The US Ponders a Strike Against Syria: What’s Behind This Aggressive Approach?

The US is considering the option of military action against Syria. The alleged use of chemical weapons (CW) by the Syrian government, which is not backed by any solid evidence, is to serve as the pretext. Syrian President Assad is going to be “punished.” On March 6, US President Trump and Israeli PM Netanyahu discussed the threat posed by Iran’s presence in Syria and ways to counter it.

Chemical weapons? But why should Syria’s President Assad use them if he has had no trouble winning with conventional weapons wherever he goes? Couldn’t the rebels be using CW? Instances of that have been uncovered and confirmed. But no, US officials don’t even bother to give a passing thought to such “unimportant and irrelevant” considerations. They know better who to blame and who deserves to be made to pay for the wrongdoings they believe have taken place. In April, 2017, the US delivered a missile strike against a Syrian military facility, in flagrant violation of international law.

It’s worth noting that a group of US senators visited Israel in late February. According to them, a conflict between Israel and the pro-Iranian forces in southern Lebanon was imminent and that fighting would likely encompass Syria as well. Israel has been increasing its support of proxy groups in Syria recently.

Senator Lindsey Graham believes that Tehran is “testing” the US and Israel and that the administration is not doing enough to push back against Iran in Syria and throughout the Middle East.

On Feb. 28, just three days before Israeli PM Netanyahu arrived in the US on March 4, Fox News offered its audience an exclusive report on a military base being built by Iran in Syria. It claimed this information was evidence that Tehran was preparing for a permanent presence in the country. The story was presented as a real scoop and the timing was carefully chosen. The report plays into the hands of both the administration and as well as those in Congress who are calling for a more resolute stand on Syria.

Israel enjoys almost unlimited US backing, which forces America to become involved directly or indirectly in the hostilities. Last month, French President Emmanuel Macron said he would order airstrikes against Syria if the use of CW were confirmed.

Israel is a privileged ally but it’s not only Israeli security that drives American policy. And it’s not so much Syria but Iran the US has in its crosshairs. If America allows Iran a land bridge linking it to the Mediterranean via Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, this will frustrate its main Middle East allies – the Persian Gulf monarchies. Lebanon will leave the sphere of Western influence. The tensions between Sunni Arab states and Iran boost US arms sales to rich Middle Eastern countries, which is hugely profitable. Thus a belligerent stand toward Tehran allows America to preserve its political clout in a region where its policy has been such a disaster in recent years.

It will be too hard to reach any agreement on the recently discovered offshore gas deposits in the eastern Mediterranean, which are a bone of contention between Israel and Lebanon. And the gas exports from these fields could diminish or eliminate the need to import Russian gas to Southern Europe, which would kill the prospects for the Turkish Stream project. Without Iran, Lebanon could be pressured into an agreement on terms dictated by Israel and America’s European allies.

With access to the Mediterranean, Iran could build naval bases that would threaten the NATO naval forces there. The ability to ship exports by sea would boost Iran’s income, making the country richer and more powerful.

Attacking Syrian forces to force a retreat will reduce Moscow’s influence and hamper the diplomatic efforts to bring peace to Syria that have been so successful recently. So-called “rebel groups,” so recently and spectacularly defeated, will reemerge as a force to be reckoned with. From Washington’s perspective, a divided Syria with vast swaths under the control of pro-US and Israel-backed groups is better than a united country in which the West can take part in the peace talks but not as a party that controls territory or exerts significant influence on the balance of power.

Inventing a reason to use force against Syria is a way to fight Iran and roll Russia back. This is a very dangerous policy. As a result, Syria will become a battlefield where powerful actors clash in their pursuit of strategic goals. That will be much worse than fighting jihadists. This scenario can be avoided through diplomatic efforts headed by Russia with the input of all. That’s what Moscow is talking about but the US does not listen. There were times when the US ignored Moscow’s concerns about Russia’s security. On March 2, Russian President Putin unveiled information about the new super weapons Russia alone possesses in the world today. In this same manner Washington may find that participating in Moscow-sponsored peace initiatives is a much better way to settle the Syrian conflict than instigating tensions as it is now doing, but it may already be too late.

By Peter Korzun of Strategic Culture.

Washington Delivers New Ultimatum on Iran

The US State Department has issued a fresh ultimatum on the Iran nuclear deal to Washington’s ostensible major allies in Europe, demanding that Germany, Britain and France commit themselves to altering the agreement along the lines demanded by President Donald Trump or face its unilateral abrogation by the US.

A secret State Department cable obtained by Reuters presents what are essentially the same demands made by Trump last January. At that time, he announced that he was prepared to relaunch all-out US economic warfare against Iran unless the European powers joined Washington in imposing a rewritten nuclear accord on Tehran, including provisions that the Iranian government cannot and will not accept.

The occasion for Trump’s threat was his reluctant announcement on January 12 that he had decided to waive the re-imposition of US sanctions that were lifted as part of the nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). He vowed that this would be the last time he issued such a waiver, unless his conditions were met. The next deadline for waiving the sanctions is May 12.

The message from the State Department to the European powers asks for their “commitment that we should work together to seek a supplemental or follow-on agreement that addresses Iran’s development or testing long-range missiles, ensures strong IAEA inspections, and fixes the flaws of the ‘sunset clause.’”

Washington has demanded that Iran grant International Atomic Energy Agency inspectors immediate and unlimited access to any site in the country, including military bases; the elimination of “sunset clauses” in the JCPOA, making time-limited restrictions on aspects of Iran’s civil nuclear program permanent; and drastically limiting, if not outlawing, Iran’s ballistic missile program.

While presented by Reuters and other media as a softening of the position outlined by Trump in January, the cable makes it clear that the US is continuing to present its nominal allies in Europe with an ultimatum.

“In the absence of a clear commitment from your side to address these issues, the United States will not again waive sanctions in order to stay in the Iran nuclear deal. If at any time the President judges that such commitment is not within reach, the President indicated he would end US participation in the deal.”

The cable’s “talking points” for US diplomats to advance Washington’s agenda in Europe stress “the Trump administration’s strategy to counter the Iranian regime’s reckless aggression,” which “addresses the full range of Iranian threats, of which Iran’s nuclear program is only one element.”

The clear implication is that Washington is embarked on a trajectory of war with Iran, either with or without the collaboration of its NATO allies in Berlin, London and Paris. Should they join with the US in ripping up the nuclear accord, it will set them on a collision course not only with Iran, but also with Russia and China, the two other signatories to the JCPOA.

