Support WhoWhatWhy
FRESH TAKES | news, content and perspective you might not find elsewhere

CLASSIC WHY: Real Reason for Syria War Plans, from Gen. Wesley Clark

We originally published this in September, 2012. More relevant now than ever. Also be sure to see this other piece with views from Clark on oil and activism, and our other related stories by typing “Syria” in our search box.

 

In this stunning but little-known speech from 2007, Gen. Wesley Clark claims America underwent a “policy coup” at the time of the 9/11 attacks. In this video, he reveals that, right after 9/11, he was privy to information contained in a classified memo: US plans to attack and remove governments in seven countries over five years: Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Iran.

He was told: “We learned that we can use our military without being challenged …. We’ve got about five years to clean up the Soviet client regimes before another superpower comes along and challenges us.”

“This was a policy coup…these people took control of policy in the United States….”


Comment Policy:
Keep it civil. Keep it relevant. Keep it clear. Keep it short. Identify your assertions as fact or speculation. No typing in ALL-CAPS. Read the article in its entirety before commenting.

Note: As a news site dedicated to serious inquiry, not a bulletin board, we reserve the right to remove any comment at any time, especially when it appears to be part of an effort to push a deceptive, unscientific, false or narrow ideological line. Posts that scapegoat by ethnicity, gender, religion or nationality will also be removed.
  • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

    In the Fora.tv footage, a YouTube copy of which was linked to by WhoWhatWhy, he tells the story the most fully (and names the most names).

    He also told the story more briefly in an interview with Amy Goodman on Democracy Now!:

    1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SXS3vW47mOE
    2: http://www.democracynow.org/2007/3/2/gen_wesley_clark_weighs_presidential_bid

    (link #2) lets has a “download” button for the whole interview, for those who are into archiving — it also has a transcript.

  • ironcloudz Z

    it obviously is not primarily a question of a few “bad men” who have hijacked American Foreign Policy. Since Obama has carried on the policy and is now about to expand it, long after Wolfowitz and company are gone.

    This is a “limited hangout” by Clark.

    • ewastud

      Possibly you are right. However, you are assuming that our civilian government leaders – our president and elected members of Congress – have full control and authority over the national security apparatus of our country that enjoys a monopoly on the “legitimate” use of violence and military force. Ever since the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas in 1963 — a military-style ambush worthy of a banana republic — the true political order in the USA has been in doubt, at the very least.

      • ironcloudz Z

        Yes, I agree about the significance of the JFK hit (as well as the other state assassinations of liberal figures which followed in its wake). It marked the beginning of the end of liberal reformism in the US and the ascendancy of the military/intelligence/corporate-fascist apparatus over “civilian” authority.

        And the overall inability of the liberal media and political establishment to challenge the official explanations of these murders showed its inability to pose a meaningful challenge to that ascendency.

        The main thing I am questioning is the “few bad apples” analysis which Clark is putting forth here.

        • ewastud

          OK, I agree with that. US military actions and foreign policy under Obama seems to be not very different from under Bush, and there is little evidence that the “bad apples” representing the fascist Project for a New American Century (PNAC) / “Neo-conservatives” have not “infected” the whole “basket” of our national security state, metaphorically speaking.

          The situation may be comparable to the FBI. That agency has functioned as a national secret political police since its inception early in the 20th Century. Its many crimes and flagrantly unconstitutional abuse of power have not not merely been the doings of a few “bad apples” — J. Edgar Hoover, his lover Clyde Tolson, William Sullivan, Mark Felt, et al, but they have been systemic and continued long after their demise and departures.

          The heads of the agency have always seen themselves as protectors of the Established Order and people of property, wealth, and political power before they are upholders of the Constitution and the Law. The FBI frequently acts above the law — lawless, a law unto itself, or in the too-often used euphemism: “extra-judicially.”

        • sgtdoom

          Geez, Obama has appointed neocons from previous neocon administrations, just as Hillary Clinton, upon becoming secretary of state, appointed Marc Grossman (member of previous Bush inner circle, and a distant cousin to the Bush family), Jared Cohen, former advisor to Kindasleazy Rice (a k a, Condoleezza Rice), and Victoria Nuland, wifey of founder of PNAC, Robert Kagan, a person Obama has mentioned that he is a big fan of?

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          Still, I have hope.

          Hope that the congress will get up the nerve to impeach the murdering bastard.

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          sad but true

        • sgtdoom

          Wesley Clark is a stooge, always meant to mislead. One might perhaps categorize his retarded son in the same manner if he weren’t so stupid? (Clark Jr., claimed that 9/11 couldn’t be an “inside job” as there were actual “republicons” in the Twin Towers that infamous day?)

