Israel’s War Plans to Attack Iran “Before the US Elections”
Pakalert Press
August 22, 2012
by Michel Chossudovsky
Israel’s Channel 10 suggests, in no uncertain terms, that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is “determined to attack Iran before the US elections” and that the “time for action is getting closer.”
“Israel is now closer than ever to a strike designed to thwart Iran’s nuclear drive”.
This timely report suggests that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak firmly believe that President Obama “would have no choice but to give backing for an Israeli attack” were it to be waged before the November presidential elections:
The TV station’s military reporter Alon Ben-David, who earlier this year was given extensive access to the Israel Air Force as it trained for a possible attack, reported that, since upgraded sanctions against Iran have failed to force a suspension of the Iranian nuclear program in the past two months, “from the prime minister’s point of view, the time for action is getting ever closer.”
Asked by the news anchor in the Hebrew-language TV report how close Israel now was to “a decision and perhaps an attack,” Ben-David said: “It appears that we are closer than ever.”
He said it seemed that Netanyahu was not waiting for a much-discussed possible meeting with US President Barack Obama, after the UN General Assembly gathering in New York late next month — indeed, “it’s not clear that there’ll be a meeting.” In any case, said Ben-David, “I doubt Obama could say anything that would convince Netanyahu to delay a possible attack.”
There is considerable opposition to an Israeli strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities, the report noted — with President Shimon Peres, the army’s chief of the General Staff and top generals, the intelligence community, opposition leader Shaul Mofaz, “and of course the Americans” all lined up against Israeli action at this stage.
But, noted Ben-David, it is the Israeli government that would have to take the decision, and there Netanyahu is “almost guaranteed” a majority. Other Hebrew media reports on Tuesday also said Netanyahu had dispatched a senior official, National Security Adviser Yaakov Amidror, to update the elderly spiritual leader of the Shas ultra-Orthodox coalition party, Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, on the status of the Iranian nuclear program, in order to try to win over Shas government ministers’ support for an attack. (Times of Israel, emphasis added)
In an earlier report, Richard Silverstein provides details of a leaked military document (translated from the Hebrew) which outlines the nature of Netanyahu’s proposed “shock and awe attack” on Iran:
The Israeli attack will open with a coordinated strike, including an unprecedented cyber-attack which will totally paralyze the Iranian regime and its ability to know what is happening within its borders. The internet, telephones, radio and television, communications satellites, and fiber optic cables leading to and from critical installations—including underground missile bases at Khorramabad and Isfahan—will be taken out of action. The electrical grid throughout Iran will be paralyzed and transformer stations will absorb severe damage from carbon fiber munitions which are finer than a human hair, causing electrical short circuits whose repair requires their complete removal. This would be a Sisyphean task in light of cluster munitions which would be dropped, some time-delayed and some remote-activated through the use of a satellite signal.
A barrage of tens of ballistic missiles would be launched from Israel toward Iran. 300km ballistic missiles would be launched from Israeli submarines in the vicinity of the Persian Gulf. The missiles would not be armed with unconventional warheads [WMD], but rather with high-explosive ordnance equipped with reinforced tips designed specially to penetrate hardened targets.
The missiles will strike their targets—some exploding above ground like those striking the nuclear reactor at Arak–which is intended to produce plutonium and tritium—and the nearby heavy water production facility; the nuclear fuel production facilities at Isfahan and facilities for enriching uranium-hexaflouride. Others would explode under-ground, as at the Fordo facility.
A barrage of hundreds of cruise missiles will pound command and control systems, research and development facilities, and the residences of senior personnel in the nuclear and missile development apparatus. Intelligence gathered over years will be utilized to completely decapitate Iran’s professional and command ranks in these fields.
After the first wave of attacks, which will be timed to the second, the “Blue and White” radar satellite, whose systems enable us to perform an evaluation of the level of damage done to the various targets, will pass over Iran. Only after rapidly decrypting the satellite’s data, will the information be transferred directly to war planes making their way covertly toward Iran. These IAF planes will be armed with electronic warfare gear previously unknown to the wider public, not even revealed to our U.S. ally. This equipment will render Israeli aircraft invisible. Those Israeli war planes which participate in the attack will damage a short-list of targets which require further assault.
Among the targets approved for attack—Shihab 3 and Sejil ballistic missile silos, storage tanks for chemical components of rocket fuel, industrial facilities for producing missile control systems, centrifuge production plants and more.