The US has spelled out its own intentions in the Trump administration’s recent National Security Strategy, lumping Iran together with North Korea under the category of “rogue states” that represent a threat to US “national interests” and are to be confronted and defeated.

None of the European powers responded directly to the US cable, which the State Department itself refused to discuss. Asked about the US demands in an online media briefing, the French Foreign Ministry declared:

“The French position on the Iran nuclear deal is known. As the President of the Republic [Emmanuel Macron] has said, we reaffirm our full attachment to the global action plan and its strict implementation.” It added that Paris would “continue to talk about the Iran nuclear program with our European and American partners.”

The European powers are pursuing their own imperialist interests in the Middle East and are increasingly at odds with US interests and strategies. The lifting of sanctions against Iran was greeted by European corporations as an opportunity to generate a fresh stream of profits through billions of dollars in new investments and trade deals. Many of these plans remain unfulfilled because of concerns that the US will target companies with unilateral sanctions, and that their investments could go up in smoke in the event of a new and catastrophic US war in the Middle East.

While hostile to Iran’s growing influence in the region, the European powers are increasingly alarmed at the prospect that Washington’s strategy of forging a regional anti-Iranian alliance with Israel and Saudi Arabia, together with the other Sunni Gulf oil sheikdoms, will produce a military confrontation that could cut off oil supplies upon which Europe depends and unleash a political and refugee crisis that will spill onto the continent.

Washington has issued its latest ultimatum in the midst of an explosive escalation of regional tensions, driven in the main by US and Israeli aggression. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu spelled out Tel Aviv’s aggressive stance against Iran in a bellicose speech to the Munich Security Conference on Sunday. Holding up what he claimed was a piece of an Iranian drone shot down over Israeli-occupied Syrian territory in the Golan Heights, he denounced Iran as “the greatest threat to the world,” equating it with Nazi Germany.

“We will act without hesitation to defend ourselves, and we will act if necessary not just against Iran’s proxies that are attacking us, but against Iran itself,” said Netanyahu, in a clear threat to attack Iran, an action that his government would undertake only with US backing.

Israel responded to the alleged overflight of the drone, which Tehran insists was launched by independent Syrian militia elements in Syria, by targeting Iranian personnel in Syria with air strikes. Syrian air defense units succeeded in shooting down an Israeli F-16 fighter jet, the first such loss for the Israeli Air Force since the early 1980s.

Speaking in response to Netanyahu at the Munich conference, Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Iranian foreign minister, attributed the frenzied tone of Netanyahu’s speech to the downing of the warplane.

“The so-called invincibility of [Israel] has crumbled,” he said.

The US military and intelligence apparatus and its loyal stenographers in the US corporate media are churning out continuous war propaganda against Iran.

Speaking at the Munich Security Conference on Saturday, US national security advisor Gen. H.R. McMaster declared it was necessary to “act against Iran,” which he accused of arming a “network of proxies” that is “becoming more and more capable as Iran seeds more and more…destructive weapons into these networks.”

The New York Times published a lengthy piece Monday based on interviews with Israeli military officers and government officials along with representatives of US, Israeli and Saudi-funded think tanks alleging that Iran is “creating an infrastructure [in Syria] to threaten Israel.” Needless to say, the article made no mention of Israel’s own funding and aid for Sunni Islamist militias attacking the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad.

The same issue of the Times carried an opinion piece by US ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley claiming, falsely, that a report issued by the United Nations proved that Iran has shipped missiles to the Houthi rebels in Yemen to fire at Saudi Arabia. The actual report found that “remnants” of the missiles were of Iranian origin, while providing no evidence as to how they got there.

Haley insists that the world must “act before a missile hits a school or a hospital and leads to a dangerous military escalation that provokes a Saudi military response.”

The column echoes the “big lie” methods pioneered by Nazi Minister of Propaganda Joseph Goebbels. That Saudi Arabia has been bombing Yemeni schools, hospitals, neighborhoods and infrastructure for nearly three years, killing some 13,000 Yemeni civilians and plunging the country’s population into the worst humanitarian crisis on the planet, goes unmentioned.

Haley is also silent on the fact that the US has provided the vast majority of the bombs and missiles dropped on the Yemeni people, while mounting logistical and refueling operations that make the mass slaughter possible.

---

Article from Bill Van Auken.

Global Research, February 21st, 2018.

World Socialist Web Site 20th February, 2018.

“Bigotry Seems Emboldened” George Bush Lashes Out at Trump

Former President, George W. Bush has struck-out at President Donald J. Trump in a heated speech addressing topics including fake news, white supremacy, public-state trust, the elections, and globalism.

The former President blasted that “bigotry seems emboldened” in the U.S, while urging the country to accept “globalization” – the same globalization which the IMF, the BIS and even the Federal Reserve now all agree and warn has led to record wealth inequality in the US.

Mr. Bush stated that “We cannot wish globalization away,” he continued later, urging society to “adapt” to economic and social change.

Mr. Bush slanted nationalism with “We’ve seen nationalism distorted into nativism.”

Despite the sheer hypocrisy, the former President also had this to say:

“Bigotry or white supremacy in any form is blasphemy against the American creed.”

Yet he is openly an advocate of anti-white programs and the racist social agendas of the globalists.

The man that led the US into a war based on fabrication in the middle-east resulting in the deaths of millions said:

“Bigotry seems emboldened. Our politics seem more vulnerable to conspiracy theories and outright fabrication.”

Mr. Bush also spoke of the ‘Russian election interference’ — a narrative proven to be false;

George W. Bush on Russian election interference: "This effort is broad, systemic, and stealthy…ultimately, this effort won't succeed." pic.twitter.com/c8A0vtROoc

— ABC News (@ABC) October 19, 2017

One person took to twitter to express how Mr. Bush was “silent through the eight years of corruption called Obama. And now he wants to stand up.”

Alternative news giant, Paul Joseph Watson, chimed in on the former Presidents’ credibility:

George W. Bush, who left office with a disapproval rating beaten only by Nixon, is going after Trump.

Trump should save this for his 2020 campaign ads.

— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) October 19, 2017

Surprisingly, Mr. Bush had no introspective insight to explain how the collapse of democracy may have started with Trump’s predecessors, including both president Obama and, of course, Mr. Bush himself, or what specific aspects of the US political process may have led to the general popular revulsion with “establishment” system, which – as much as Putin would love to take credit – started long before any alleged Russian involvement.

