Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

[don]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Shedlock, on Financial Sense, fleshes out Clark's comments . . .

How Long Ago Was a War Against Syria Decided?

By Michael Shedlock
Created 27 Aug 2013

Secretary of State John Kerry says the use of chemical weapons in Syria is "a moral obscenity".

With that clue (and many others), note that Obama prepares wary US public for war with Syria [1].

The White House has begun to prepare a wary US public for military action in Syria, with a flurry of well-publicized meetings of the administration’s national security team, backed by a statement by secretary of state, John Kerry, calling the regime’s use of chemical weapons “a moral obscenity”.
Mr Kerry said on Monday President Bashar al-Assad’s forces’ responsibility for the use of chemical weapons in an attack which left hundreds dead last week was “undeniable”, cementing a sharp about-turn in Washington’s response to the issue.
Mr Obama said last year the use of chemical weapons would cross a “red line” in a conflict which the US has stayed out of, apart from promising to funnel weapons to some anti-Assad forces. Subsequently, however, when faced with allegations that chemical weapons had been used, administration officials had suggested they could not be conclusively traced back to Mr Assad’s military.
The US is now moving quickly, and together with its Nato allies, could launch air strikes as early as Thursday or Friday this week, said individuals familiar with internal administration deliberations.

Chemical Weapons Questions

Q: Were chemical weapons used in Syria?
A: Highly likely
Q: By Assad, the rebels, or both?
A: Good question (and no one knows the answer for sure)
Q: Does it matter?
A: Apparently not. The US is headed for war anyway.

We Know Where They Are

Reflect back on the inane war in Iraq. Recall Donald Rumsfeld's statement regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction: "we know where they are".
We didn't know then. Do we know now?
Does it matter? Apparently not.

Iraq War Quotes

Please consider a few Iraq War Quotes [2].

11/15/1999, Dick Cheney, CEO of Halliburton (later, Vice President)
"Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow." (at the London Institute of Petroleum)
10/11/2000, George W. Bush, Candidate for President
"I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation building."
10/29/2001, Michael Leeden, American Enterprise Institute
"Just wage a total war against these tyrants; I think we will do very well and our children will sing great songs about us years from now."
02/13/2002, Kenneth Adelman, a member of the Pentagon's Defense Policy Board
"Liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk."
09/18/2002, Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense (before Congress)
"We do know that the Iraqi regime has chemical and biological weapons. His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons -- including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and mustard gas. ... His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of biological weapons—including anthrax and botulism toxin, and possibly smallpox." (presentation to Congress)
10/7/2002, George W. Bush, President
"The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas."

Curiously, every statement except the first one by Dick Cheney was a blatant lie or blatant stupidity (take your pick).

[Hear More: JKC de Courcy: Three Big Geopolitical Threats For 2013 [3]]

Pentagon Had Plan in 2001 to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years, Including Syria

Want proof?
Fair enough. I would too.
Please consider this 2007 article Gen. Wesley Clark Says Pentagon Had Plan in 2001 to Attack Seven Countries in Five Years [4].
Better yet, please play the video: General Wesley Clark: Wars Were Planned – Seven Countries In Five Years (Syria Included) [5]

15 Signs

Via ZeroHedge here are 15 Signs That Obama Has Already Made The Decision To Go To War With Syria [6]

What Do US Citizens Want?

I am glad you asked.
As Syria war escalates, Americans cool to U.S. intervention [7].

Americans strongly oppose U.S. intervention in Syria's civil war and believe Washington should stay out of the conflict even if reports that Syria's government used deadly chemicals to attack civilians are confirmed, a Reuters/Ipsos poll says.
About 60 percent of Americans surveyed said the United States should not intervene in Syria's civil war, while just 9 percent thought President Barack Obama should act.
The Reuters/Ipsos poll, taken August 19-23, found that 25 percent of Americans would support U.S. intervention if Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's forces used chemicals to attack civilians, while 46 percent would oppose it. That represented a decline in backing for U.S. action since August 13, when Reuters/Ipsos tracking polls found that 30.2 percent of Americans supported intervention in Syria if chemicals had been used, while 41.6 percent did not.
Taken together, the polls suggest that so far, the growing crisis in Syria, and the emotionally wrenching pictures from an alleged chemical attack in a Damascus suburb this week, may actually be hardening many Americans' resolve not to get involved in another conflict in the Middle East.

"A Moral Obscenity"

Those looking for "A Moral Obscenity" now have it.
I am willing to define the term as follows: A pre-ordained war, on inconclusive evidence, with only 9% support (24% even IF chemicals were used by Assad).

Source: Global Economic Analysis


Where the meat lies is not in the above, that's a given, but where are we going? What are the implications, how is the political economy affected? What does it mean for us here on the 'tulip over the next 5 - 10 years? How does the New Economy fit with the Geo-political moves being played out before us?

