Unz评论•另类媒体选择$
美国主流媒体大都排除了有趣,重要和有争议的观点
 博客浏览迈克·惠特尼(Mike Whitney)档案
特朗普的战争呐喊:当下湾时刻?
通过电子邮件将此页面发送给其他人

 记住我的信息



=>
杰克·坎宁安(Jake Cunningham)摄影| CC BY 2.0

书签 全部切换总目录添加到图书馆从图书馆中删除 • B
显示评论下一个新评论下一个新回复了解更多
回复同意/不同意/等等 更多... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
同意不同意谢谢LOL轮唱
这些按钮可将您的公开协议,异议,感谢,LOL或巨魔与所选注释一起注册。 仅对最近使用“记住我的信息”复选框保存姓名和电子邮件的频繁评论者可用,并且在任何八个小时的时间内也只能使用三次。
忽略评论者 关注评论者
搜寻文字 区分大小写  确切的词  包括评论
列表 书签

An attack on an ammunition dump that contained chemical weapons has touched off a massive propaganda blitz aimed at drawing the United States deeper into Syria’s six year-long war. The incident which took place in the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun, killed an estimated 72 people and left several hundred others severely ill. According to Russia Today:

“The warehouse (that was bombed) was used to both produce and store shells containing toxic gas…The shells were delivered to Iraq and repeatedly used there… Both Iraq and international organizations have confirmed the use of such weapons by militants.” (RT)

Reports in the western media have dismissed the RT account as “nonsense” and placed the blame squarely on Syrian President Bashar al Assad. Leading the charge once again is the “纽约时报” chief propagandist Michael R. Gordon who, readers may recall, co-authored fake news stories with Judith Miller about Saddam’s elusive Weapons of Mass Destruction. Here’s a sample of Gordon’s work from a piece he wrote (with Miller) in 2002. It helps to put Tuesday’s incident into perspective:

“More than a decade after Saddam Hussein agreed to give up weapons of mass destruction, Iraq has stepped up its quest for nuclear weapons and has embarked on a worldwide hunt for materials to make an atomic bomb, Bush administration officials said today. In the last 14 months, Iraq has sought to buy thousands of specially designed aluminum tubes, which American officials believe were intended as components of centrifuges to enrich uranium. American officials said….” (New York Times)

Gordon’s article helped pave the way for invasion of Iraq, the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis and the destruction of one of the world’s oldest civilizations. Now he’s moved on to Syria. Here’s a blurb from his latest piece titled “Worst Chemical Attack in Years in Syria; U.S. Blames Assad”:

“The United States blamed the Syrian government and its patrons, Russia and Iran, on Tuesday for one of the deadliest chemical weapons attacks in years in Syria, one that killed dozens of people in Idlib Province, including children, and sickened scores more.

A senior State Department official said the attack appeared to be a war crime and called on Russia and Iran to restrain the government of President Bashar al-Assad of Syria from carrying out further chemical strikes.

Britain, France and Turkey joined Washington in condemning the attack, which they also attributed to Mr. Assad’s government. The United Nations Security Council was scheduled to be briefed on the attack on Wednesday.” (New York Times)

Does that sound like a justification for war? Gordon seems to think so.

And Gordon is not alone either. He is joined by the entire western media and their blood-thirsty colleagues on Capital Hill. Now it appears that President Donald Trump –who promised an end to Washington’s regime change wars– has joined their ranks. Here’s the statement Trump issued on Tuesday shortly after the attack:

“Today’s chemical attack in Syria against innocent people, including women and children, is reprehensible and cannot be ignored by the civilized world. These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime are a consequence of the past administration’s weakness and irresolution. President Obama said in 2012 that he would establish a “red line” against the use of chemical weapons and then did nothing. The United States stands with our allies across the globe to condemn this intolerable attack.” President Donald J. Trump, Office of the Press Secretary, April 04, 2017

Repeat: “These heinous actions by the Bashar al-Assad regime …cannot be ignored by the civilized world”.

Is Trump planning to lead the U.S. into a war with Syria?

Compare ‘President Trump’s’ comments this week to ‘Candidate Trump’s’ comments in December 2016:

“We will pursue a new foreign policy that finally learns from the mistakes of the past…We will stop looking to topple regimes and overthrow governments…. Our goal is stability not chaos, because we want to rebuild our country (the United States) …In our dealings with other countries, we will seek shared interests wherever possible and pursue a new era of peace, understanding, and good will.”

Quite a difference, eh? Now check out these blurbs on Trump’s Twitter account in 2013 when Citizen Trump was trying to persuade Obama that he should “stay the hell out” of the Syrian conflict.

