, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,


Obama approves up to 250 troops to help ‘local forces’ in Syria. Which ‘local forces’? The moderate jihadists cannibals who have so far slaughtered, ransacked, beheaded, starved the Syrian population or held hostage as a human shield?

If there were a ‘War Nobel Prize’, the winner today would surely Obama: despite the recent American military failures on Turkish-Syrian border, and in complete contradiction to the efforts of peace talks in Geneva, Obama declares sending hundreds of military special forces in Syria.

Cynical? Sadomasochistic? Sociopathic? Schizophrenic? Or, more simply, just passively obedient to his AIPAC masters?

Obama approves to send in Syria up to 250 troops to help the ‘local forces’. Which ‘local forces’? The ‘moderate jihadists cannibals’ of the countless factions of cutthroat mercenaries who have so far slaughtered, ransacked, beheaded, starved, held hostage as a human shield, terrorized the Syrian population, forced to flee from their homes or in camps for refugees in Turkey, to allow Erdogan to earn billions in ‘buying and selling’ displaced persons with a misguided Europe?!?

In light of these events, and immediately after Obama’s visit to the Saudi and Gulf tyrants, it is now clear to everyone, as the light of the sun, even to the most naive, that the real aim of the U.S. regime is not to combat terrorism but to increase the mercenary violence and the guerrilla warfare in Syria, to try in every way to overthrow the freely and legitimately elected government of President Bashar al-Assad in Damascus, without whose skilled political and military leadership Syria would be today completely slave of the jihadist barbarities, like Libya [without Gaddafi] today is the prey of the worst Islamist terrorist gangs in the service of Turkish and Saudi dictatorial regimes

We re-published here a series of analyzes and reports given by RT’s journalists, as well as an interview with Hans-Christof Von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary-General, who also states that:

“the moderate fundamentalists, with whom the US has tried to cooperate, did not had success on the ground [as instead says Obama]; but the main point is that at the time when one tries to have a restart of the Geneva peace talks [under the leadership of Staffan de Mistura] it is tragic that we continue these series of experiments … in Syria right now, with the end result that the talks will not move well in Geneva and the peace will be further removed from the country called Syria”.

Obama, more than for his undeserved ‘Nobel Peace Prize’, will be remembered for his honorary and universally recognized ‘Nobel War Prize’.

(SFP-WP Newsroom statement)


More boots on the ground:
Obama sends 250 more US troops to Syria

RT (1) ~ US President Barack Obama confirmed plans to dramatically increase the American troop presence in Syria by deploying an additional 250 personnel, bringing the total to 300. He said the troops would help drive out the Islamic State terrorist group.


The move, which was first reported by the media, will once again contradict Obama’s 2013 promise of not putting any “American boots on the ground in Syria.”

“Just as I have approved additional support for Iraqi forces against ISIL (Islamic State, previously ISIS/ISIL – RT), I’ve decided to increase US support for local forces fighting ISIL in Syria,” Obama said.

“A small number of US special operations forces are already on the ground in Syria,” he said. “Their expertise has been critical as local forces have been driving ISIL out of key areas.

So given the success, I have approved the deployment of up to 250 additional US personnel in Syria, including special forces, to keep up this momentum.”


It was not immediately clear how many of those 250 troops would be added to special operations, medical or intelligence support. According to Obama, they will be involved in special operations as well as in training and assisting Syrian opposition forces to fight IS.

Speaking in Hannover, Germany, Obama said NATO members can and should do more to fight Islamic State.

“In Syria and Iraq we need more nations contributing to their campaign. We need more nations contributing trainers to help build up local forces in Iraq. We need more nations to contribute economic assistance to Iraq so it can stabilise liberated areas and break the cycle of violent extremism so that ISIL cannot come back,” he said.

Obama is visiting Germany to discuss various foreign policy issues, including Syria, Ukraine, Libya and the controversial Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) deal.

He is meeting top European officials, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron, French President Francois Hollande and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi.

The escalation of the American military presence in Syria may undermine the ongoing UN effort to bring Damascus and ‘moderate’ opposition armed groups to a peaceful transition after five years of war, Hans-Christof von Sponeck, a veteran German diplomat and former UN assistant secretary-general, told RT.

“Obama is entering his last six months and he wants to leave a legacy that shows some sign of success. And Americans are never short of experiments,” he said. “It’s jumping from one laboratory test to another and in the meantime the county continues to go further to destruction.”

The first time Obama broke his 2013 promise of no “American boots on the ground in Syria” was when he sent 50 US special operations forces to Syria last year, claiming the move as a “counterterrorism” measure and not a step closer to a ground invasion.