Richard Silverstein underscores the fact that there is considerable opposition eithin Israel to the Netanyahu-Barak plan to bomb Iran, which is being waged with a view to allegedly ensuring the “safety of Israel” against Iran.
Will this Israeli opposition prevail were a decision to be taken by Netanyahu and his Defense Minister to carry out an attack plan?
Is Netanyahu a US Political Proxy?
Who is backing Netanyahu? There are powerful economic interests in the US who are in favor of an attack on Iran.
Is this an Israeli war project or is Israel’s prime minister a US political proxy, acting on behalf of the Pentagon?
What happens if Netanyahu gives the order to attack? Will this order be carried out by Israel’s high command despite extensive opposition from within Israel’s Armed Forces?
The issue is not whether Washington will grant a green light to Israel before the US elections as conveyed by the the Israeli media.
The fundamental question is twofold.
1. Who at the political level decides on launching this war? Washington or Tel Aviv? Who are the economic powers elites which overshadow the political process in both the US and Israel?
2. Who ultimately decides– in terms of military command and control– in carrying out a large scale theater war in the Middle East: Washington or Tel Aviv?
Israel is a de facto US military outpost in the Middle East. US and Israeli command structures are integrated, with close consultations between the Pentagon and Israel’s Ministry of Defense. Reported last January, a large number of US troops are to be stationed in Israel. Joint war games between the US and Israel are also envisaged.
US-Israel-NATO war plans directed against Iran have been ongoing since 2003 including the deployment and stockpiling of advanced weapons systems.
The Israeli media reports are misleading. Israel cannot under any circumstances wage a war on Iran without the military backing of the US and NATO.
Advanced weapons systems have been deployed. US and allied Special Forces as well as intelligence operatives are already on the ground inside Iran. US military drones are involved in spying and reconnaissance activities.
Bunker buster B61 tactical nuclear weapons are slated to be used against Iran in retaliation for its alleged nuclear weapons program.
Military actions against Iran are coordinated with those pertaining to Syria.
What we are dealing with is a global military agenda, centralized and coordinated by US Strategic Command (USSTRATCOM) involving complex logistics, liaison with various military and intelligence entities. In 2005, USSTRATCOM was identified as “the lead Combatant Command for integration and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in combating weapons of mass destruction.” This Combatant Command integration also included coordination with America’s allies including NATO, Israel and a number of frontline Arab states, which are members of NATO’s Mediterranean dialogue.
In this broader context of imperial warfare coordinated out of USSTRATCOM in liaison with US Central Command (USCENTCOM), Netanyahu’s attack plan against Iran, conveys the illusion that Tel Aviv rather than Washington calls the shots on waging a war on Iran.
The Israeli media reports mentioned above convey the impression that Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak are in a position to act independently of Washington as well as force Obama into supporting Israel’s attack on Iran.
The notion that Israel could act alone and against the interests of the US is part of a subtle disinformation campaign. There is a longstanding foreign policy practice for Washington to encourage its close allies to take the first step in the unleashing a war, with the Pentagon pulling the military strings in the background.
Let us be under no illusion, the war plans directed against Iran, which have been on the Pentagon’s drawing board since 2003, are established at the highest levels in Washington in consultation and coordination with Tel Aviv and NATO headquarters in Brussels.
While Israel participates in the conduct of war, it does not play an overriding central role in setting the military agenda.
This article was written by Michel Chossudovsky and originally published at Global Research
US Desperation Surfaces in Syria
Obama’s bizarre threats indicative of losing strategy and increasing desperation.
by Tony Cartalucci
August 21, 2012 – US-led NATO forces armed, funded, trained, and even provided air support for Libyan terrorists emanating out of Libya’s eastern Cyrenaica region – most notably Benghazi which had served as the premier international terrorist recruiting ground in the world, according to the US Army’s Combating Terrorism Center, producing a percentage per capita of militants outstripping even that of Saudi Arabia.
Operating under the banner of the “Libyan Islamic Fighting Group” (LIFG), a US State Department, British Home Office, and United Nations-listed international terrorist organization, and officially merged with Al Qaeda in 2007, its commanders including Abdul Hakim Belhaj and Mahdi al-Harati led NATO’s military proxy forces on the ground as US, French, and British planes destroyed the nation from the air.
