Obama's Thermonuclear War Drive Has Been Stymied; But Only Obama's Removal from Power Can Assure Peace

September 17, 2015

President Barack Obama's drive to provoke a thermonuclear confrontation with Russia has been stymied through a series of war-avoidance moves that have fundamentally altered the global strategic landscape.

The key initiating blow to Obama's effort was Russian President Vladimir Putin's brilliant flanking maneuver in Syria. Now it is universally confirmed that Russia has established a deeper military presence inside Syria.  A new Russian-built airbase near Latakia on the northern Syrian Mediterranean coast will be completed within several weeks.  The Islamic State and Nusra Front offensive to oust President Bashar Assad has been set back by the Russian actions.  President Obama is in a state of rage, but is boxed in by the Putin actions.  Putin has deepened the trap for Obama by pressing for the US President to agree to a face-to-face meeting later this month in New York City on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly.  Putin's speech before the General Assembly will set forth a proposal for a global war against the Islamic State and other, allied terrorists.

Even before the Putin actions in Syria, sane forces in Western Europe were terrified into action by the recognition that Obama was driving for confrontation with Russia, and that such a confrontation could rapidly turn into a thermonuclear war.  When Putin took the decisive action in Syria, while pressing for implementation of the Minsk Accords to end the crisis in eastern Ukraine, European governments, led by Germany, made a major policy shift.  Germany, and now France, have welcomed the Russian initiative in Syria and called for broad cooperation between the West and Russia to solve the crisis, which has flooded Europe with refugees from the Obama-British wars in the Middle East and North Africa.

Inside the United States, a revolt has erupted among military intelligence personnel assigned to the Central Command, who have filed formal complaints that high-level Obama officials have been pressuring them to "cook" the intelligence on the war on the Islamic State, to create the appearance of success, when, by every sane measure, the US-led war on ISIS has been an utter failure.  In effect, Obama and DNI Gen. James Clapper, who is accused of leading the pressure campaign on the analysts, are following in the footsteps of Vice President Dick Cheney, in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq in March 2003.  Decades earlier, the same "body count" arguments, being foisted on the Centcom analysts, were used to prolong the doomed Vietnam war.

These combined actions have blunted Obama's war drive against Russia—for the time being.  There can be no let-up on the demand for Obama's removal from office, either through impeachment, forced resignation, or the invoking of the 25th Amendment.  So long as Obama remains in office, even if he is restrained by sustained war-avoidance efforts, the danger will remain.  The estimate is that Obama is doomed by his own failed policies, but his removal is the only guarantee that his doom will not also lead to doom for mankind as a whole.



"Cooking the Books" on ISIS at Centcom

The New York Times reported, Tuesday, that more details of the allegations that senior intelligence officers at US Central Command are "cooking the books" in the war against ISIS have been provided to the Pentagon Inspector General's office. According to the report, intelligence analysts have provided specific documents that allegedly show alterations intended to make the war against ISIS look rosier than it really is. Unnamed officials now say that the analysts at the center of the investigation allege that their superiors within Centcom's intelligence operation changed conclusions about a number of topics, including the readiness of Iraqi security forces and the success of the bombing campaign in Iraq and Syria, the Times reports.

"The senior intelligence officers are flipping everything on its head," said one government intelligence analyst. The analyst said that the complaints involve the highest-ranking officials in Centcom's intelligence unit, run by Army Maj. Gen. Steven R. Grove. The Guardian has been reporting that Grove has been in "unusual and frequent" contact with Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, which the analysts see as contributing to the pressure.

The IG investigation into cooked intelligence contributed to the atmosphere of incredulity at the Senate Armed Services Committee hearing today, at which US Central Command chief Gen. Llod Austin III testified.

Committee chairman Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) said:

"Published media reports suggest that the CIA's estimate of ISIL's manpower has remained constant, despite U.S. airstrikes — which suggests that either they were wrong to begin with, or that ISIL is replacing its losses in real time. Neither is good,...

"Indeed, this committee is disturbed by recent whistleblower allegations that officials at Central Command skewed intelligence assessments to paint an overly-positive picture of conditions on the ground...[adding that]...If true, those responsible must be held accountable."

Austin refused to discuss the investigation but promised the senators that "you can be assured I will take the appropriate action," should the allegations be confirmed by the IG investigation. 

Sane US Voices Demand Obama Work with Putin on Syria

A number of leading strategists from the US and Europe are pressing for the Obama Administration to work with Russia to solve the Syria crisis, now in its fourth year.

Graham Fuller, ex-CIA Middle East/North Africa official, published "The Russians are Coming!" on his blog Sept. 15, calling on the US to stop its obsession with containing Iran and Russia and accept the idea that Russia is on the ground in Syria and can play a constructive role in defeating ISIS.

"There are two major countries in the world at this point capable of exerting serious influence over Damascus—Russia and Iran. Not surprisingly, they possess that influence precisely because they both enjoy long-time good ties with Damascus; Assad obviously is far more likely to listen to tested allies than heed the plans of enemies dedicated to his overthrow."

After reviewing how Russia bailed out Obama in 2013 by getting Syria to surrender its chemical weapons, Fuller says that

"even were Syria to become completely subservient to Russia, US general interests in the region would not seriously suffer... We are entering a new era in which the US is increasingly no longer able to call the shots in shaping the international order... Russia is probably better positioned than any other world player to exert influence over Assad."

Fuller concludes: "Bottom line: Washington does not have the luxury of playing dog in the manger in 'managing' the Middle East, especially after two decades or more of massive and destructive policy failure on virtually all fronts."

Carnegie Europe's Judy Dempsey asked a number of experts whether the US should work with the Russians on Syria, and the overwhelming majority of specialists she polled said "yes." While not every one of the think tankers asked to respond to her question were enthusiastic about a Washington-Moscow solution, with just one exception, they all concurred that Russia was in Syria, has deep ties to the Syrian government, and must be part of any viable solution.

Ian Bremmer, President of the Eurasian Group, offered a pointed response:

"It's time to accept that Russia will play a larger and lasting role in the Middle East. The U.S. president's Syria policy is a failure... The United States Russian policy is worse. The U.S. administration stumbled into conflict with Russia over Ukraine, a country that matters much more to Moscow than to Washington, and Russian President Vladimir Putin is now proving that Russia is too big to isolate. Focus on the future. U.S. President Barack Obama's primary Middle East commitment should be to destroy the Islamic State, the best-equipped, best-funded terrorist organization in history... Washington needs partners. NATO allies, Iran, Iraqi militias, and Russia all have good reason to want the Islamic State on its back. All will be needed."