Bush also spoke about the American identity.

“Our identity as a nation, and unlike many other nations, is not determined by geography or ethnicity, by soil or blood. Being an American involves the embrace of high ideals and civic responsibility.”

What Mr. Bush left out was that ethnicity happens to still be regional, and in these regions there are cultures that have formed; these cultures may hold values and ideals contrary to American ideals and culture. No, not all cultures are equal.

Look to China where the general mentality is to be grateful to work for much less than the Western standard. Mr. Bush said it himself; being American is all about embracing “high ideals and civic responsibility,” yet he advocates the importation of non-western thinking individuals, who come in vast swathes from being under twisted, exploitative governments, their minds and outlooks marred by downtrodden backgrounds that would be grateful for anything they get, all without a word to say that they need to be re-educated in western ideals and standards.

This is about re-population and mindset replacement to whitewash the American dream and its constitution for good, its about bringing in people who will vote for globalist, collectivist-Marxist ideals and big-brother-state welfare, but Mr. Bush slyly talks of ethnicity and skin color as the prevailing narrative, while at every turn taking Trump out of context and trashing him for somehow encouraging ‘white supremacy.’

Mainstream media fiercely supportive of Bush’ globalist speech.

Of course, the establishment-backed armada of biased mainstream media outlets are hailing Mr. Bush’ speech as a complete ‘take down’ of Trump; a ‘successful’ character assassination.

All this anti-Trump hysteria and not a word on the previous destructive administrations, like that of George W. Bush himself. It is clear that this is not about virtue or the American dream: this is about slandering a man who advocates real populist change in America and the wider world.

Media pushing globalist narratives non-stop for those who still listen to it.

The Independent had the gumption to call out Trump for telling the truth by saying that the US’ foreign policy is not as pure as the establishment would like us to believe:

Donald Trump appeared to equate US foreign actions to those of Russian President Vladimir Putin, saying, “There are a lot of killers. You think our country’s so innocent?”

Here's Twitter praising George W. Bush.

Yes, really – George W. Bush.

Let that sink in.

Savor it.

This is the regressive left. pic.twitter.com/BnJWl6TEKu

— Paul Joseph Watson (@PrisonPlanet) October 19, 2017

Iran’s growing power behind new American hostility

Original Article – The Duran

Following the 2003 Iraq invasion, Israeli military historian Martin van Creveld reflected,

“The world has witnessed how the United States attacked Iraq for, as it turned out, no reason at all. Had the Iranians not tried to build nuclear weapons, they would be crazy”.

US President Donald Trump has recently decertified the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) – the nuclear deal – with Iran. Furthermore, he has imposed fresh sanctions on the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of the Iranian military.

Two months ago, Iran President Hassan Rouhani said his country may restart their nuclear programme “within hours”, if any more American sanctions were implemented. Considering Iran are again coming under the spectre of attack from their old nemesis, such developments may prove inevitable.

It stands as the signal America, with its aggressive militarism, has sent to the world: Develop nuclear weapons if you want protection from us. It is a message North Korea have long since heeded. The DPRK would surely have been attacked by now, had they not armed themselves with nuclear warheads and masses of artillery.

American threats to North Korea and Iran constitute a violation of the United Nations Charter. The US was one of the key signatories behind the UN’s creation in 1945. During the time since, they appear to have regarded it as a mere ceremonial duty.

The opening lines of the Charter state it is designed to, “save succeeding generations from the scourge of war… to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights… and of nations large and small”.

Among the common charges laid at Iran’s door by the West is “fuelling instability”. In simple terms, this means disregarding American wishes. As ISIS rampaged through northern Iraq in 2014, it was Iran who first came to the aid of the besieged Kurds. Actions like this have been called “destabilisation” and “supporting terrorism”.

Iraq was attacked by the US in 2003, leaving a scale of ruin that Iraqis compare to the Mongol invasions of the 13^th century. In the West this was titled “democracy promotion” or “stabilisation”. Not neglecting to mention up to a million Iraqis who died, in an attack which also set the groundwork for ISIS’s emergence.

Meanwhile, of the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, UN atomic watchdog chief Yukiya Amano said last month, “The nuclear-related commitments undertaken by Iran under the JCPOA are being implemented. The verification regime in Iran is the most robust regime… currently existing. We have increased inspection days in Iran, we have increased inspection numbers… and the number of images has increased”.

This is resounding proof that Iran are meeting every requirement asked of them, unlike others. Once more, it is the US, Israel and Saudi Arabia who are taking the lead in discounting international law.

In doing so, they are furthering their isolation in the global arena. The five other powers that primarily hammered out the nuclear deal – China, Russia, France, Germany and Britain – have said they will stand by it regardless of the American position.

The true reasons behind this renewed hostility to Iran are unspecified of course. Iran are becoming an increasing influence in the Middle East, a growing rival and deterrent to Israel, for instance. Iran also performed an important role, allied to Russia and the Syrian Army, in defeating Western-backed opposition terrorists in Aleppo.

Other causes of concern are Iran’s “support for terrorism”, as President Trump has reiterated, echoing his predecessors’ words. This mainly refers to Iran’s backing of Hezbollah and Hamas. Both these organisations came into existence because of US-led aggression in the Middle East, abetted and supported by Israel or Saudi Arabia.

This Western-directed terror greatly outweighs anything attributed to either Hezbollah or Hamas. Hezbollah, for example, have played a role in the retreat of ISIS – having fought the extremists over three years in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. The duo are also staunch enemies of Israel, therefore of the US.

Nor can Iran, along with Hezbollah and Hamas, even compete with Saudi Arabia when it comes to sponsoring Islamic terror. ISIS themselves are an offshoot of Saudi religious fanaticism and its broadening of the jihadi message.

What’s more, Iran – the earth’s fourth largest oil producer – have never been forgiven for removing themselves from American control 38 years ago. Much as a gang underling must be taught lessons for betraying the Mafia don, Iran have been mercilessly punished. Those living in Cuba can back up Iran’s claims with their own half century of evidence.

Even American intelligence recognises Iran’s strategic doctrines are defensive, and that they pose no major military threat. Last year the US arms budget was 50 times greater than Iran’s. Yet in Western circles, Iran are often viewed as the “gravest threat to peace”, despite no record of having outright invaded another country.