These very same commanders of this very same listed-terrorist organization would then turn its cash, weapons, and fighters on Syria, as early as November 2011, arriving on the Turkish-Syrian border to enjoy yet another NATO safe haven and logistical networks overseen by Western intelligence along with US funding and arms laundered through Gulf Cooperative Council (GCC) members such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia.
Image: Libyan Mahdi al-Harati of the US State Department, United Nations, and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf)-listed terrorist organization, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG), addressing fellow terrorists in Syria. Harati is now commanding a Libyan brigade operating inside of Syria attempting to destroy the Syrian government and subjugate the Syrian population. Traditionally, this is known as “foreign invasion.”
In essence, just as Al Qaeda had served as an “Arab Foreign Legion” for the US in Afghanistan in the 1980’s during its inception, it once again is serving as a foreign legion inside Syria, fighting Washington’s proxy war against the Syrian government.
It appears however that unlike in Afghanistan where Al Qaeda fought alongside a sizable indigenous force against foreign Soviet troops, the tactical environment is revered – where Washington’s proxy terrorist forces are foreigners facing a highly motivated, well organized, and better armed indigenous Syrian Army.
US Machinations Unraveling – Shareholders Face Liquidation
Coordinated attempts by NATO and its proxy forces to invade and overrun the cities of Damascus and Aleppo in July and early August have failed, with proxy forces being expelled after suffering sizable loses. An attempt to decapitate Syria’s leadership in a bombing in central Damascus also fell flat, with high ranking officials quickly replaced, followed quickly by a cohesive military counter offensive.
The bombing was also followed by the mysterious disappearance of Saudi Arabia’s Bandar “Bush” Bin Sultan, who if confirmed assassinated, may indicate that NATO’s plans are suffering at even the highest levels of organization.
Compounding the West’s attempts to overthrow the government of Syria, is the increasing support Syria has been receiving due to Iranian efforts to assemble international forums representing half of the world’s population, condemning the support of foreign interference and promoting alternatives to the violent destabilization being carried out by the West. A 30 member conference was held ahead of the annual Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) meeting in Tehran, Iran – and another meeting will be held again on the sidelines of NAM toward the end of August.
Image: An impressive counter to the so-called “Friends of Syria” confabs held by Wall Street and London corporate-financier interests in an attempt to sway global opinion toward a repeat of Libya’s destruction at NATO’s hands, the International Consultative Conference hosed by Iran seeks to end the flow of foreign arms into militant hands and resolve political differences through more civilized means.
With the tactical situation inside Syria deteriorating for Western proxies and international consensus shifting in unprecedented directions against Washington and London, shareholders in the West’s latest adventure appear to be making tacit moves to divest their support and protect their own interests, lest they be left with the ignominious results of an increasingly compounding failure.
Obama’s Recent Threats
With this in mind, the US has been making increasingly unhinged “Bush-esque” remarks regarding “weapons of mass destruction” in Syria and attempting to expand the pretexts under which it could “militarily intervene.” Even the very “movement” of Syria’s “unconventional weapons” in a “threatening manner,” US President Barack Obama claimed in a recent statement, would constitute a “red line.”
Obama claims that the US “fears” Syria’s unconventional weapons “falling into the hands of the wrong people.” If the US is willfully arming, funding, and threatening to back militarily, listed Al Qaeda terrorist organizations, then whose hands is the US referring to? And while the US struggles to foment victory in Syria, it seems to have stretched its support for terrorism all the way to Russia’s Caucasus Mountains, reigniting violence there, linked to Al Qaeda as well.
Image: The Washington Consensus’ shrinking legitimacy is proportionally matched to its increasingly untenable perpetuation. Its unjustified, disastrous military adventure in Libya seems to have resulted in a Pyrrhic victory, hobbling the institutions and legitimacy it needed to likewise undermine and overthrow the Syrian government in a timely fashion. Overstretched, it appears the West is even trying to strike at Russia with terrorist proxies that now span from North Africa all the way to the Caucasus Mountains.
To say that the US is overstretched is an understatement. It is overstretched politically, economically, and tactically. It risks a historically unprecedented collapse that would destroy all shareholders invested in its increasingly unhinged and transparently illegitimate ambitions. Nations, in particular GCC members, are beginning to realize with acute alarm that their support of Washington’s agenda is now threatening their very self-preservation. A victory even at this point would still likely be Pyrrhic.