[Southernguy]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Here is a link to a PDF presentation describing what a minimum cost / minimum American exposure strike relying primarily on Tomahawks might look like.

It's interesting that this presentation was produced-published with so little anticipation to "Syrian army chemical attack on civilians"

[c1ue]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

IMO, credibility is low in this entire endeavor.

Just look at this:

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...394620,00.html

Rebels: Assad, Hezbollah used chemical weapons

Hezbollah accused for first time of using chemical weapons in Damascus suburb attack; according to Syrian rebels, several were killed, injured due to gas


...

Last week, the US officially confirmed that comprehensive examinations revealed Assad's forces used chemical weapons several times over the last few months against the opposition.

...

In light of this, Washington made clear that Syria crossed the red line President Barack Obama set to Assad, and that the US will start arming the rebels to aid them against the Syrian regime and Hezbollah.

The problem being - the above article was from June.

If at first you don't succeed...

What is even more interesting:

(hat tip to Jesse's CrossRoads Cafe)

http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/op...-29531534.html

For example, no-one is going to be interested in persistent reports in Beirut that three Hezbollah members – fighting alongside government troops in Damascus – were apparently struck down by the same gas on the same day, supposedly in tunnels. They are now said to be undergoing treatment in a Beirut hospital.

...

Well it happened in Lebanon when the US Air Force decided to bomb Syrian missiles in the Bekaa Valley on 4 December 1983. I recall this very well because I was here in Lebanon. An American A-6 fighter bomber was hit by a Syrian Strela missile – Russian made, naturally – and crash-landed in the Bekaa; its pilot, Mark Lange, was killed, its co-pilot, Robert Goodman, taken prisoner and freighted off to jail in Damascus. Jesse Jackson had to travel to Syria to get him back after almost a month amid many clichés about “ending the cycle of violence”. Another American plane – this time an A-7 – was also hit by Syrian fire but the pilot managed to eject over the Mediterranean where he was plucked from the water by a Lebanese fishing boat. His plane was also destroyed.

[don]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Where the meat lies is not in the above, that's a given, but where are we going? What are the implications, how is the political economy affected? What does it mean for us here on the 'tulip over the next 5 - 10 years? How does the New Economy fit with the Geo-political moves being played out before us?

That's the question(s)

[c1ue]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Where the meat lies is not in the above, that's a given, but where are we going? What are the implications, how is the political economy affected? What does it mean for us here on the 'tulip over the next 5 - 10 years? How does the New Economy fit with the Geo-political moves being played out before us?

It all depends on your point of view.

From my point of view - nothing has changed. The same people, with the same reflexive actions as well as the same motivations are acting in the same way.

There is no New Economy; what we have is the same economy as in the past 2 decades - only with everything costing ever more due to compound loading of bankster fees even as most people have ever less due to their incomes and/or jobs lagging. Syria doesn't matter to the US in any perceptible way, but then again neither did Kosovo, or Grenada, or W's Saddam. Even Afghanistan, once the overt Taliban cooperation with OBL was shown to be in error, the rest seems like a huge waste of blood and treasure.

[verdo]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Where the meat lies is not in the above, that's a given, but where are we going? What are the implications, how is the political economy affected? What does it mean for us here on the 'tulip over the next 5 - 10 years? How does the New Economy fit with the Geo-political moves being played out before us?

That's the question(s)

It means artificially higher oil prices, which will push higher gold prices. Basically, the last way anyone wants to become more wealthy

[aaron]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Larry Summers might run the FED!

I have very little doubt they care at all about the American public. Whoever is tugging on Obama's strings right now is set to profit from another war. Thus, we will have a war.

[shiny!]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Larry Summers might run the FED!

I have very little doubt they care at all about the American public. Whoever is tugging on Obama's strings right now is set to profit from another war. Thus, we will have a war.

Unfortunately, that about sums it up.

[charliebrown]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

If I was Syria, I know what would be coming a plan accordingly. I would not take a phalanx of cruise missiles lying down.
I would really try to get some of those yakhont missiles close enough to use. Could a missile be brought close enough to use via small boat, or mini submersible? What about U.S. aligned soft targets in the region. Would the Syrian Airforce engage the flotilla?

[don]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

It all depends on your point of view.

what we have is the same economy as in the past 2 decades

Agreed, in the sense the new Economy has been building since the 70s.

In the history of the industrial Age never has a major power voluntarily de-industrialized until now.

Having the World's Reserve Currency and an Overwhleming Military are the two most important trump cards making that even plausible.

The Financialization of the US Economy may be a transitory phase, not an end game in itself.