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          Like the CIA “rogues” and mafia hitmen and anti-Castro Cubans of the Kennedy assassination, this is just another fallback position. I hate to say it, but I no longer trust anyone who ever wore scrambled eggs on their uniforms. Even the big bad general is afraid to say the forbidden words: 9/11 was an inside job.

          There’s a good reason Dick Cheney has an aritificial heart and has an ambulance following him around wherever he goes. He can feel the flames of Hell licking his ass.

      • NoBodyScanners

        You forgot to include the false flag event of 9/11….that was the coup that turned this country into a police state.

        Bush & Cheney Knew About 9/11 Months Before It Happened Says Whistleblower Charged Under Patriot Act

        http://www.veteranstoday.com/2013/07/03/breaking-the-set-bush-cheney-knew-about-911-months-before-it-happened-says-whistleblower-charged-under-patriot-act-video/

        • sgtdoom

          This ancient fart may sound offensive to you, but the idea that Johnson, Nixon, Ford, David Rockefeller-supporter Carter (still a member of the Bretton Woods Committee the last time I checked [BWC is the lobbyist group for the international super-rich[), Reagan, the Bush boys, the Clintons, etc., were somehow the people of choice is truly stupifying, my good citizen!

          The coup occurred in 1963, when the last real Democrat in the White House sought work for overall progress, both technical and progress for the peoples of the planet. After President Kennedy was murdered, then the national progressive leader, Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr., and Bobby Kennedy immediately after he won the California presidential primary and he looked a sure bet to best Nixon, their coup was absolutely solidified.

          No, the real coup occurred long ago, and the people, Trilateral Commission’s Tom Brokaw’s so-called greatest generation (greatest sheeple bunch, IMHO), looked the other way, either out of stupidity or cowardice.

          Read the 1958 published article by Ferdinand Lundberg, The Treason of the People.

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          Remember the Maine.

    • Frank von Winkhorst

      I’m not sure it’s a “limited hangout,” whatever that non word is supposed to mean, but he clearly doesn’t understand or won’t enunciate the obvious fact that 9/11 was instituted for the specific purpose of allowing the ramming through of this “policy coup.”

      9/11 was no more happenstance than the blowing up of the USS Maine that allowed the U.S. to attack and defeat the Spanish Empire. The only difference is that the Spanish-American War was over bananas, whereas the current hostilities are over oil, gas, and pipelines.

      • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

        A limited hanogout is a term with well-established meaning.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limited_hangout

        For an ironic chuckle, check out the story about a term that Nixon’s counselor Ehrlichmann used to him: “modified limited hangout”. What will those career liars (oops I mean “lawyers”) think of next!

        Oh, hey, look, this came out today…

        On a completely unrelated subject, it does seem that no one with any real-world clout on the other side of my computer-screen-media-portal can ever say that 9/11 was an inside job. (So just forget that whole “bottomless pit”.) Wesley Clark is going par for the course here, as someone with real-world clout, as opposed to “I have a computer and a keyboard and an opinion”-clout.

        I guess the reason for this is it destroys the foundations of our way of life, not just in cognitively dissonant terms, but in economic. Just too many people from the tip-top to the very bottom of our economic order depend on the 9/11 Myth as it is, so unless you want to up-end all that, just forget it.

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          Please don’t quote Wikiganda to me. If you haven’t figured out by now how corrupted that organization is, there’s no hope for you. Check out show number 645 at Black Op Radio, Jim DiEugenio’s analysis of how John McAdams and his allies have prevented any honest description of the facts there: http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2013.html

        • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

          Don’t make a joke of yourself by not reading me.

          “Limited Hangout”. It means something. It’s well-established. That’s not any form of -ganda.

          If you would read me, you might not impute whatever sense of persecution you did from my words.

          And it’s a god-awful logical fallacy to dismiss Wikipedia in that way. Sure, it doesn’t have “the real truth”. But it’s still useful.

        • Frank von Winkhorst

          Granted it’s useful if you want to find the discography for a rock band. Beyond that, not much. And as for ridiculous neologisms that don’t appear in any serious dictionary or even in slang dictionaries, you really need to lose the American tendency to make up words because you don’t know the real word. And that is, in the final analysis, why Americans make up terms. It’s because they have been watching dumbed down TV for so long and reading only the most superficial of dime novels that they have no inkling of what real English looks and sounds like. This is the very essence of Orwell’s Newspeak.

  • Jeff Grotke

    somebody please explain to me how Syria’s government is worse than Saudi Arabia’s?