No matter how well Syria goes for the West from this point on, the mechanisms it has used to get here, including its “Responsibility to Protect” doctrine, the legitimacy of the UN, the West’s so-called commitment to “human rights,” and the narrative of the so-called “War on Terror” have been undermined beyond salvage.
One can only imagine the mountains Washington is promising to move in order to keep its allies lined up behind them, particularly the ruling governments of Turkey and the GCC. For an elitist clique that has prided itself in “realist” political discourse, it has become increasingly surrealist. Whether or not Washington’s allies mirror this surrealism all the way to their own demise, remains to be seen.
Syrians run to Jordan – and into a humanitarian crisis [video]
Russia Today
August 20, 2012
The newly confirmed peace envoy for Syria says his main task is to stop the civil war in the country. This, as the UN observer mission there has come to an end amid escalating violence there. Tens of thousands are fleeing the conflict to neighboring states, including Jordan. RT’s Paula Slier has the latest from the border.
The Syrian Government is Not Isolated
Largest nations on Earth converge to support embattled Syrian government.
by Tony Cartalucci
August 11, 2012 – Iran has recently hosted 30 nations including Russia, China, India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, Ecuador, Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Oman, Turkmenistan, Venezuela, Cuba, Jordan, Tunisia, Palestine, and many others in Tehran this week in efforts to support the Syrian government against foreign destabilization. Upon the agenda were calls to end foreign arms currently flowing into terrorist hands inside Syria, proposals to broker a meaningful ceasefire, the coordination of humanitarian aid, and supporting the Syrian people’s right to reform without foreign interference.
The unique conference featured representatives of over half of the world’s population, and signals that indeed, Syria’s government is not as “isolated” as portrayed by Western neo-imperialists.
Image: An impressive counter to the so-called “Friends of Syria” confabs held by Wall Street and London corporate-financier interests in an attempt to sway global opinion toward a repeat of Libya’s destruction at NATO’s hands, the International Consultative Conference hosed by Iran seeks to end the flow of foreign arms into militant hands and resolve political differences through more civilized means.
The meeting comes as revelations emerge that the United States, United Kingdom, NATO-member Turkey, and members of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) are supplying weapons, cash, and other assistance to foreign militants with direct links to Al Qaeda. These include Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG) militants who are in fact listed by both the US State Department and the UK Home Office (page 5, .pdf) as a foreign terrorist organization and a proscribed terrorist organization respectively.
As foreign militants continue to flow over Syria’s borders bolstered with an increase in foreign aid, sectarian violence has spiraled out of control. The UN has categorically failed to condemn the West’s state sponsorship of international terrorism now ravaging Syria. It appears that nations around the world, including shareholders in the Anglo-American establishment, may be having second thoughts about the increasingly untenable enterprise the West has chosen to pursue.
Earlier this month, during a Saudi-Qatari sponsored, US-UK-backed UN resolution, a large number of nations either voted no, abstained, or failed to attend the vote, indicating slipping support for what is sometimes called the “Washington consensus.”
US, GCC, and NATO actions in Libya in support of sectarian militants to install a stable of Western-created proxies into power has stripped away much of the “primacy” of “international law” and left the willfully abused geopolitical tenant of “responsibility to protect” (R2P) irrevocably in tatters. With the West’s attempted destabilization of Syria stalled, global public opinion has grown aware of the true nature of Syria’s so-called “rebels,” and that many are foreign fighters committing an array of abhorrent atrocities. The UN’s failure to act, or even worse, its role in facilitating what equates to military aggression couched in “humanitarian” pretenses, jeopardizes international law all together.
The West has ungracefully faced this quandary of its own creation by simultaneously attempting to use the presence of Al Qaeda terrorists as a causus belli to militarily intervene while also rebranding Al Qaeda as champions of freedom in Syria. One breathtaking account was given by the Fortune 500-funded Council on Foreign Relations in their article, “Al-Qaeda’s Specter in Syria,” claiming:
“The Syrian rebels would be immeasurably weaker today without al-Qaeda in their ranks. By and large, Free Syrian Army (FSA) battalions are tired, divided, chaotic, and ineffective. Feeling abandoned by the West, rebel forces are increasingly demoralized as they square off with the Assad regime’s superior weaponry and professional army. Al-Qaeda fighters, however, may help improve morale. The influx of jihadis brings discipline, religious fervor, battle experience from Iraq, funding from Sunni sympathizers in the Gulf, and most importantly, deadly results. In short, the FSA needs al-Qaeda now.”
