Tuesday, April 10, 2018

The Implications of Waving a False Flag or How America Marched to War

As word of an alleged gas attack in the Syrian town of Douma on April 7, 2018 spread through the mainstream media, America's "shoot from the hip" president had this and this "to say":

Notice how Mr. Trump seems to have significantly changed his viewpoint on Russia's president, his former best pal?

The Trump Russia-blaming tweet was followed by this:

So, we pretty much know who Donald Trump is blaming for the gas attack; Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin.  

In case you were wondering, the rest of Washington is in on the anti-Russia in Syria sentiment as shown here:

Here is the key section:

"The Assad regime and its backers must be held accountable and any further attacks prevented immediately. Russia, with its unwavering support for the regime, ultimately bears responsibility for these brutal attacks, targeting of countless civilians, and the suffocation of Syria’s most vulnerable communities with chemical weapons. By shielding its ally Syria, Russia has breached its commitments to the United Nations as a framework guarantor. It has betrayed the Chemical Weapons Convention and UN Security Council Resolution 2118. Russia’s protection of the Assad regime and failure to stop the use of chemical weapons in Syria calls into question its commitment to resolving the overall crisis and to larger non-proliferation priorities.

The United States calls on Russia to end this unmitigated support immediately and work with the international community to prevent further, barbaric chemical weapons attacks."

In total, Russia is blamed for the alleged atrocity 4 times in this very short press statement from the United States Department of State.

In addition, here's what Tom Bossert, Donald Trump's Homeland Security Advisor until April 10, 2018 had to say about the chemical attack in an interview on ABC's "This Week" with Martha Raddatz:

"MARTHA RADDATZ: And I want to lastly talk about Syria. We’ve seen those horrific images coming out of Syria this morning. And it looks like there was a chemical attack. I know you’re still looking into that. What do you think the president will do if it’s indeed a chemical attack? What do you think he should do?

THOMAS BOSSERT: Yes, it’s a quite serious problem. We’ve seen the photos of that attack. I think -- I mean, first, I would note the timing of this, it’s the first thing that struck me, this is the one year anniversary of our action the last time they made the mistake of using these weapons and pushing the rest of the world.

This isn’t just the United States, this is one of those issues on which every nation, all peoples have all agreed and have agreed since World War II, is an unacceptable practice. So looking at it...

RADDATZ: So is it possible they -- there will be another missile attack?

BOSSERT: I wouldn’t take anything off the table. These are horrible photos. We’re looking into the attack at this point. The State Department put out a statement last night and the president’s senior national security cabinet have been talking with him and with each other all throughout the evening and this morning, and myself included." (my bold)

Not to miss out on an opportunity to slag Russia and Iran, here is a statement from the European Union on the Douma attack:

Once again, we find this:

"We call on the supporters of the regime, Russia and Iran, to use their influence to prevent any further attack and ensure the cessation of hostilities and de-escalation of violence as per UNSC Resolution 2401."

Now, let's look at the most important part of this story, the response from Russia.  What we in the West rarely hear is the unvarnished response from Moscow, a participant in the Syrian civil war that was actually invited to attend the conflict by Syria's legitimate leader, Bashar al-Assad.  Here is what was published on the English language website of Russia's Foreign Ministry:

In case you skimmed over the press release, here is the key portion:

"We have to say once again that military interference in Syria, where Russian forces have been deployed at the request of the legitimate government, under contrived and false pretexts is absolutely unacceptable and can lead to very grave consequences."

Given Europe's penchant for sucking up to the United States and the arrival of pro-war John Bolton in  Washington as he takes up his official capacity as National Security Advisor, we can pretty much be assured that Europe and the United States will respond to Russia's alleged complicity in the use of chemicals against Syrian civilians by marching ever closer to all-out war with Russia.  By feeding the world a long series of false flags, thereby keeping the sweaty masses riled up, our leaders are able to assist the military-industrial complex's endless need for war...and ever-increasing profits.  In this case, if the Russians are to be believed, "very grave consequences" can be expected if the United States and its allies should be deemed to be interfering in Syria's affairs any more than they already are.  God help us all if a mistake by a United States-led coalition resulted in the deaths of Russian military personnel, after all, far smaller grievances have led to all out war.  In the game of war, unintended consequences often result in death.


  1. I understand Russia's need for patience and yes, I even approve but - HELL - it would be good to SEE some "grave consequences."

  2. Since Putin's or Russia's back is already against the wall, and patience cannot be expected to last indefinitely, even a mouse once cornered fights back to survive. I understand Russia is outnumbered and surrounded, particularly in that region, but one cannot let itself be humiliated time and time again without a fair and square fight, dialogue or even trial. The push is now a shove. A warning shot may be in order?

  3. If Israeli jets can fire rockets into Syria from Lebanon why can't Syrian jets fire Air-to-air rockets from Syria on the Israeli aircraft over Lebanon doing it?

  4. Russia has to be very careful or this will lead to ww3, who want's that hmm? They are dealing with imperialst hypocrites warmongering corrupted hawks and the like....

    1. It doesn't matter if Russia is careful or not - WW3 is the goal of the "imperialis hypocrits", and no choice will be given. The only thing Russia has any control over is perhaps the timetable.