With three months left until the inauguration of the next president, President Obama is virtually out the door. That doesn’t mean he doesn’t have time to start World War 3, however, and he has plenty of members of his administration arguing he should do exactly that.
Officials are eager to scream genocide over the fighting in Aleppo, which up until a couple of weeks ago the US was supposed to be participating in, and to argue that the US cannot possibly sit by and do nothing. What that “something” would be, however, is a matter of considerable debate among top policymakers.
Ironically, while Secretary of State John Kerry was the one who made the deal with Russia on joint attacks against Aleppo in the first place, he’s also leading the charge for a “strong response” against Russia and the Syrian government.
Officials are using any and every opportunity now to escalate tensions with Russia, with the DHS openly accusing them of trying to hack the US election, and several officials suggesting it to be a plot to get the Republican nominee elected.
Picking a military fight with Russia, extreme though it is, seems to be the go-to response for an awful lot of the high-ranking officials, and the main thing that seems to be holding President Obama back is that three months from now he’s out of office, and that’s awfully late to start a world war.
This article originally appeared on Antiwar.com.
The post US Officials Deeply Divided On Attacking Russia In Syria appeared first on MintPress News.