Obama won the presidency first time around in 2008 by pledging to bring peace to the Middle East. However, in recent years, decisions were made to keep adding US troops in the region to help control numerous conflicts.

Obama’s decision to boost the number of American troops on the ground in Syria brings up issues concerning the previous failures of the US train and equip program that dealt with unreliable opposition fighters.

The Pentagon gave up on the training part of the project in October, after senior Obama administration officials admitted that the US had only trained a handful of fighters, despite the program’s $500 million budget.

Moreover, it was revealed in September that one group of trainees had surrendered one quarter of their US-supplied weapons, ammunition, and vehicles in exchange for safe passage through territory held by another rebel group affiliated with Al-Qaeda.

This boost to American ground force also raises legal concerns for Obama. An expansion of the US role highlights that America is in war against IS, which under the Constitution requires congressional authorization, which Obama has never received.

In addition to more troops in Syria, the Pentagon announced last week that 217 additional military personnel and Apache helicopters will be sent to Iraq, largely in an advisory capacity, on how to fight Islamic State. The additional troops will bring US troop levels in Iraq to 4,087.

The US-led coalition has been carrying out airstrikes against IS in Iraq and Syria since mid-2014. However, the US involvement in Syria began without the approval of the Syrian government of President Bashar Assad.

No boots on ground in Syria,
but U.S. troops wearing boots & on ground are there
[State Dept]

RT (2) ~ Despite repeated promises to the contrary, US troops are in Syria, and the Pentagon has sent 250 more. But the State Department says those American soldiers wearing boots in Syria aren’t actually “boots on the ground.”

President Barack Obama confirmed plans to dramatically increase the American troop presence in Syria by deploying an additional 250 personnel, bringing the total to 300. He said the troops would help drive out Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL).

In 2013, Obama promised not to put any “American boots on the ground in Syria.”

The president repeated that claim in a September 2014 interview on ‘Meet the Press’.

“The notion that the United States should be putting boots on the ground, I think would be a profound mistake. And I want to be very clear and very explicit about that,” Obama said on September 7, 2014.

Three days later, he reiterated that point in an address to the American people, promising that US troops would not fight in Syria.

On Monday, however, State Department spokesman John Kirby admitted that the US has boots on the ground in Syria… but that they are not there as boots on the ground.

Associated Press reporter Matt Lee pressed Kirby on the issue.

“For months and months and months, the mantra from the president and everyone else in the administration has been the no boots on the ground, and how…” Lee said.

“That is not true,” Kirby replied, cutting him off.

“What?” Lee exclaimed.

“It’s just not true, Matt. It’s just not true,” Kirby said. “I just flatly, absolutely disagree with you,” the spokesman said while pounding his fist on the podium.

RT’s Gayane Chichakyan then joined the fray.

“Within 24 hours, we have seen two headlines, one of them being, ‘President Obama rules out ground troops to Syria’ and he told the BBC…” she said. “And then, shortly after, ‘President Obama to deploy 250 more special forces troops to Syria.’”

“My question is, what is the difference between the troops that the president ruled out and the troops that he’s going to send to Syria?”

“You know, that’s actually an intelligent question. That’s a good question, and I appreciate that you asked it because it’s very relevant,” Kirby responded, explaining that the first set ‒ what most people think of as “boots on the ground” ‒ would be conventional ground troops who would participate in large combat. Instead, what the US is sending an additional 250 troops for advisory and assistance purposes, joining the 50 such special forces already there.

“There is a big difference between saying, ‘no boots on the ground’ ‒ we’ve all recognized since almost the outset that we’ve had US troops in Iraq, which are very much on the ground ‒ and the colloquial meaning of the term, which is what many people when they say ‘no boots on the ground’ are referring to,” Kirby said,“which is large-scale, intentionally combat ground troops engaged in combat operations that they themselves are conducting independently” of the country’s “indigenous forces.”

“That’s not happening, and that’s not gonna happen,”he said.

“You guys are getting way wrapped around the actual on the phrase ‘boots on the ground’,” Kirby added later, noting that, among other things American pilots are flying combat missions above Iraq and Syria.

Lee took up the mantle of questioning once again.

“Why didn’t the administration come out and say, ‘There will be no large-scale combat’ instead of saying ‘no boots on the ground’?” Lee asked. “These people, unless they’re not wearing boots, are boots on the ground!”

“Listen, on this point, I totally agree with you,” Kirby replied. “They are wearing boots, and they are on the ground. But that doesn’t mean that they are in large-scale ground combat operations!”

And around and around they went again.

