|
IMPERIAL CRUSADE AGAINST SYRIA
Without wars, power would not be power
Oscar Sánchez Serra
WHY is the United States
attacking Syria?
Brazil, Russia – reborn as a
superpower and an uncomfortable one – India and
China – are emerging economies that are already
acting as leaders on the world geopolitical stage.
It is said that India and China, also the most
populated nations of the world, will mark the rate
of development during the 21st century. In other
words, one has to be prepared for a global transfer
of power. The current empire will not be the most
powerful.
For Viktor Burbaki of the U.S.
Strategic Culture Foundation, mathematical models of
the global geopolitical dynamic have led to the
conclusion that a grand-scale victory in a war
utilizing conventional means is the only option for
the United States being able to reverse the rapid
collapse of its geopolitical status. Burbaki affirms
that if the current geopolitical dynamic persists, a
change in global leadership could be expected by
2025, and the only way in which the United States
can derail this process is by unleashing a war on a
grand scale.
Yugoslavia in 1999, Afghanistan in
2001 and Iraq in 2003 have already endured imperial
attacks, utilizing the same argument based on a pack
of lies. The tactic of the world gendarme has never
been to challenge states that could dispute its
global supremacy, for which reason Burbaki considers
that Iran, Syria and Shi’ite groups, such as
Hezbollah in Lebanon, face the greatest danger of
suffering strikes in the name of a new world
redistribution of power. The specialist did not
state this the other day, but more than 12 months
ago, in February of 2012.
In other words, to get rid of Syria
and Iran, obstacles on the route to U.S. global
domination, would be Washington’s next natural step.
Paul Farrell, U.S. columnist and
financial analyst, stated last April that the United
States needed a new war, in order for capital to
thrive. He ironically commented then, in a brief
note which appeared in Russia Today, "Didn’t
WWII get us out of the Great Depression?" He capped
this statement off with data which informs his
thesis that wars benefit capitalists above all. The
Forbes list of world billionaires skyrocketed from
322 in 2000 to 1,426 recently, 31% of them being
American.
Marcelo Colussi, Argentine
psychologist, professor, writer, journalist and
full-time activist for social justice and global
dignity, has one of the most convincing answers to
the question as to why the United States would
attack Syria. When, at the beginning of the 20th
century, U.S. President Calvin Coolidge said that
his country’s business consisted of doing business,
this has today been transformed into doing business
with war. Let others do the fighting and here we are
to sell them weapons.
In this context, the Argentine
intellectual passes his verdict that today, U.S.
power is based on wars, always those in other
nations, never on its own territory. In any event,
war is its axis; its domestic economy is nourished
to a large extent by the arms industry and its
planetary hegemony (appropriation of raw materials
and imposition of the rules of the economic and
political game on a global scale, with primacy of
the dollar. Today, Washington needs wars. Without
wars, the power would not be a power.
What we are seeing now with a
besieged Syria, what is leading the Middle East into
a war of unforeseeable consequences, with the real
target, Iran, following behind and with Israel,
which is waiting, pressuring and coercing the master
to the North to fulfill its promise of punishing
that Persian country, is not a chance operation.
The first victim of war is the truth.
While in Iraq the most obscene fallacies were its
possession of weapons of mass destruction and its
close links with Al Qaeda, and in Iran, the
manufacture of powerful nuclear armaments, in Syria
the lie is chemical weapons utilized by President
Al-Assad against his own people, although nobody
with the most elemental common sense believes it,
because Syria would be the least to benefit by
creating a pretext such as this.
But lies are part of the plan, and
this one did not come into existence overnight, nor
was it improvised in a bar over a few beers, but in
the White House, in 1997, when a group of fevered
minds of the alienated ultra-right created a project
for the New American Century, with the objective of
sustaining the United States as the hegemonic
superpower of the planet, at any and all costs.
The objectives of the project are
the opening up, stability, control and globalization
of markets, as well as security and freedom of trade;
unrestricted access to energy sources and raw
materials needed to dynamize the U.S. economy and
those of its allies; the monitoring and control in
real time of people and all significant political
and social movements opposed to its interests; the
expansion and domination of the financial and
industrial capital of its companies and
transnational corporations; and the assuring of
control over the means of communication and world
information.
To that end it has not even stinted
on mercenaries, who abound in Syria – well paid and
armed – nor in the deployment of U.S. military might,
as well as creating situations within nations, such
as the manufacture and unveiling of the so-called
Arab Spring in North Africa, which ended with the
assassination, recorded live, of Libyan President
Muammar al-Gaddafi.
Who thought up and armed this
insanity based on the industry of death, the real
sustenance of the U.S. economy? Illustrious neo-cons
with senior positions in the administrations of
Reagan, George Bush (father and son); in other words:
Dick Cheney, Jeb Bush, Paul Wolfowitz, Donald
Rumsfeld, Dan Quayle, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Elliott
Abrams, John Bolton and Richard Perle, among others.
Who sheltered them politically? The Republican
Party, the Democratic Party, AIPAC (the American
Israel Public Affairs Committee), or the pro-Israeli
lobby in the nation of the stars and stripes; and
many powerful organizations on Wall Street, in the
media and in the powerful military-industrial
complex. It would seem that it is not important who
the President happens to be.
The Twin Towers were brought down,
but this provided the basis for the rising up of the
Project, sowing the divine fundamentalist idea that
the United States is the only nation capable of
combating the terrible evils of Islamist terrorism,
drug trafficking, or organized crime, even though it
is within its own territory that most terrorists are
harbored, where the highest quantity of drugs are
consumed, and where criminals enjoy impunity. An
implacable media crusade was launched which fixed
fear and danger in the mentality of citizens of the
world.
It has reached the extent that, even
the UN, in its investigation into the existence of
chemical weapons in Syria – the key pretext for the
aggression – has stated that its research is only to
confirm whether they were used or not, and not who
utilized them.
A variant of the of the Arab Spring
was already tested out in Syria, but failed in
destabilizing the country, hence the recourse of
destroying the nation and leaving it without a
government, and without order, because social
anarchy there would justify a U.S. presence, plus
that of its allies with all their troops and even a
coalition. This would provide a gateway to Iran,
additionally keeping a close watch on the dangerous
Hezbollah in Lebanon, and a commitment to Israel
which, since its defeat by this force in 2006, has
not been able to heal its wounds.
Who can be left in any doubt that
all of this is an orchestrated plot, and that the
United States and its allies are not bothered as to
whether or not chemical weapons enter the equation?
What does interest it is the geo-strategic
situation of Damascus and imperial power, even if
this involves a bloodbath in this nation of heroic
people, and world peace is once again trampled by
the nation and government which sets itself up as
the paradigm of human rights. But it should be
careful. Those who live by the sword, die by the
sword.
|