Clearly, no nation in good conscience, or at least interested in self-preservation, could condone the overt destabilization of Syria by foreign powers with disingenuous motives, using listed-terrorist organizations to do so. The potential of this same ploy then being turned against other nations including members of Iran’s 30 nation conference, or even the US and UK’s “Friends of Syria” confabs, becomes increasingly more likely if such tactics are not condemned and altogether balked.
While US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talks of “no-fly zones” with NATO-member Turkey this week, the successful conference in Tehran illustrates that any such act of aggression will be carried out unilaterally, further undermining the West’s own contrived “international order” with a growing number of nations standing in direct opposition, not in support of, Wall Street and London’s next move.
Iran plans to hold another such conference later this month.
For more information, please listen to the first half of Dr. Webster Tarpley’s August 11th broadcast of World Crisis Radio.
US-NATO Meddling in Syria Faces International Condemnation [video]
Land Destroyer Report
August 12, 2012
Webster G. Tarpley, Ph.D.
PressTV – Tarpley.net
August 12, 2012
Iranian Hostage: “US Torture, most horrifying ordeal” [video]
YouTube — ravenise00
August 17, 2012
The released Iranian national, Shahrzad Mir-Qolikhan, who was in a United States prison for five years over unfounded allegations, tells Press TV that she had “the most horrifying experience” there as a political hostage.
ASH/HN
http://www.presstv.com/detail/2012/08/16/256646/us-jail-ones-most-horrifying-…
Full-Scale War In Syria
SteveLendmanBlog
August 9, 2012
Former Russian Prime Minister Yevgeny Primakov calls it “full-scale civil war.” It’s full-scale but not civil.
Syria’s been invaded. Civil war implies two internal warring sides. That’s very much not the case. Primakov said:
“Mercenaries and volunteers from other states are fighting (Assad) jointly with” violent internal forces. Most Syria opponents are nonviolent. They want peaceful conflict resolution. Washington has other ideas.
“President Obama has given a direct order to the CIA to support the Syrian opposition.”
“That is flagrant interference in internal affairs of a sovereign state, which does not endanger the United States or anyone else.”
“Saudi Arabia and Qatar are funding militants. Turkey is giving them active support.” So are other regional countries.
“Russia holds the only correct position,” he added. “We have a moral position: we care for life and security of millions of people and for stability of the huge and important region.”
Syria is strategically important for Moscow. Tartus is its only Mediterranean base. Protecting it is key. Assad is a valued regional ally. It’s in Russia’s interest to support him.
Moscow backed Annan’s peace plan dependent on keeping him in power and having Syrian sovereignty be respected. Its strategy also lets other global allies know it’s committed to back them if needed. Some have their own internal problems and need reassurance.
Regional economic interests are also important. Much more is involved than weapons.
Russia constructed Iran’s Bushehr nuclear facility and agreed to build three more. Both countries have strategic ties. They also have other economic relations.
Russian Federation regions have additional ones. Both countries cooperate on oil and gas interests.
Russian expertise and technology helped build Syrian infrastructure. It’s also responsible for dozens of industrial facilities. It includes about one-third of its electrical power capacity, another third of its oil-related operations, and help building the Euphrates dam.
Maritime interests are important. Linking Latakia, Syria with Novorossiysk, Russia on the Black Sea facilitates cargo shipments. Gazprom has oil and gas development operations.
Both countries have nuclear energy ties. They also cooperate on other commercial, scientific, military, and environmental issues.
Russia and Syria enjoyed strategic relations for decades. Patrick Seale called Moscow Hafez Assad’s main ally. Given Washington’s regional ambitions, both countries serve each other strategically.
Greater Washington Eurasian control threatens Moscow directly. Preventing it is key. Standing firm on Syria and Iran is vital.
America infests the region with military bases. Offensive missile shield installations target Russia and China. Both countries partnered with Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan in a Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) alliance.
India, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan, and Mongolia have observer status. Belarus and Sri Lanka are dialogue partners. Expanding the organization is planned.
SCO supports economic cooperation, peace, and national sovereignty. Member states are a potential bulwark against Washington-led NATO aggression.