From the Real Donald J. Trump– “We should stay the hell out of Syria, the “rebels” are just as bad as the current regime. WHAT WILL WE GET FOR OUR LIVES AND \$ BILLIONS?ZERO”

5年33月15日下午2013:XNUMX

Donald J. Trump– “President Obama, do not attack Syria. There is no upside and tremendous downside. Save your “powder” for another (and more important) day!”

6:21 AM - 7 Sep 2013

Donald J. Trump– “What will we get for bombing Syria besides more debt and a possible long term conflict? Obama needs Congressional approval.”

上午11:14 – 29年2013月XNUMX日

The difference between Citizen Trump and President Trump could not be starker. Citizen Trump was nearly a pacifist while President Trump has deployed more Marines and Special Forces to Iraq and Syria, 2,000 more US combat troops to Kuwait (in anticipation of a broader conflict) and stepped up US operations in Somalia, Yemen, Afghanistan and beyond. Even more troubling is the fact that he has loaded his foreign policy team with right-wing militarists like James “Mad Dog” Mattis (who leveled the Iraqi city of Falluja in a vicious fit of rage.) and Lt Gen HR McMaster, who was recently denounced by a retired senior US Military Police officer, Arnaldo Claudio, as a war criminal for “human rights abuses of detainees in Tal Afar, during the Iraq war.” (See: “US Army Investigator Accuses National Security Adviser McMaster of War Crimes in Iraq”, The Libertarian Institute)

What’s so disturbing about the appointments of Mattis and McMaster is that Trump has apparently relinquished control over foreign policy and handed it over to his generals whose political orientation is at the far right-end of the spectrum.. Check out this clip from an article at Antiwar.com by Jason Ditz:

“Trump Expands Pentagon’s War Authority– Trump Giving Commanders Increasing Autonomy to Conduct Operations

While most of the talk about the Pentagon’s proposals for various wars to President Trump has focused on requests for more troops in more countries, a much less publicized effort has also been getting rubber stamped, one giving commanders in those wars increasing autonomy on operations….

While President Trump is eager to make such moves early on to show that he is “listening to the generals,” granting so much autonomy to the military to fight its own wars without political oversight is risky business…. as it further distances America’s direct foreign interventions from politicians, and by extension from the voters, turning the details of major military operations into little more than bureaucratic details for career military brass.

These major changes are happening in almost complete silence, as while there have been mentions of the Pentagon seeking these new authorities, always as an afterthought to getting more troops, there is little to no interest in debating the question.” (antiwar.com)

Think about that for a minute: The world’s most lethal killing machine is now in the hands of career militarists who are trained to win wars not seek political solutions. How can this not lead to a dramatic escalation? Trump thinks that by abdicating his responsibility as Commander in Chief he is showing his support for his generals, but what he’s really doing is revealing his feeble grasp of how the system works. His approach can only lead to more needless carnage, that much is certain.

So what happens now, and how does all this fit with Tuesday’s chemical attack in Syria?

The western media and the political class have already decided that the incident is going to be used for two purposes:

1. Discredit Syrian President Bashar al Assad

2. Create a justification for increasing US military involvement.

The fact that Assad and Putin have already denied that Syria used chemical weapons (“We deny completely the use of any chemical or toxic material in Khan Sheikhoun town today and the army has not used nor will use in any place or time, neither in past or in future,” the army said in a statement, as quoted by Reuters) is not going to make any difference at all. The pretext has already been established and the Pentagon’s strategy may soon be launched.

At the very least, we can expect a more forceful attempt to seize and occupy the eastern quadrant of the country, establish military bases, impose a no-fly zone, and boost the number US combat troops in the theater. There’s also a good chance that the US will engage the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) at Deir Ezzor in their effort to clear and capture east Syria.

The prospects of a conflagration between the United States and Russia are increasing by the day.

上帝帮助我们。

迈克·惠特尼 住在华盛顿州。 他是 绝望:巴拉克·奥巴马与幻觉政治 (AK按)。 绝望也可以在 点燃版。 他可以达到 [电子邮件保护].

(从重新发布 反击 经作者或代表的许可)
 
隐藏12条评论发表评论
忽略评论者...跟随Endorsed Only
修剪评论?
    []
  1. “The warehouse (that was bombed) was used to both produce and store shells containing toxic gas…The shells were delivered to Iraq and repeatedly used there… Both Iraq and international organizations have confirmed the use of such weapons by militants.” (RT)

    I’m extremely skeptical of this explanation.