One of the major ironies is how American actions this century have aided Iran’s cause. Fourteen years after the Iraq war ended, the New York Times laments that, “Walk into almost any market in Iraq and the shelves are filled with goods to Iran… Turn on the television and channel after channel broadcasts programs sympathetic to Iran. A new building goes up? It’s likely that the bricks and cement came from Iran. And that’s not even the half of it”.

The root cause behind such outcomes – the devastation left behind by the US-led invasion – are unmentioned in the Times article. Iraq had long been a Shiite majority country, but before the 2003 attack it was governed by a Sunni minority. The Americans wiped out the elite Sunni rulers, inadvertently pushing Iraq close to Iran, also a Shiite majority nation.

With American hostility towards Iran again increasing, it is striking that China, in particular, have become a key ally of the Middle East country. Today, China represent both Iran’s largest export and import market. From 2000 to 2014, China’s share of Iranian exports grew from 4% to a significant 49%, mostly in crude oil. During that 14-year stretch, China’s share of imports to Iran rose from 5% to 45%.

Closer Sino-Iranian military ties have also developed. In 2012, for the first time, Chinese warships appeared in the Persian Gulf for a joint exercise with the Iranian navy.

Under President Rouhani (in power, 2013-present), relations have stepped up another level – with an overall 70% increase in trade with China, who view Rouhani favourably. Last year, China and Iran agreed to increase trade to $600 billion over the next decade.

China have also become a major supplier of advanced weapons to Iran. This includes anti-ship cruise missiles, Land Attack cruise missiles, providing scores of sophisticated J-10 fighter jets to Iran, etc. The J-10 fighter is “roughly comparable to American’s lethal F-15 in battle”.

In November 2016, a military cooperation agreement was signed by China and Iran, with joint military drills having occurred in June this year. Iran’s then Defence Minister Hossein Dehghan said, “The upgrading of relations and long-term defence-military cooperation with China, is one of the main priorities of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s defence diplomacy”. It also poses another major deterrent to Iran’s enemies.

One can assume the above developments are viewed with horror by those in Washington, Tel Aviv and Riyadh.

Mandalay CEO Sells Up Before Attack

From thetruthseeker.

MGM Grand owns Mandalay Bay Casino Hotel in Las Vegas, from where a shooter attacked a nearby Country Music Festival, killing 59 and injuring 527.  The Chief Executive Officer of MGM Grand, James Murren, suddenly began selling-off his MGM Grand Stocks in the weeks before the attack took place.

This leaves the question, why?

Did James Murren have prior knowledge that this attack was going to take place?  Did he know that the value of MGM Grand stocks would plummet after the attack, and so he cashed-out before the attack happened?

MGM Resorts International (NYSE: MGM) CEO James Murren sold 294,150 shares of the stock in a transaction on Friday, September 8th. The shares were sold at an average price of $34.08, for a total transaction of $10,024,632.00. This was a significant transfer of wealth.

Following the transaction, the chief executive officer now directly owns 71,442 shares in the company, valued at $2,434,743.36, having owned 365,592 shares before the transaction.

The transaction was disclosed in a document filed with the Securities & Exchange Commission (image provided), and can also be taken directly from the US Securities Exchange Commission website which can be accessed through this link.

---

On Thursday, September 7th, James Murren sold 259,760 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The stock was sold at an average price of $34.19, for a total transaction of $8,881,194.40.

On Wednesday, August 9th, James Murren sold 57,269 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $31.54, for a total transaction of $1,806,264.26.

On Monday, July 31st, James Murren sold 57,269 shares of MGM Resorts International stock. The shares were sold at an average price of $33.05, for a total transaction of $1,892,740.45.

Why did James Murren start dumping large amounts of his own company’s stock weeks before the attack?  Some are wondering if it may be because he had prior knowledge the attack was to take place.

 In the meantime, folks who hold stock in MGM Grand may wish to ask themselves if continuing to hold this stock is a smart move? Now that this information is out, it is likely that many, many people may choose to distance themselves from this corporation . . .  and we all know what happens when folks start “distancing themselves” from a particular stock — the value tends to PLUMMET.

Source

Russian Prime Minister Warns: There’s No Hope Of Improved Relations – Deep State Aims To Remove Trump From Power

When President Trump won the election, there was hope that he would be able to finally help the US government make peace with the Russians, and stave off the possibility of another world war. He has undoubtedly made some progress in that regard, by ending the CIA’s program to arm the rebels in Syria. And it’s safe to assume that if Hillary had won the election, that there would be absolutely no chance for our nations could reconcile with each other.

The deep state controls Trump and his confidantes, against their will.

Overall however, the Trump administration hasn’t made much progress with the Russians. With every step taken towards peace we’ve fallen two steps back, as our government’s relationship with Russia continues to crumble. The deterioration of this relationship reached a new low recently when congress approved legislation that issues new sanctions against Russia, and prevents Trump from easing those sanctions. Trump signed the bill anyway, knowing that it passed with so many votes that if he had vetoed it, Congress could have immediately overridden his decision.

And as you might expect, the Russian government isn’t taking these new sanctions lightly.

“The U.S. President’s signing of the package of new sanctions against Russia will have a few consequences,” Medvedev, Vladimir Putin’s onetime successor in the Kremlin wrote on his Facebook page in Russian and English. “First, it ends hopes for improving our relations with the new U.S. administration. Second, it is a declaration of a full-fledged economic war on Russia.”

But that’s not all Medvedev had to say on the matter. He added that the approval of the new sanctions essentially amounted to a kind of deep state coup.

“The Trump administration has shown its total weakness by handing over executive power to Congress in the most humiliating way,” Medvedev wrote, lauding the “U.S. establishment” for having “fully outwitted” the White House. Both U.S. chambers passed the bill to take the power of lifting sanctions on Russia from Trump, with an overwhelming majority.

“The issue of new sanctions came about, primarily, as another way to knock Trump down a peg,” the Russian prime minister wrote. “New steps are to come, and they will ultimately aim to remove him from power.”

That makes Medvedev the latest in a long line of high profile individuals, to warn that there is plot within Washington to have Trump removed from office. As time goes on, it’s becoming harder to doubt the possibility that there are forces in our government who not only want to overthrow the Trump administration, but they want to derail any efforts to find peace with the Russian government.

Why Trump must sign the new Russia sanctions bill.

Article from The Duran

The neo-con establishment has deprived the president of foreign policy authority, locking in sanctions by act of congress.

