TEHRAN (Press Shia) – An American political commentator hammered the US Army for going its own way and ignoring the president’s orders, saying the US attack on Syrian troops a few days before coming into force of a ceasefire in the Arab country was clearly a military coup.

In an interview with the Press Shia News Agency, Rick Staggenborg, a political analyst and peace activists from Oregon, deplored a “military coup” by the US Army, saying it is “simply not obeying” Obama’s orders.

What follows is excerpts from his interview:

Press Shia: It seems that an increasing number of American people are getting tired of US military engagement in the Middle East and do not want to see their tax dollars being spent thousands of miles away. As an analyst with a good knowledge of the situation, what scenarios do you imagine for the US policy towards the Middle East under the next president?

Staggenborg: Well, I’m afraid they’re not going to be what the American people would want, at least those who are paying attention to what's happening in the Middle East. Hillary Clinton is very likely to be the winner. She has made it quite clear that she wants a no-fly zone in Syria, which would involve, of course, attacking the Syrian military. That’s the part most Americans don’t know. They hear about a no-fly zone and they think "Oh, we are going to protect the poor Syrians who are being attacked by their own government" when in fact, of course, this is a foreign coup and it would be… to protect the terrorists, who are trying to take down the Assad government, which would destabilize the entire region and, given Russian involvement, could spark World War III. So, it is a very dangerous situation. Unfortunately, I think very few Americans have any idea of that.

Press Shia: A recent audio recording obtained by the New York Times suggested that Secretary of State John Kerry is frustrated that his diplomatic efforts to end the conflict in Syria had not been backed by a serious threat of US military force. Does it imply that the US politicians still believe in the use of force, despite the bitter experiences in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Staggenborg: Absolutely, I think that the majority of politicians are still convinced that the US has to win, because it’s just a matter of pride. Of course, the ones who design these attacks have ulterior motives; they want to control the oil and gas supplies, that’s the real reason for this conflict. But unfortunately, most politicians do feel that use of force is still appropriate, including Obama to a certain extent.

Now, what’s even worse is Obama is trying to scale that back and give a chance for peace, but the State Department, whose job is to prevent wars, has been taking over by warmongers. They’re actually pushing for this; Kerry is one of them. They’re pushing for war instead of trying to prevent it. So the president is in the situation where he is really trying to institute a ceasefire, but people don’t believe it because of the violations. But what other people are saying, and I agree, is that the military is simply not obeying his orders. He wanted a ceasefire, so they went ahead and attacked two days before the ceasefire was supposed to take effect. They attacked the Syrian army. This, in fact, is a military coup. When the military is just ignoring what the president says and going on with this, then the president is not in charge of the country. So that is effectively a coup, and people don’t get that either. They don’t see this in the United Sates, they don’t understand. They think that foreign policy…that everybody agrees on foreign policy. That’s nonsense. There is always disagreement. Obama has been not as hawkish as people like Hillary Clinton wanted him to be, or Kerry wanted him to be. He's all alone (on this) and he doesn’t get credit for that. People don’t understand how dangerous this situation is. Again, I can’t emphasize that enough. Americans are just blinded because the press is completely controlled by these people who want more and more wars. They think they can control this and ultimately, eliminate Russian influence in the region.

Press Shia: There are public concerns that the nuclear agreement with Iran would be scrapped by the US if Donald Trump takes the office, with speculations about military action against Iran. Do you believe that such thing would ever happen?

Staggenborg: I don’t think he would scrap the treaty, because Congress won’t let him. That’s a congressional action, the president can’t do that because Congress passed it. Will he start a war with Iran? It’s hard to say. It’s …(laughing). I should not laugh, but I don’t know what else to do. Again, these people in charge of US foreign policy, they’re basically insane. Who would risk nuclear war to continue this crazy plan to take over the whole Mideast? These people, eventually, are going to, and we are all going to, pay the price. Everywhere is in the way and America too. We’ve already paid a huge economic price, but it’s going to be much worse.

We’ve got to get out of Syria, and let that situation resolve itself. Without US and Saudi support, and Turkish support, the rebels will be wiped out in a matter of months.