    March 30 – Tillerson declares that “longer term status of President Assad will be decided by the Syrian people”

    April 4 – SAA bombs a warehouse, and chemical shells stored there accidentally kill 70 people.

    …and this is just a coincidence? Pleeze…

    If there’s ever been a ‘false flag’ OP, this has to be it.

    • 同意: Felix Keverich
    • 回复: @Wade
  2. attonn 说:

    Trump may very well break world record in speed with which a politician betrays his voters. Sad…

    • 回复: @Realist
  3. paraglider 说:

    last october the pentagon/cia and the generals had their chance to save their isis spawn from defeat in alleppo but demurred from trying to tackle the russian s300/s400 air defence systems protecting syrian skies and most likely had they TRIED THEN would have shown to the world the profound vulnerability of the american air power forces.

    american military power exists ONLY as force able to intimidate as long as no one capable of hurting them calls their bluff. the pentagon certainly understands this even if the politicans are too stupid to grasp this elemental concept.

    against russian missile air defences their is most likely no way through safely without suffering staggering and public losses the pentagon can not afford in the court of public opinion and perception.

    imo this blustering out of washington will be no different than last october.

    all the sound and fury signifying nothing

    nothing because nothing has changed in terms of russian control of syrian air space and becuase american ground troop can not and will not fight without air supremacy…something unlikely to be achieved without enormous cost.

    should trump be foolish enough to try his presidency will go down with our air force.

    • 回复: @El Dato
    , @Taras77
  4. El Dato 说:
    @paraglider

    They will use Cruise Missiles.

    That’s only 1.5 million USD a pop (sans support and launch services, which are itemized separately).

    Paid by forced taxation via money printing.

    Buy Raytheon for now!

    (Also, start taking down names, maybe of NYT writers. These can be used to reserve seats in FEMA gas wagons at some future time)

    killed an estimated 72 people

    That’s less bang-for-the-buck than a Hellfire hitting an Afghan wedding celebration. USA kills harder!

    • 回复: @Taras77
  5. anon • 免责声明 说:

    美俄之间发生大火的可能性日益增加。”

    还是俄罗斯和美国之间达成协议? 以色列将被允许在叙利亚黎巴嫩拥有完全控制权,后来伊朗美国将允许俄罗斯在东欧和乌克兰拥有完全控制权。

    • 回复: @El Dato
  6. Kirt 说:

    Whitney calls it, though I’d have to dissent from his description of US generals as “career militarists who are trained to win wars”. They haven’t won any wars recently, just kept them going indefinitely.

  7. El Dato 说:
    @anon

    US would allow Russia to have total say in Eastern Europe and Ukraine.

    That would never happen. All of Ukraine is scheduled for eventual absorption into the tender embrace of the EU.

    It is doubtful that Russia would even want “total say in Eastern Europe”. What the heck would they do with it?

    Nationalism-wise, only half of Ukraine and possibly all of Belarus would be interesting in any case.

    The idea that Russia want to have Eastern Europe like it’s the times of Stalin again is a sick-mind US construction.

    • 回复: @anon
  8. anon • 免责声明 说:
    @El Dato

    Then what does US want from Russia?
    Does Russia know it?
    If it knows why it has been trying to play nice with USA in so many ways for so long. Why does it allow Israel to create mayhem and chaos in ME?

    Sure America wants to absorb Russia the way it has Hondurus and Libya and Somalia and Yemen or in varying combinations of those situations. But given that scenario why Russia even pretends to talk to US, why does it sanction Iran or NK ?

    Or helps US in so many ways .

  9. Taras77 说:
    @paraglider

    The big problem may be that, as you state, trump will go down but many lives may be lost in the process- this betrayal is a gigantic con by the neo cons and their political synchophants.

    Putin is not going to roll over for this affront to humanity-to kill children and their mothers in order to create a false flag staggers the mind but what else is new with our c i or a.

    http://novorossia.today/putin-95-of-world-terrorist-attacks-are-orchestrated-by-the-cia/

  10. Taras77 说:
    @El Dato

    Just noted that 60 tomahawks have been launched on syrian airfields-the neo cons have won, prob got what they are looking for.

    God save us all in this era of absolute greed, insanity, and evil.

  11. Realist 说:
    @attonn

    Yes, so very sad. But at least Trump will be a one termer.

当前评论者
说:

发表评论 -


 记得 我的信息为什么?
 电子邮件回复我的评论
$
提交的评论已被许可给 Unz评论 并可以由后者自行决定在其他地方重新发布
在翻译模式下禁用评论
通过RSS订阅此评论主题 通过RSS订阅所有Mike Whitney评论