Despite the White House’s apparent opposition, the US congress has passed a new sanctions package against Russia, Iran, and North Korea.

Donald Trump seems destined to sign the legislation – and in fact, he has little choice.

Congress passed the bill by a nearly unanimous, veto-proof vote of those present: 419-3 in the House and 98-2 in the Senate (Sens. Paul and Sanders dissenting).

The anti-Russia lobby has thereby signaled its determination to push full steam ahead with American Exceptionalist military and economic supremacy, even if such policy is ultimately futile and self-destructive and in fact, pushes Washington’s European vassals closer to Moscow.

The bill represents the victory of the ideologues over the realists – the smaller latter camp led only by Trump and a few of his close advisors such as Steve Bannon and former advisor Mike Flynn.

The legislation also signifies a remarkable and possibly even unique hamstringing of a president’s foreign policy authority by his own party in congress. Under the bill, Trump will be unable to lift any sanctions against Russia, Iran, or North Korea without approval from congress – a virtual certainty not to happen in the current or foreseeable political climate.

Trump could veto the bill, but it would be sacrificing political capital for zero gain, throwing away any trust he has with the republican party in congress, as both parties have pledged to override the president’s veto.

Fox Business reported Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Bob Corker (R-TN) as saying a veto would be futile:

“I cannot imagine anybody is seriously thinking about vetoing this bill,” said Corker. “It’s not good for any president — and most governors don’t like to veto things that are going to be overridden. It shows a diminishment of their authority. I just don’t think that’s a good way to start off as president.”

Democratic Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) was equally emphatic to CNN:

“If he vetoes the bill, we will override his veto,” Cardin said.

Regardless of Donald Trump’s personal views toward the anti-Russian Sanctions (it is unlikely, given his public statements, that he opposes the new sanctions on Iran or North Korea), a veto would be a pointless gesture which would be interpreted as another a political defeat for a president who badly needs congress’ cooperation on his legislative agenda.

Even if Donald Trump supports improved relations with Russia – and I believe he has made it clear enough on multiple occasions that he genuinely does – it is extremely near-sighted to assume he would prioritize that policy change over his domestic program, including healthcare, tax cuts, infrastructure, and border security. That would be true even without the massive establishment backlash towards any hint of rapprochement with Moscow.

Except during wartime, US presidents are not elected on foreign policy. Donald Trump was elected president based primarily on two issues: jobs and immigration. Foreign policy issues play a very unimportant role in American elections – unless and until American troops start dying in large numbers.

Trump’s supporters in middle and working class America could not care less whether sanctions are tightened on Russia, and most are probably naturally inclined to think that they should be. After all, Russia has been portrayed by the media and politicians as a menacing country for decades – singlehandedly re-educating the public is beyond the capabilities of even the president.

Nevertheless, according to several reports, the White House had tried to reduce the scope of the sanctions and its restrictions on the president in talks with congress, but to no avail. Again from Fox Business:

Trump had privately expressed frustration over Congress’ ability to limit or override the power of the president on national security matters, according to Trump administration officials and advisers. They spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal White House deliberations.

ABC news noted that members of the Trump administration had voiced disapproval of an earlier, similar bill locking in sanctions:

The White House has expressed reservations about that aspect of the bill after the Senate first passed similar legislation last month, but without targeting North Korea. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told Congress then that the White House wanted the “flexibility” to deal with Russia, and White House legislative director Marc Short expressed opposition to the “unusual precedent of delegating foreign policy to 535 members of Congress.”

Faced with united opposition by neo-con globalist bought and paid for legislators, signing the bill is a political force majeure for Trump. One assumes it will happen quietly this week and without any of the usual fanfare of Trump’s other public signings.

Trump has sought to repair fragmented relations with Russia, his efforts are being actively dashed by a neocon establishment that has subverted him.

No doubt the president will hope for increased cooperation from congress on his domestic agenda as compensation, as well as the dropping of “Russia collusion” charges against him and his closest advisors.

But it may be a forlorn hope. The first six months of Trump’s presidency have shown a mass media and political establishment united in implacable opposition to any of the Trump insurgency’s threatened changes to the status quo.

 

Washington May Plan to Nuke Russia and China

The possibility of a preemptive nuclear strike on Russia and China is an approach shortlisted by Washington Deep Statesmen amidst Globalist fears of slipping control.

Despite the best laid plans of Globalist mass psy-ops, funded terrorist organisations, ‘collateral damages’, and so on, the Global Elites realise they must up-the-ante to reach their goals to cripple the last superpower international opposition. With Russia and China out of the equation, there are no barriers to world government.

This increasingly aggressive stance has further escalated following the moment the Russian central bank opened its first overseas office in Beijing on March 14th this year, marking a step forward in forging a Beijing-Moscow alliance to bypass the US dollar in the global monetary system, and to phase-in a gold-backed standard of trade.

Nuclear War being prepared for:

Paul Craig Roberts explained in-detail the Globalist’s preparation for a possible surprise last-resort take-down on his website.

Lt. Gen. Viktor Poznikhir, Deputy Head of Operations of the Russian General Staff has concluded that Washington in pursuit of global hegemony is implementing an anti-ballistic missile system that Washington believes can prevent a Russian nuclear response to a US pre-emptive attack. http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/04/us-forces-preparing-sudden-nuclear.html

Careful studies have convinced the Russians that Washington is investing in and arranging components that have no other function than to devastate Russia and cripple the country’s retaliatory capability. In short, Washington is preparing to launch a nuclear war. https://www.rt.com/news/386276-us-missile-shield-russia-strike/

The amassing US militants in the South China Sea/Korean peninsula/Japan suggests that the US may be poised for a direct invasion of East Asia through North Korea as a hotbed trigger point, the invasion follow-through would lead into China and its other respective satellites in the case of the big showdown; if it gets the final go-ahead by the deep state neo-con shadow government.

It comes down to this, Washington is sufficiently criminally insane to risk the destruction of life on earth based on the supposition that Washington’s offence will work perfectly and Russia and China’s capabilities will be so degraded that no retaliatory response will occur.

Where then is the hope? Russia and China cannot simply sit there and await America’s preemptive nuclear strike, bit by bit their position is weakened to the point the weighing scales of power are irreversibly against them, luckily they are taking action to secure themselves at all levels.

