Tag Archives: War

ISIS is a US proxy army, by Tate Ulsaker

At some point, people are going to have to confront their own denial and admit that the US government is directly funding ISIS. These “accidental” transfers are made to look indirect. They are not indirect, they are directly moving from the US through US intermediaries to ISIS. What is so complicated about that?

If it happened once, maybe that could be called an accident.

If twice, there should be some court hearings and firings and possibly war crimes tribunals for those involved, but it still might be called an accident.

But you don’t call it an accident if the US is “accidentally” losing constant flows of small arms and money and convoys of artillery and missiles to ISIS through US paid intermediaries in Syria.

6 guardian

Experiment:
* Go to Google
* Type: US fund isis
* See result: https://www.google.co.nz/#q=us+fund+isis

What are the top 10 organic results today?:

1) Global Research – “America Created Al-Qaeda and the ISIS Terror Group” – http://www.globalresearch.ca/america-created-al-qaeda-and-the-isis-terror-group/5402881

Continue reading ISIS is a US proxy army, by Tate Ulsaker

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn

The Three Harpies are Back!, by Pepe Escobar

Source: counterpunch

shutterstock_386144401-2-1

Those were the days when Libya (“We came, we saw, he died”) offered to the world a full-blooded humanitarian imperialist spectacle starring Three American Harpies: Hillary Clinton, Samantha Power and Susan Rice, actually four if Hillary’s mentorette and soul mate, Madeleine Albright, was included.

Pop cynics felt tempted at the time to coin those Amazons-in-waiting Brunhilde and the Valkyries. Or at least to qualify perma-smirker Hillary as Attila The Hen.

So let’s kill the suspense. There will be, predictably, a sequel. And it even comes with a somewhat highbrow preview, titled Expanding American Power, published by the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) think tank .CNAS happens to be co-founded – and led – by former Undersecretary of Defense Michele Flournoy, who served in the Obama Administration under Leon Panetta.

Also predictably, CNAS and its combative paper read as a sort of grand PNAC remixed – including some of those same old neocon/neoliberalcon faces; Elliot Abrams, Robert Zoellick, Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, and of course Flournoy herself, who a Beltway consensus already identifies as the next Pentagon head under a President Clinton.

In this context, Exceptionalistan rules in all its forms – from thejuicy defense contractor donor list to the emphasis on NATO on trade via the Trans-pacific Partnership (TPP) and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP). After Brexit though, implementing TTIP will be a tall order – and that’s a mighty understatement.

Pentagon-in-waiting Flournoy was recently quoted as willing to send “more American troops into combat against ISIS and the Assad regime than the Obama administration has been willing to commit.”

Well, not really. She actually responded to the piece, arguing she’s in favor of “increasing U.S. military support to moderate Syrian opposition groups fighting ISIS and the Assad regime, like the Southern Front, not asking U.S. troops to do the fighting in their stead.”

Continue reading The Three Harpies are Back!, by Pepe Escobar

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn

100 Years On…Still In The Trenches, by Finian Cunningham

Source: Information Clearing House

This year marks the 100th anniversary of two of the biggest military slaughters in history – the battles of the Somme and Verdun, both fought during the First World War. Shockingly, when we survey the warmongering mentality today of US-led NATO powers one may deduce that not much has changed fundamentally. We see the same murderous squander of human potential by an unaccountable elite.

During the Somme and Verdun campaigns, upwards of two million casualties were suffered on all sides by the British and French armies in trench warfare with their German enemy. The Somme was the deadliest battle of the entire war, pitched between July and November 1916, while Verdun was the longest running, from February until December in the same year.

For the British army the opening day of the Somme remains its worst day in martial history, incurring some 60,000 casualties and losses in a matter of hours.

The First World War, from 1914 to 1918, which was waged mainly on French territory and pitted major European powers, including Russia, against one another, resulted in a total death toll of 17 million, of which the majority – 11 million – were military.

It is astounding to think that only a mere 20 years later, an even more catastrophic world war would take place. The Second World War (1939-1945) resulted in at least 60 million dead. And in that carnage, it was civilians who would comprise the vast majority of the dead.

Both wars became emblematic of industrial-scale killing. Machine-guns, tanks, warplanes and warships were first deployed on a scale never seen before in the history of warfare.

However, it is the First World War perhaps that stands out as the more futile and barbaric. After all, during the Second World War, known as the Great Patriotic War in Russia, men and women courageously gave their lives to defeat a brutal, genocidal ideology of fascist imperialism espoused by the Axis Powers led by Nazi Germany.

Continue reading 100 Years On…Still In The Trenches, by Finian Cunningham

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn

Speaking the Unspeakable: Why the Establishment Wants to Silence Donald Trump, by SAM HUSSEINI

Sam offers below a fresh perspective on how there could still be hope left in the most unlikeliest of places, the police state of America.

After all, the country still claims to be a democracy so why not call it out on that? At the very least it advances the debate beyond the goebbelsesque headlines being pumped out of the “media”. The establishment has always fed off hate at every turn and the common man is manipulated,isolated and disenfranchised.

300+ million Americans are being “informed” by 6 media companies on what they should eat,drink,write,think,see,accept,vote and well you get the picture. Anything that leads to a distortion in a false reality – which promotes endless war – is positive.

Sam has done a great job at bringing a viable solution to the table, check out his excellent initiative at votepact.org

Augmented Ether
———————————————————————————-

source: counterpunch

trumpsmirk-510x383

The establishment so wants everyone else to unfriend Trump supporters on Facebook. There’s even an app to block them. That’ll teach them!

Yes, Trump plays a bully boy and is appealing to populist (good), nativist, xenophobic, and racist sentiments (bad).

Those things need to be meaningfully addressed and engaged, not for self-styled sophisticates to raise their noses, dismissing them.

But focusing only on the negative aspects of Trump’s campaign has blinded people to the good — and I don’t mean good like, oh, the Democrat can beat this guy. I mean good like it’s good that some of these issues are finally getting aired.

Trump appeals to nativist sentiments, but those same sentiments are skeptical of the militarized role of the U.S. in the world — as was the case during Pat Buchanan’s 1992 campaign.

The New York Times recently purported to grade the veracity of presidential candidates. Of course by their accounting, Trump was off the scales lying. But he recently said the Obama administration and Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State “killed hundreds of thousands of people with her stupidity….The Middle East is a total disaster under her.” Now, I think that’s pretty accurate, though U.S. policy in my view may be more Machiavellian than stupid, but the remark is a breath of fresh air on the national stage.

But I’ve not seen anyone fact-check that assertion, because that’s not an argument much of establishment media wants to debate. Of course, a few sentences later Trump talks about the attack on the CIA station in Benghazi, causing Salon to dismiss him as embracing “conspiracies,” which is likely all many people hear.

Shouldn’t someone who at times articulates truly inconvenient truths be noted as breaking politically correct taboos? Trump says such truths, such as this nugget from the Las Vegas debate about U.S. wars:

“We’ve spent $4 trillion trying to topple various people that frankly, if they were there and if we could’ve spent that $4 trillion in the United States to fix our roads, our bridges, and all of the other problems; our airports and all of the other problems we’ve had, we would’ve been a lot better off. I can tell you that right now.”

This I think is a stronger critique of military spending than we’ve heard from Bernie Sanders of late.

Continue reading Speaking the Unspeakable: Why the Establishment Wants to Silence Donald Trump, by SAM HUSSEINI

Share on FacebookTweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePin on PinterestShare on Google+Share on TumblrDigg thisBuffer this pageShare on StumbleUponFlattr the authorShare on RedditPrint this pageShare on LinkedIn