the idea of potentially provoking a war with Russia, for the sake of protecting a bunch of Islamic terrorists? Plus, lets be realistic here. We’re talking about a war in which these guys…




Would have to take on these guys…




I certainly wouldn’t like to be an American soldier in the near future, if things keep going down this insane path.


5 thoughts on “US Soldiers to be used as Human shields, to protect terrorists.

  1. […] been plenty of hints that it might eventually come to this, and these hints were obvious even to me just shy of a year ago. So if an ordinary person like me could see this coming, that long ago, then surely those in […]


  2. I just couldn’t go away your web site before suggesting that I actually enjoyed the standard information an individual provide to your visitors?
    Is going to be back ceaselessly to investigate cross-check
    new posts


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s