• China is currently escalating its military presence in the South China Sea. China aims to extend its military reach into the South China Sea and Western Pacific in such a way that it can effectively control who can — and cannot — enter those regions.
• China launches new aircraft carrier, April 2017. It is not expected to be operational until 2020 and will carry China’s Shenyang J-15 fighter jets.
• Vladimir Putin, in late 2016, posted nuclear weapons in far-east Siberia, well within range of Western-coast US states & their major cities.
• 2016, Russia deploys Baltic missile system in response to US missile system in Eastern Europe.
• Vladimir Putin, in 2016, has stationed nuclear weapons in Kaliningrad, Russia’s Baltic exclave in Europe, well within range of all major European cities.
• ~330,000 Russian soldiers are currently stationed on Moscow’s western border as the Russian satellites lean towards Western control.
• Iran and Russia are moving closer together in their military alliance, working to boost ties and coordination in Syria and elsewhere in the region following the U.S. decision to launch a military strike in Syria, according to regional reports and experts.
• The Middle East and Syria – where Russia has staged its first large-scale military action outside the borders of the former Soviet Union since communism.
• Russia seizes Crimea in 2014 in a bid to secure adjacent waters in the Black Sea following US-led & funded manipulation of Ukrainian politics. The Russian taking of Crimea prevents the US from building extensive naval presence in the region, and defends an important Russian pipeline into the EU.
• Russia is making provisions for economic immunity from Western sanctions, especially following the US orchestrated oil crisis that battered the Russian economy. The Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) marks a big step towards gold-backed currencies in the far-East, this is undoubtedly a move towards financial independence, free of the shackles of the USD. Putin seeks to include China, India, Iran (among others) in this arrangement.

On the US continuing to expand their missile infrastructure, despite the signing of the nuclear deal with Iran. “The threat is gone, but the creation of the missile defense system is continuing.” — Vladimir Putin

China creates island territory in the South China Sea region.

Possibly Washington does not intend to conduct a preemptive nuclear strike, but only to convince Russia and China that Washington’s preparations give Washington so much predominance in a conflict that Russia and China will submit to Washington’s hegemony. But this interpretation of Washington’s intention implies no less risk. Why would Russia and China wait for Washington to complete its preparations for war, preparations that permit Washington to turn Russia and China into puppet states? The above listed actions from Russia and China details their counter-measures to retain global balance.

Trump, under threat of impeachment must do the bidding of the Elite or face prosecution and personal reputation-obliterating scandal.

During a Syrian air force attack on an ISIS position, a chemical weapon exploded, or so it is alleged. Instantly Washington said that Assad had used “Sarin gas against his own people.” Trump was shown photos of dead babies and stupidly ordered a US military strike against Syria.

This action against Syria can be classified as a war-crime, as arbitrarily bombing a sovereign nation without any legal oversight is categorically in contravention to Geneva convention statutes.

As a result, the Deep state can and probably have already swarmed forth, and eagerly used this set-up as blackmail ammunition to force Trump into becoming yet another puppet, else risk his personal reputation in a scandal that would see his impeachment. The Presidency is once again under Globalist control, hence why Trump is now distancing himself from his campaign promises.

“I am a nationalist and a Globalist.” — Donald J. Trump, April 2017

Trump under extreme neo-con pressure to take action in middle-east as Globalist-funded terrorist group, ISIS, loses big-time in war to oust Assad.

According to White House sources who spoke to Infowars, Trump is reticent to see U.S. troops embroiled in yet another Middle East quagmire, but is under pressure from top neo-cons in his administration to prevent Russia from dominating the region as the fall of ISIS nears. Trump has been isolated and surrounded by a Globalist dominated cabinet.

End-game plan to strike down the last opposing superpowers in one fell swoop.

One might hope that the American and Western populations would be outraged that Washington is so power-crazed that Washington is subjecting all life to such risks. But there is no sign of an anti-war movement. The Western left-wing has degenerated into obsession with pointless information such as ‘Identity Politics’ in which the only threat comes from white heterosexual males who are portrayed as misogynists, racists, and homophobes.

The Western left-wing is no longer war-conscious. Indeed, the left-wing has become diverted into such silly irrelevancies as transgender rights to toilets of their choice. The impotence of the Western left is so overwhelming that the left might as well not exist.

---

The decades-long tug-of-war to break the last independent sources of oil & other important natural resources, namely the states of Iran and Syria, both who have chosen to not trade in the medium of the US dollar as world reserve currency, is a struggle between the single-currency one-world globalist vision of the US Empire, and the last truly nationally leaning powers; Russia and China.

If Russia – the world’s fourth largest gold producer after China, Japan and the US – is set to become a major supplier of gold to China, the probability of a scenario hinted by many over the years, namely that Beijing is preparing to eventually unroll a gold-backed currency, increases by orders of magnitude.

The formation of the Eurasian Economic Union is the East’s answer to increasing Western economic sanctions and pressures, when backed into a corner, the Eastern superpowers must work together, or face economic bullying that will eventually bring them down.

“It is a bloc meant to rival the European Union and the United States in its influence in Russia’s near abroad.” — Stratfor

The dollar is not gold backed, and is printed out of thin air by the Federal Reserve, as long as the petrodollar system exists, the US has infinite funds at its disposal.

In an attempt to turn the tables, China and Russia are shifting away from dollar-based trade, to commerce which will eventually be backstopped by gold, or what is gradually emerging as an Eastern gold standard, one shared between Russia and China, and which may one day backstop their respective currencies.

The imperialistic petrodollar system relies on international cooperation through military coercion and bullying, first a financial offer will be made, if that is rejected military intervention takes place, i.e. Libya, Iraq etc. 

Trump is now a captive of the Deep State

When the gullible and insouciant American public and the presstitutes who participate in the deceptions permitted the Deep State to get away with the fairy tale that a few Saudi Arabians under the direction of Osama bin Laden, but without the support of any government or intelligence agency, were able to outwit the entirety of the Western Alliance and Israel’s Mossad and deliver the greatest humiliation in history to “the world’s only superpower” by making the entirety of the US government dysfunctional on September 11, 2001, Washington learned that it could get away with anything, any illegal and treasonous act, any lie. The gullible Western populations would believe anything that they were told.

Not only insouciant Americans, but much of the world accepts any statement out of Washington as the truth despite the evidence. If Washington said it, Washington’s vassals in Germany, France, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Netherlands, Belgium, and Japan assent to the obvious lie as if it were the obvious truth. So do the CIA purchased media of these vassal states, a collection of whores who prefer CIA subsidies to truth.

