UN Presses for Truce to Save Embattled Terrorists in AleppoTony Cartalucci Curious is the United Nation and NATOs sudden interest in peace. Both organizations are suing for truces on two separate battlefields, one in Ukraine in Eastern Europe, and another in Syrias northern city of Aleppo amid a regional conflagration in the Middle East. It is curious because talks of truces were completely absent just as recently as 2011, when both organizations, the UN and NATO, backed hordes of terrorists sweeping across Libya, committing abhorrent atrocities including the systematic, genocidal extermination of Libyas black communities. To explain the transparently hypocritical change in policy, the UN and NATO are now witnessing a change in fortunes for forces backed by the very special interests that have hijacked and upturned the mission statements of both organizations. Forces that were afforded absolute impunity from the UN and were backed, armed, and provided air cover by NATO in Libya, are now encircled and facing destruction in Syria. Likewise, a similar proxy conflict in Ukraine has seen thousands of NATO-backed militants encircled. A desperate attempt to broker a ceasefire through the so-called Minsk accord fell apart before the ink dried, with NATO-backed militias openly declaring they had no intention of giving up the fight. The Only Terms That Could Be Acceptable For Syria in particular, Aleppo only still serves as a battlefield for the sole reason that NATO is to this day still funding, arming, and transferring terrorists to the battlefield through NATO-member Turkey. Any ceasefire or truce brokered in the northern city of Aleppo, Syrias largest city and a national commercial hub, should be accompanied by international peace keepers stationed in Turkey to ensure the regime in Ankara is no longer harboring, arming, and supplying terrorists within its territory. With the streaming of terrorists across Turkeys border with Syria abated, the existential threat to Aleppo and the rest of northern Syria would likewise cease to exist, making calls for Syrian troops to stand down a much more reasonable proposition. To ask them now, while hordes of invaders flow into their country for the sole purpose of dividing and destroying it, is an unimaginable absurdity. Should invading militants be blocked from crossing into Syria permanently, an amnesty could be arranged for Syrian militants. The total and complete restoration of peace and stability in Syria, with its territory fully intact, can be the only terms accepted in any deal with the UN. Anything less is ploy by the UN and NATO to buy time for an increasingly defeated army of proxy militants and a last ditch effort to arrange a settlement that will leave swaths of Syrian territory in the hands of NATOs proxy forces where they can rebuild and relaunch their destructive campaign in the near future. Tony Cartaluccis articles have appeared on many alternative media websites, including his own at 