“It’s tragic U.S. continues series of experiments in Syria”
~ Hans-Christof Von Sponeck ~
[former UN Assistant Secretary-General]

RT (3) ~ Barack Obama wants to leave a legacy that shows some sign of a successful presidency. However he continues to experiment in Syria, which may hamper the Geneva peace talks, says Hans-Christof Von Sponeck, former UN Assistant Secretary-General.

President Obama has announced the biggest escalation of American intervention in Syria to date with a further 250 troops, on top of dozens who are already on the ground.


Given the success, I’ve approved the deployment of up to 250 additional US personnel in Syria, including special forces to keep up this momentum,” the US President said in a speech at a trade fair in Hanover, Germany.  “They’re not going to be leading the fight on the ground, but they will be essential in providing the training and assisting local forces as they continue to drive ISIL back,” he said.

RT: Mr. Sponeck, President Obama is now sending hundreds of American troops to help what he called “local forces” in Syria. That’s a big vague, isn’t? What sort of forces does he mean?

Hans-Christof Von Sponek: I’m probably speculating here, but I would say he refers to the moderate fundamentalists, with whom the US has tried to cooperate – not very successfully, I must say. But the main point one should make here is: at the time when one tries to have a restart of the Geneva peace talks under the leadership of Staffan de Mistura, the UN official, it is tragic that we continue these series of experiments in Iraq, but mainly in Syria right now with the end result that the talks will not move well in Geneva and the peace will be further removed from the country called Syria.

RT: Taking into the account all the negative sides, why is he doing that?

H-CVS: He is entering his last six months and he wants to leave a legacy that shows some sign of success. And the Americans are never short of experiment, never short of trying something new… It is jumping from one laboratory test to another, and in the meantime the country continues to go further towards a destroyed nation.

RT: Obama says he respects European privacy. Has he forgotten how the NSA reportedly tapped Angela Merkel’s phone for years?

H-CVS: I want to tell you, maybe there’s a wonderful political amnesia, but that amnesia doesn’t apply to normal Central European citizens. Do you really think we have forgotten the NSA affair? Do you really think we haven’t followed the WikiLeaks revelations? It is all in the heads, what it does to us is [deepening] the distrust…

RT: We heard Obama also mention so-called “Russian aggression” as a threat to Europe. Are Europeans buying that and do you expect the EU to extend its sanctions against Russia with rhetoric like that?

H-CVS: You know very well that there is an increasingly deep gap between the political message coming out of Europe from Parliaments and what the public feels. This is why you see more and more people now taking time and also contributing financially to try to put some sanity back into the debate. The TTIP is only one example, where Central Europeans, Germans in particular are very, very uncomfortable with the leadership that they see coming out of Berlin.

RT: We saw so many people are against TTIP, because it all is sorted out behind closed doors. Why is Obama pushing it so strongly?

H-CVS: If you run into trouble you cover up. For the last three years now the Americans and the Europeans have tried to sort out, whether they want to be pro-TTIP, or not. This isn’t an easy birth, and he wants to make sure that the child is born before he leaves the office.

RT: What do you think of it: good or bad thing?

H-CVS: Free trade, if it is free trade, it is not a bad thing, but it must be an even playing field. If you don’t do that, if you have behind the curtain all kinds of things which favor you, but not the other side then you run into problems, and the public has discovered that. We do not want to lower our standards, we do not want to endanger an already fragile environment, and we certainly don’t want to be party to court cases, where an enterprise can take a government here in Central Europe to task for having changed, whatever it has decided to change. So it is transparency that could make a difference…

‘Treacherous move’

Political analyst John Wight describes Washington’s decision to deploy extra troops to Syria as “a very serious move which is designed to undermine the sovereignty of the Syrian government.” 

The Syrian government “has been involved in the unremitting conflict for five years at huge cost to its people,” he told RT. “It’s an insult and a treacherous move” on the US, which “created the conditions for this conflict and for its continuance,” Wight added.

“The important thing to be stated here is that unless the deployment of these troops is being done with the clear cooperation and consent of the sovereign Syrian government in Damascus, then this is tantamount to the invasion of Syria by American troops. This is a violation of their territory and it should be treated in this regard,” he said.


RT -(1)-
RT -(2)-
RT -(3)-
Submitted by SyrianPatriots 
War Press Info Network at:
Re-publications are welcome, but we kindly ask you,
to facilitate the correct information's diffusion,
to cite all these original links and sources.

NOTE: The contents of the articles, speeches or comments on this page are of sole responsibility of their authors. The team and the editorial staff of SyrianFreePress do not necessarily subscribe every point of view expressed and are not responsible for any inaccurate, incorrect or offensive statement in this article. Complaints and corrections (verifiable) will be welcomed and accepted. Copyright owners can notify their claims to us, and the verified contents will be removed.