When Obama inherited the Deep State’s agenda from George W. Bush, he set up Syria’s Assad for regime change by repeating for many months that if Assad used chemical weapons in the “civil war” that Washington had sent ISIS to conduct, Assad would have crossed the “Red Line” that Obama had drawn and would, as the consequence, face an invasion by the US military, just as Iraq had been invaded based on Washington’s lie about “weapons of mass destruction.”

Having burnt this idea into the feeble minds of the Western populations, Obama then arranged for a chemical weapon to be exploded in Syria and blamed it on Assad. Thus, the Red Line had been crossed, the insouciant West was told, and America would now invade.

The UK prime minister, the usual piece of Washington-owned garbage, rushed to the support of the American invasion, promising British support. But the British Parliament voted NO. The MPs said that the UK was not going to support another American war crime justified by obvious lies. Only in Britain does democracy still have any teeth, as we saw a second time with the Brexit vote. All the rest of the West lives in vassalage and slavery.

The Russian government also took a firm stand, admitting that Russia stupidly trusted America in Libya, but no more. We, said the Russians, will ourselves remove any and all chemical weapons from Syria and turn them over to Western “civilization” to be destroyed, which the Russians did.

What did Western “civilization” do with the weapons? They gave some of them to ISIS. This gave Washington a second chance to accuse Assad of using chemical weapons “against his own people.”

And so Washington has rolled out this hoax a second time. During a Syrian air force attack on an ISIS position, a chemical weapon exploded, or so it is alleged. Instantly Washington said that Assad had used “Sarin gas against his own people.” Trump was shown photos of dead babies and stupidly ordered a US military strike against Syria.

This was the first time that Washington had engaged in an unambigious war crime without any cover. Trump had no UN resolution, not even one that could be stood on its head as in Libya. Trump had no NATO participation, no George W. Bush “coalition of the willing” to give cover to the war crime with the support of other governments.

There are no skirts for Trump to hide behind. He stupidly let himself be pushed into commiting an unambigious war crime.

Now all his opponents—the Deep State, the military/security complex, the CIA, the Hillary Democrats, the warmonger Republicans—have the New White House Fool under their control. If Trump doesn’t do as they want, they will impeach him for his war crime.

Meanwhile the risk of war with the Russian/Chinese/Iranian/Syrian alliance grows closer. The US shows every intention of provoking this war. Washington has imposed sanctions on 271 employees of Syria’s Scientific Studies and Research Center for, in Washington’s lying words, responsibility “for developing and producing non-conventional weapons and the means to deliver them.”

In order to make this false charge stick, Washington prevented any investigation whatsoever into the facts of the alleged chemical weapon associated by Western propaganda, not by any known fact, with a Syrian air attack on ISIS. If Washington is so certain that Syria is responsible, why does Washington block an investigation? If Washington is right, an investigation would prove Washington’s case. But as Washington is again lying through its teeth, an investigation would prove the contrary. And that is what Washington fears and is the reason Washington blocked an investigation.

Why do Western peoples believe the US government, a well proven liar, who blocks an investigation and asserts that everyone must believe Washington or else be put on a list of Russian agents?

Here is the lie, the raw propaganda, that the US government has no qualms about issuing: https://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/sm0056.aspx It comes from the US Department of the Treasury in which I once served honorably. But honor no longer exists in the US Treasury.

Are Western populations intelligent enough to understand that the only reason for Washington to block an investigation of the alleged use by Syria of a chemical weapon is that the facts clearly do not support Washington’s lie? No, they are not.

Theodore Postol, a scientist at MIT, has concluded from his investigation that the chemical weapon was not dropped from the air but was set off on the ground and that it was not Sarin gas as Sarin lingers and the alleged aid workers who were immediately on the scene were unprotected by gloves or masks or by anything. If the gas were Sarin, they would be dead also.

The Russian explanation is that the Syrian air force attack hit a storage facility, conveniently arranged by Washington, that contained chemical weapons. I have seen reports that Washington, or Washington’s vassals such as Saudi Arabia, have provided ISIS with chemical weapons. President Putin of Russia says the reason Washington has delivered chemical weapons to ISIS is that there can be more orchestrated instances of their use that can be blamed on Assad.

I think I can say in complete confidence that this is what is happening: Washington intends to wear Russia down with orchestrated chemical attack after chemical attack, portraying Russia as an inhuman defender of Assad’s alleged chemical attacks, in order to more thoroughly isolate Russia and in order to provoke opposition to Putin’s government, especially among the US and German financed NGOs that Russia stupidly permits to operate in Russia and in the Russian media. Washington’s goal is to force by the weight of world opinion Putin to abandon Assad to Washington.

US Secretary of State Tillerson, another gigantic disappointment to those who hoped for peaceful relations between the US and Russia/China/Iran/Syria, has said that the US still intends regime change in Syria. Tillerson has advised Russia to get out of Washington’s way and to “consider carefully their support for Bashar al-Assad.”

Russia cannot abandon Assad, because if Syria falls to Washington, Iran will be next, and then the Washington-financed jihadists will be set upon the Muslim populations of the Russian Federation and China.

This is Washington’s game plan. I am certain Putin is aware of it, and I think the Chinese are, despite their inordinate focus on making money.

The questions before us could not be any clearer: Will Russia and China break and give in to Washington? If not, will Washington become a good world citizen for the first time in America’s history, or will Washington issue more threats, thereby convincing Russia and China that their alternative is to wait for Washington’s preemptive nuclear strike or deliver one themselves?

This is the only question that the world faces that is worth our attention. I spent a quarter century in Washington. The evil that is in control there at the present time is unprecedented. I have never seen anything like it.

Can the world survive the evil that is concentrated in Washington, evil that has the support of the governments of the Western world?

 This article first appeared at PaulCraigRoberts.org.

#NOWARINSYRIA: IF YOU DON’T WANT WORLD WAR III IN THE MIDDLE EAST YOU NEED TO LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD NOW

Article from End of the American Dream.

We are closer to the start of World War III than we have been in decades.  In part 3 of this series of articles, I discussed the fact that President Trump’s team was preparing a “military response” in Syria and that a “coalition” is being formed to remove Syrian President Bashar al-Assad from power.  Well, as I am writing this article the missiles have started flying.  Cruise missiles from a U.S. Navy vessel in the Mediterranean Sea have hit multiple targets inside Syria, and many fear that what we have just witnessed could be the beginning of a broader conflict.