The general dumbing-down of the domestic workforce, in contrast to the 50s and 60s emphasis on mass technical education, suggests only a small contingent is and will be needed.

How does the explosion of domestic energy extraction and the scrambling of foreign sources - in wars without end, from Iraq to Libya and now Syria - fit into the emerging mosaic.

Are we heading towards Fortress America, a retreat from Pax Americana, where the majority are government dependents?

If not, where else?

[verdo]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

I think if Obama goes in with this, he will put himself up to be a target for impeachment honestly. The devastation this war will bring globally will be spinned by republicans as a means to get Obama out of office. I can see it happening. This wont be some little house on the prairie, skipping through the grass kind of war. Obama is going to get a lot of people killed if he gives in to the neocons pushing him into this. I just wish that the British and French would man up and strike on their own instead of yelling at the U.S. to do it. Instead of fighting to the last American, how about they themselves go in and try their luck huh?

[c1ue]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

How does the explosion of domestic energy extraction and the scrambling of foreign sources - in wars without end, from Iraq to Libya and now Syria - fit into the emerging mosaic.

Certainly instability in the Middle East, which almost always leads into higher oil prices, cannot but be beneficial to shale oil.

However, from my perspective - the primary benefit from fracking is natural gas. In that perspective, ME actions do nothing positive.

For that matter - the Canadians benefit far more than the shale folk from higher oil prices. I don't think anyone believes that nation is involved.

Are we heading towards Fortress America, a retreat from Pax Americana, where the majority are government dependents?

My view is the two are not related. Pax Americana is a function of MIC, while Fortress America is a function of bankster/1%. Sure, there are overlaps - but the relationships are significantly less than before.

100 years ago, or even 50 years ago, the Fortress America component was mostly specific companies seeking access to offshore resources of various forms (labor, fruit, minerals, etc) in order to profit, or sometimes just to collect. It required cooperation with MIC in order to 'protect US interests'.

These days, I do not see at all any benefit for JPM, Citigroup, and so forth with respect to the MIC. The banksters are firmly ensconced on vein upon the domestic US and their stranglehold is far more dependent upon political reins, with a dollop of 'Homeland Security' thrown in.

Note that I don't actually believe in some nefarious conspiracy with respect to the US government and the private portion of the MIC. It is just an unsurprising outcome that a form of collective madness arises - particularly when everyone involved profits from it.

[Fiat Currency]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Certainly instability in the Middle East, which almost always leads into higher oil prices, cannot but be beneficial to shale oil. However, from my perspective - the primary benefit from fracking is natural gas. In that perspective, ME actions do nothing positive.

For that matter - the Canadians benefit far more than the shale folk from higher oil prices. I don't think anyone believes that nation is involved.

Then they're either blind, or weren't looking very hard ...

Canada's role in Libya its biggest military gambit in decades (June 21, 2011)

Flying low, slow and vulnerable, a pair of lumbering Canadian spy planes operate just off the Libyan coast at the edge of shoulder-fired missile range, eavesdropping on pro-Gadhafi forces and feeding critical targeting information.

The Auroras, Cold-War-era submarine hunters newly kitted out with sophisticated sensors, are playing a little-known and relatively risky role as part of Canada's biggest involvement in a military conflict in decades.

The range of Canada's war-fighting assets - fighter-bombers, surveillance aircraft, tankers and a warship - represents the broadest array of commitment to a relatively small conflict in many years.

Compared with previous conflicts, including the 1991 Persian Gulf war and the 1999 Kosovo air war, Canada has a bigger role and a far bigger command presence.

In the Libyan war, Canada has an unmatched multidimensional role. While the needle-nosed CF-18 fighter-bombers garner much of the media attention, there are scores of Canadians on the NATO command-and-control aircraft running the minute-to-minute air war, the Auroras, along with three air-refuelling tankers, and a warship cleared to sail so close to Misrata harbour that sailors on board can watch the splashes of shells from shore that fall short.

"It's a very big effort for a military that still has a major presence in southern Afghanistan," said a senior NATO officer from an allied country, who was not authorized to be quoted by name.
The whole coalition effort, more than 20 warships, nearly 200 warplanes and nearly a dozen countries with varying degrees of commitment, is under the command of a Canadian - air force Lieutenant-General Charles Bouchard.

"It's a much bigger role than we played in Kosovo," said Canadian air force Colonel Alain Pelletier, referring to the 1999 NATO bombing campaign that attacked Serb tanks and troops terrorizing Albanian Kosovars. Col. Pelletier, now the Canadian air force contingent commander for the Libyan war, led the first Canadian bombing strikes in Kosovo, so he is well-positioned to compare the two air wars 12 years apart.

But the Canadian role in the current war goes far beyond the 330-plus-and-counting laser-guided bombs dropped by the CF-18s on Libyan targets.

