Hillary’s emails show a reset with nuclear potential

When the current Democratic presidential contender, Hillary Clinton was Secretary of State, she convinced President Barack Obama to authorize a covert operation in Libya.

The plan included sending in special forces and arming “rebel” groups in preparation for a joint US-NATO aeronaval attack.

Clinton’s e mails, that subsequently came to light in leaks, prove what another motive for war might have been blocking col. Gaddafi’s plan to harness Libya’s sovereign funds to establish independent financial organizations, located within the African Union as well as an African currency that could serve as an alternative to the dollar and the CFA franc.

After razing the State of Libya, the US and NATO brought in the Gulf monarchies and set about on a covert operation to destroy the State of Syria by arming the “rebel” groups. The move fascilitated the birth of ISIS.

An e-mail from Clinton, one of the many the Department of State was compelled to de-classify following the uproar triggered by the disclosures on Wikileaks, proves however one of the key objectives of the operation is still underway.

David Haggith argues on The Great Recession Blog that the manner of fighting the Syrian war consistently showed a different objective — regime change.

The Syrian Civil War began in 2011 — the middle of Hillary Clinton’s term as US Secretary of State.

As unmarked NATO war planes began arriving in Turkey that same year, delivering weapons absconded from Libya where America participated in another war for regime change, volunteer Libyan soldiers accompanied them.

Haggith says the mission was clearly outside of NATO’s charter, which was to form an alliance under which all members would fight to protect any individual member if it was attacked, not to transform the world to suit some members of an elite.

In an e-mail dated 31 December 2012, declassified as “case no: F – 2014 – 20439, Doc No. CO5794998”, during Hillary Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State, certain parts shed light on other reasons for an intervention:

“It is Iran’s strategic relationship with the Bashar Assad regime that allows Iran to threaten Israel’s security – not through a direct attack but through its allies in Lebanon such as the Hezbollah.”

“The best way to help Israel is to help the rebellion in Syria that has now lasted for more than a year” (i.e. from 2011). How? By mounting the case that the use of force is a sina qua non to make Basshar Assad fold, so as to endanger his life and that of his family”.

“Wrecking Assad would not only be a huge advantage for the security of the State of Israel, but would also go a long way to reducing Israel’s justifiable fear that it will lose its nuclear monopoly.”

So, the former Secretary of State admits what officially is not said: Israel is the only country in the Middle East to possess nuclear weapons.

The support given by the Obama Administration to maintain the status quo, is confirmed by the agreement signed on 14 September this year in Washington under which the United States agrees to supply aid to its ally.

According to this very revealing document pillaged from Hillary Clinton’s email archives, Obama needed to bring down Assad’s regime in order to calm Israel into accepting the eventual nuclear agreement he was working out with Iran.

After the Russian intervention scuppered the plan to engage in the demolition of Syria by fomenting a civil war, it has become even harder to justify a war directly against Assad.

This strategy has already cost the US its nuclear disarmament agreement with Russia and has put the US on the edge of a hot war with Russia.