Trump should not have done this, because according to the U.S. Constitution the president needs the approval of Congress to go to war.  Fortunately there are still a few members of Congress that still care about the Constitution and that are bold enough to point out this fact.  One of those members of Congress is U.S. Senator Rand Paul…

Earlier on Thursday, Senator Rand Paul (R-Kentucky) announced he would oppose any military action without a vote in Congress.

“The President, if he decides to do something in Syria, he would come to Congress and ask for a declaration of war. Short of Congress voting on it, I’m opposed to illegal and unconstitutional wars,” Paul told Fox News radio show ‘Kilmeade and Friends’.

Now that the missiles have started flying, it may be too late to stop this war from happening.

But that does not mean that we shouldn’t try to stop it.  Now is the time to raise our voices and to let Donald Trump know that we do not want this war.

And what is especially tragic about all of this is that Donald Trump is taking us to war because of a misunderstanding.  Rand Paul’s father, former presidential candidate Ron Paul, is among many that believe that there was “zero chance” that Assad would have deliberately used chemical weapons against those innocent people…

Pointing out that the prospect of peace in Syria was moving closer before the attack, with ISIS and Al-Qaeda on the run, Paul said the attack made no sense.

“It looks like maybe somebody didn’t like that so there had to be an episode,” said Paul, asking, “who benefits?”

“It doesn’t make any sense for Assad under these conditions to all of a sudden use poison gases – I think there’s zero chance he would have done this deliberately,” said Paul.

As I discussed in part 1 of this series, the incident in Syria’s Idlib province on Tuesday was almost certainly a false flag attack that was designed to pull the United States and other western powers into the war.

And since I wrote that article, more evidence that this was a false flag attack has continued to emerge…

Evidence which has emerged in the aftermath of the attack at Khan Sheikhoun indicates that not only was the nature of the attack misreported by the media, but that certain individuals on the ground in Syria may have had foreknowledge of the attack up to several days before it happened. On April 3rd, 2017, an anti-Assad journalist tweeted that the next day he would be launching a media campaign to cover airstrikes on the Hama countryside, including the use of chemical weapons. It is not clear how the reporter was able to know that chemical weapons would be used an entire day before the attacks occurred.

Observers further noted that on April 1st, 2017, a doctor on the ground in Khan Sheikhoun, Dr. Shajul Islam, had received several shipments of gas masks in the days running up to the chemical incident. The revelations on Twitter fueled speculation that opposition figures were aware of the chemical attack days before it actually happened, contesting the narrative that the Syrian government was responsible. Daily Mail has reported that Dr. Shajul Islam was at one point sought by the British government in connection with the abduction of two journalists in Syria, and security services have stated that Islam and his brother may have had ties to ISIS executioner “Jihadi John.”

In addition, it is very interesting to note that the “White Helmets” were ready and waiting with their cameras to film the attack when it happened.  The White Helmets are funded by George Soros and they have been closely affiliated with al-Qaeda in the past.  They very much want to see Assad removed from power, and so they would greatly benefit from the U.S. getting involved in the war in Syria.

And let us not forget that it turned out that Assad had absolutely nothing to do with the infamous “chemical attack” that he originally got the blame for in 2013…

The narrative for the August 2013 attack in Ghouta, which Barack Obama cited as the pretext for a long awaited U.S. attack on government targets in aid of jihadist rebels, completely collapsed after it emerged that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

The United Nations’ Carla Del Ponte also said that evidence suggested rebels had used sarin nerve gas.

As journalist Seymour Hersh reported in December 2013, intelligence officials told him that the entire narrative was a “ruse” and that “the attack was not the result of the current regime.”

If Donald Trump would have just waited until all the facts were known, it is quite likely that he would have seen that there was absolutely no need to attack Syria at all.  This is something that I discussed on the Alex Jones Show on Thursday, and hopefully we can spread this information far and wide before it is too late.

Because if the U.S. does something very foolish in Syria, there is a very real possibility that it could actually cause World War III to erupt.  I included the following quote in part 3 of this series, but I want to share it again because it shows how much is at stake.  According to The Intercept, one of the military options that has been presented to Trump is a “saturation strike” that would result “in Russian military deaths”…

The proposed strike would involve launching Tomahawk cruise missiles to overwhelm Russian air defense systems used by the Syrian military. The Russian government currently helps maintain the air defense sites and advises the Syrian military.

According to both U.S. military officials, the current proposal would likely result in Russian military deaths and mark a drastic escalation of U.S. force in Syria.

One U.S. military official said the decision to allow the strikes, which would kill Russians, signals a significant change in policy by the Trump administration. A decision by Trump to go forward with the plan would be a reversal from the Obama administration, which denied multiple air strike proposals  that would likely cause Russian personnel casualties in Syria.

I cannot even begin to describe how foolish it would be for Trump to make such a move.

Hopefully Trump will stop listening so much to his generals and will begin to listen to some common sense.

When Obama was considering military action against Syria in 2013, Trump strongly urged him not to do it…

In one September 5, 2013 all-caps rant, Trump tweeted, “AGAIN, TO OUR VERY FOOLISH LEADER, DO NOT ATTACK SYRIA – IF YOU DO MANY VERY BAD THINGS WILL HAPPEN & FROM THAT FIGHT THE U.S. GETS NOTHING!”

“Don’t attack Syria – an attack that will bring nothing but trouble for the U.S. Focus on making our country strong and great again!” Trump tweeted four days later.

During the presidential campaign, Trump also bashed Hillary Clinton for her disastrous foreign policy, tweeting, “Crooked Hillary Clintons foreign interventions unleashed ISIS in Syria, Iraq and Libya. She is reckless and dangerous!”

Trump was right on the money when he originally said those things, and hopefully he will go back and read those tweets and take his own advice.

We live at a time when the world is becoming increasingly unstable, and many of the things that I have been warning about for a very long time are starting to come to pass.

Nothing good is going to come out of an attack on Syria.  Other than “looking tough”, there is nothing to be gained for the United States, but there is so much that could go tragically wrong.

In 2013, the American people very loudly let Barack Obama know that they did not want a war with Syria.

If we want to stop a war with Syria in 2017, we need to be even louder than last time, because President Trump seems determined to act very quickly.

So if you do not want us to go to war with Syria, raise your voice right now, because tomorrow might be too late.