Excerpt:...Al-Qaeda, through its offshoot "the Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL)" has succeeded in sabotaging the Syrian revolution by assassinating officers and top military commanders of the secular Free Syrian Army. With the help of Tehran and Damascus, the Jihadist groups have targeted the rivals of the two regimes and managed to tarnish the image of the revolution against the Syrian regime.”
Regime suppporters should not get alarmed by accurater reports like this. Keep in mind that Obama is evidence immune. He will deny everything in order to please his Master Putin..
ALEPPO MAP SHOWS REBELS GAINS AGAINST ISIS IN WEST & NORTH
After victories west to #Aleppo, rebels are advancing around Tal_Rifaat. The size of the arrows is indicative of the attacking/defending forces and that suggests ISIS is seriously outmanned in this area.
Article: CIA RAMPING UP COVER TRAINING FOR MODERATE LEVELS BUT WITH STRONG LIMITS IMPOSED BY A POWER-SEEKING OBAMA.
So: Obama is opposed to strengthening moderate rebels because he doesn’t want them to win. In which case who would he prefer to win?
Obama's position automatically favors the worst alternatives: either the Syrian Hitler or Al Queda). He favors statemate and prolongied war knowing his position aids and bets sectarian genocide and further physical descruction of Syria. Indeed it no skin off his back as he lives the good life in the White House.
How can one explain Obama's attitude? Partly it constitutes an endorsement of the ruthless Chenchnya strategy employed by Assad on the advice of Obama’s pal, Vladimir Putin. A stalemate also reflects Obama's desire for more power. A rebel victory would deprive him of a chance to play Big Shot at a peace conference. Finally Obama wants a stalemate in order to bog down Iran for years in a Viet Nam-style quagmire.
Obama justifies his “do nothing” position with a blatant lie--that this is a “civil war” between Syrians (In which case it would indeed be none of our business). Yet he is fully aware of the massive and continuing aid to the regime from Iran and Russia since March of 2011. He cannot fail to be aware of the massive Sectarian Intervention by Shia militias trained and armed by Iran in May. That makes our president a bold-faced liar. His implicit position, translated honestly, sounds like this: : “What arms, I didn’t see any arms? What Iranian-trained Shia militia. I didn’t see any. It's a civil war. Wake up!"
ALAWITE REGIME SEEKS TO EXTERMINE PALESTINIANS BY STARVATION
Palestinian refugees in Yarmouk are being starved to death by the Syrian regime. Does anyone care?
REPLAY: This is one of the situations which led me to post the following earlier and I'm reposting part of it here.
THE TIME MAY NEVER BE BETTER FOR ISRAEL TO INTERVENE DIRECTLY AGAINST THE Al QUEDA/ASSAD ALLIANCE
Has Israel ever required pre-approval from the USA before going to war when her national security was at risk? Why start with Obama in the White House? Israel should find glee in doing now he refused to do months ago. What Sunni Arab would have imagined Israel coming to his or her rescue after an American president not only refused to prevent sectarian genocide but then rubbed it in by playing footsie with the very parties responsible? It would be indeed “the world turned upside down.”
Rebels are now fighting simultaneous against the Al Queda, Iran, Hezbollah, Assad and various proxies (all Israel’s enemies). With the possible exception of Jabhat Al-Nusrah, their interest and Israel’s interests coincide 100%. Israel could use a new friend in the region and I can’t think of a better way to make one.
The case for intervent (by air only) is overwhelming. What a way to cripple Khamenei without need of a direct attack! What a way to change regional attitudes toward Israel! Maybe the Turks and Saudi woul join any attack.
In terms of Israel’s national interest a speeded up rebel victory in which Israel played a part easily trumps every alternative outcome: a) Victory by extreme Islamists, b) An never complete victory by an unpredictable leader in a decades-long destabilizing and radicalizing environment or c) a prolonged, radicalizing civil war won by rebels with no outside help except from Gulf monarchs. It’s a no brainer.
WHAT’S IN IT FOR ISRAEL?
The clock is ticking and this is a once-in-a-lifetme opportunity. If the regime and ISIS should manage to take the rebels out of the picture this chance will never come again. Potential benefits are humanitarian, political, strategic and military. What better way to cripple the IRI’s regional scheming beyond recovery? In terms of risk and cost it beats the next a direct attack on Iran yet it would no less effective.
Certainly Syrians would have reason to be grateful to Israel. Aside from that gratitude and the enduring hatred of the IRI due to genocide-supporting role, self-defense would suggest closer ties with Israel. Hezbollah in Lebanon, caught between two states with grievances, could be forced to disarm and disband. The Palenstinians, murdered and starved by Assad and his Iranian-Russian allies, would likely be far more amenable to a peace deal because of new trust gained.
THE RISKS BEAT ANY ISRAELI ALTERNATIVE
:Even if Israel avoids any direct attacks on Hezbollah, there’s always the possibility that Hezbollah will respond with a missile attack. But that risk becomes just as likely or more so under all other scenarios, especially a direct attack on Iran. Why take the latter risk when there is an easier way to eliminate the same threat. After disposing of Assad, it will essential that Israel join with others in helping rebuild Syria—an impossibitity under the other three alternatives for many reasons.
OBAMA’S #1 GOAL IN SYRIA CERTAINLY APPEAR TO BE...
Eliminate all moderate. Force Syrians are forced to choose between the Syrian Hitler (Assad regime) and Al Queda. Note how Obama's policy goals coincide 100 percen with those of the regime and its ally, Al Queda/ISIS.