On June 6 and 7, members met in Beijing. Security and economic cooperation issues were discussed. Washington’s missile shield was condemned.
Its North Africa/Eurasian militarization threatens Russia, China, Iran, and other countries. Syria is ground zero. Holding the line is vital. Odds of succeeding are uncertain. Washington doesn’t quit once strategic plans are implemented.
Assad promises to try. On August 8, SANA state media said he’s determined to defeat terrorists responsible for mass killings and atrocities.
He spoke during a meeting with Iran’s Supreme National Security Council Secretary Saeed Jalili. They met on issues affecting both countries. They agreed that resolving Syria’s crisis depends on internal solutions.
Separately, SANA reported Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi warning about:
“Plots which aim at destabilizing peace and stability in the region, instigate conflicts among the minorities and sects which lived together in peace in order to change the situations in the region.”
Salehi met with Turkish officials in Ankara. They discussed 48 Iranian visitors abducted by Syrian insurgents. At issue is ensuring their safety and release. Reportedly three were killed.
Syrian captors said one was a Russian general. They identified him as Major General Vladimir Kuzheez. Moscow’s Defense Ministry called the claim “complete lies.” An official statement added:
“The goal of broadcasting such statements is not just to cause a sensation, but a clear attempt at a slur toward the Russian Army.”
Kuzheev is very much alive. He met with journalists and dismissed reports of his death, saying:
“I want to express thanks to the media for their attention to my person….I want to confirm that I am well and alive in Moscow….I realize that this information is a provocation not only against me but against my country.”
Saudi controlled Al Arabiya broadcast a video featuring Free Syrian Army representatives claiming Kuzheev was killed. They showed what they called his photo ID identity card. It was fake.
The battle for Aleppo continues. Government forces cleared insurgents from Salaheddin. They’re gaining the upper hand. Reports are the city is surrounded.
Five Saudi and two Turkish military officers were captured. One was a Turkish general. Earlier insurgent claims about controlling most of the city were false.
They’re outmanned, outgunned, and outmaneuvered. They’re being defeated. Nonetheless, clearing them from neighborhoods takes time.
Press TV cited reports about insurgents supplied with chemical weapons. It said Turkey gave them surface-to-air Stinger missiles. They came with “thermal rockets and sophisticated weaponry.”
“More than 100 Turkish troops backed with armored vehicles and helicopters entered the Syrian border town of Cerablos in the Kurdish region of Kobani on Tuesday.”
“A spokesman for the Kurdish militias in the border towns of Kobani and Efrin accused the Turkish forces of supplying arms and ammunition to insurgents fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government.”
“NBC News also reported on July 31 that nearly two dozen MANPADs (man-portable air-defense systems) have been delivered to the insurgents in Syria by Turkey.”
Rick Rozoff also said Turkey has troops in Syria. They threatened to use them to protect a site agreed to in 1921.
Ankara was guaranteed the right to station forces at the Suleyman Shah mausoleum. He’s the grandfather of Ottoman Empire founder Osman I (Osman Bey).
Turkey considers the site and surrounding area sovereign territory. A small military contingent protects it. Whether it’s a wedge for larger numbers and planned belligerency remains to be seen.
Rozoff said the site was “proclaimed a NATO outpost in Syria.” Developments ahead warrant close monitoring. Incrementally they head toward Western and/or regional intervention.
On August 6, Ron Paul warned about more war, saying:
“The administration seems determined to fight yet another war in Syria that has nothing to do with American national interests.”
“Neoconservatives have long demanded that we overthrow the Syrian government before moving on to war against Iran. This bellicosity continues regardless of which party is in the White House.”
“In Syria we see once again we see how our interventionist policies backfire and make us less secure.”
Washington has no business being involved in Syria, he added. “When will we learn our lesson and stop intervening in conflicts….having nothing to do with American national interests?”
Republican and Democrat hawks way outnumber Paul and other congressional doves. Obama heads toward war. Electoral politics dictate timing. Post-election may be planned. He and Romney are like-minded.
It doesn’t matter who wins. Both men support war. Expect it. Only its timing is unknown. Catastrophic consequences look certain.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago and can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.
His new book is titled “How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion and Class War”
http://www.claritypress.com/Lendman.html
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com and listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network Thursdays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.
http://www.progressiveradionetwork.com/the-progressive-news-hour
PN 