The Auroras are flying critical reconnaissance and spying missions, not the mundane maritime sovereignty patrols to check fishing boats usually associated with the aging and ungainly four-engine propeller planes. Equally little known are the exploits of HMCS Charlottetown, the Canadian frigate that has spent weeks in the hostile waters just off the embattled Libyan port of Misrata.

Nevertheless, the Canadian war fighting role - while significant for a modest military - pales compared with the major powers. British and French warplanes are flying more than half of the total Libyan strike missions and both countries have deployed helicopter gunships - critically needed for hunting pro-Gadhafi forces in dense urban battlefields.

Although the United States has deliberately adopted the lowest possible profile, as President Barack Obama seeks to avoid a leading role in a third war against a Muslim country, the United States military still provides the bulk of the behind-the-scenes heavy-lifting including support, resupply, command and control, search and rescue, satellite surveillance, high-flying Global Hawk spy drones and the missile-firing Predator drones.

The massive barrage of cruise missiles that opened the Libyan war with a scaled-down version of a "shock and awe" campaign was mostly an American display of firepower.

Canada's unique role among America's closest allies in sharing continental air defence has given the President and the Pentagon a comfort level with a commanding Canadian air force general that wouldn't exist with any other NATO nation.

Off the Libyan coast, the Auroras, festooned with sideways-looking sensors as part of a sophisticated multimillion-dollar upgrade, feed streams of data surreptitiously gathered.
"It monitors lines of communications, fixes location, finds checkpoints," Col. Pelletier said. That electronic snooping, intercepting signals from cellphones to military radios to emissions from radar sites, is part of a myriad, three-dimensional dynamic digital battlefield picture that targeters and commanders use to direct warplanes for bombing strikes.

"It brings a new capacity to the fight with its ability to look at what is going on inland," Col. Pelletier said.

Meanwhile, off Misrata, HMCS Charlottetown, along with British warship HMS Liverpool, have played vital roles in helping Libyan rebel forces liberate the port city. Most of the nations that have sent more than 20 warships to the NATO force have attached so-called caveats, limiting their use to relatively safe and benign activities such as stopping and checking freighters and tankers in the mid-Mediterranean to make sure no arms are being shipped to either side.

But Charlottetown, unfettered by such limits, has been providing cover for minesweeping operations off Misrata. A Dutch naval officer who described efforts by pro-Gadhafi forces to close the harbour with floating and submerged mines, described the 5,000-tonne Charlottetown as positioned only a few thousand metres offshore. Splashes from mortars and rockets falling short of the ship can clearly be seen and flares and tracers light up the night sky in photographs taken from the warship.

[don]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Certainly instability in the Middle East, which almost always leads into higher oil prices, cannot but be beneficial to shale oil.

However, from my perspective - the primary benefit from fracking is natural gas. In that perspective, ME actions do nothing positive.

For that matter - the Canadians benefit far more than the shale folk from higher oil prices. I don't think anyone believes that nation is involved.



My view is the two are not related. Pax Americana is a function of MIC, while Fortress America is a function of bankster/1%. Sure, there are overlaps - but the relationships are significantly less than before.

100 years ago, or even 50 years ago, the Fortress America component was mostly specific companies seeking access to offshore resources of various forms (labor, fruit, minerals, etc) in order to profit, or sometimes just to collect. It required cooperation with MIC in order to 'protect US interests'.

These days, I do not see at all any benefit for JPM, Citigroup, and so forth with respect to the MIC. The banksters are firmly ensconced on vein upon the domestic US and their stranglehold is far more dependent upon political reins, with a dollop of 'Homeland Security' thrown in.

Note that I don't actually believe in some nefarious conspiracy with respect to the US government and the private portion of the MIC. It is just an unsurprising outcome that a form of collective madness arises - particularly when everyone involved profits from it.

I agree it is organic, in the sense that Competitive Capitalism inevitably is transformed into Monopoly Capitalism , with all its concomitant contradictions, primarily the Crisis of Overproduction, which (apparently) leads to Financial Monopoly Capitalism. Of course every case is singular - Finance Monopoly Capitalism with American Characteristics features the World's Reserve Currency and an Overwhelming Military Capability. The rest are the details . . . .

[don]

Re: Escobar's Holy Tomahawk War

Given that the pretext for attacking Syria is falling apart before the public’s eyes, why is the US preparing to wage war on that country? Who benefits from the ongoing destabilization of Assad’s government? What will the Middle East look like if the Sunnis take over Syria? What is Israel’s role in this? What do Turkey, Qatar and Saudi Arabia have to gain from a war in Syria? And what does Bandar Bush have to do with all of this? Join us today on The Corbett Report as we discuss these and other pressing issues as the world stands on the brink of yet another US-led Middle Eastern military adventure.