    • ewastud

      According to Clark, it isn’t the way these Middle East countries’ rulers rule that matters to the Powers That Be in our Military-Industrial Complex/National Security State, it is the countries’ alliance with Russia that marks them for elimination of their ruling regime. Democratic principles have nothing to do with it as far as these policy coup people are concerned – purely Machiavellian.

    • Frank von Winkhorst

      Democracy=Capitalism. It’s the old Cold War Mindfuck. “Democracy” is just a euphemism for corporate rule. The Saudis are friendly to the corporations. Therefore, they are “democratic.”

      • crankedyank

        A sig line I saw on another forum:

        “The left-right dichotomy is just a ruse that keeps the common folk playing checkers while the elite play chess.”

        I agree, and I’d take it a step farther. Left = Right. There is a “higher” club to which all the (kabuki) players belong. We are living in post-political America. There is much sound and fury, which signifies not a thing because it all occurs on a bogus stage.

    • Snead Hearn

      US stooge=good, democratic.
      Fail to be US stooge=evil, dictatorship

  • gogetem1

    This “little known speech” is becoming quite well known among alternative media watchers, and he made this allegation in more than just one speech.

    • Russ

      In my conversations with some of the most successful, best educated people in this country, virtually none are familiar with this speech, even today. “Alternative media watchers” are not the standard for much of anything in this country–that’s why we are trying to grow a news organization with a much broader and larger reach. Please materially support our ability to expand–and introduce more people to our site. Thanks.

      • gogetem1

        That’s a fair point. Though I would still point out that Clark has told this story to Amy Goodman as well.

        • Russ

          Most of the people I’ve seen on that show talking about Syria seemed to support intervention. The need for new media outlets is pretty apparent.

        • mt56

          I disagree. Amy is opposed to the war, but is determined to also present the opposing rationale for us to see their view for ourselves. She wants us to understand their rhetoric too. It’s important to understand your enemies.

  • Pingback: CLASSIC WHY: Real Reason for Syria War Plans, from Gen. Wesley Clark | Soynadie

  • ewastud

    I had a dim recollection of this information related to the public by Clark recently when hearing of Obama’s charges against Syria’s political leadership.

    This post helpfully refreshed my memory and suggests that the claims of use of chemical weapons against Syrians is as phony as George Bush’s infamous WMD. It appears to be nothing more than a pretext for a confrontation with Russia for reasons of a larger geopolitical strategy.

  • http://www.911Blogger.com/ Orangutan.

    “This was a policy coup…these people took control of policy in the United States….”

    And then they appointed Henry Kissinger to run the investigation and the people bought it up. Sad days in America.

  • Chuck (Smithfix) Smith

  • Perplexed

    Wesley Clark is a moron. He is only a General becausse of Clinton.

    Clark sold his soul to politicians.

    Don’t believe a word he says.

    • Idon’t Know

      Clark was ascendant in the U.S. military long before Clinton.

  • Pingback: Syria and a Policy Coup | VIEWS from the EDGE

  • Snead Hearn

    If a king or president follows US orders, he’s a great democratic leader, who “fights terrorists in his country”, even if he uses WMDs (such as Sadam did with our backing), or is involved in drug dealing (Noriega, with the CIA). If he stops following US orders, he becomes a corrupt dictator, who uses WMDs, or sells drugs, or who kills his own people, etc.
    And of course, chemical weapons are fine, when the US uses them, as in Vietnam and Iraq.

    The hypocrisy in Washington reeks.

  • sfulmer

    “This was a policy coup…”

    Readers of Family of Secrets please keep in mind that this may be better thought of as “policy sustainability”, as the nation has been drifting or driving to the right without opposition since the real coup of November of ’63.

    Covering up 63/68 only makes it possible for Wesley Clarke to think there was a policy coup, and for the public to accept the appearance of such as more evidence that our elected leaders have no control.

    • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

      Good point. Let me do an idle recap of policy vis-a-vis The Presidency since ’63…

      LBJ: Obviously a collaborator with (or hostage to) the JFK Assassination Forces.

      Nixon: Hostage to Said Forces. Was thrown out of office in a softer coup for not being hostage enough.

      G. Ford: Took way too many blows to the helmet in his many years of competitive football. Not smart enough to have achieved First Base in Politics without being a stooge to Said Forces. Warren Commission Stooge (or let’s just say he had much to lose from any Warren Report revision). After the Nixon Soft Coup, Ford put in Rumsfeld for Secretary of Defense and Cheney for his Chief of Staff. Whose idea was that? Well, Ford said: “I did it totally on my own. It was my decision. I fitted the pieces together, and they fitted excellently.” Uh huh.

      Reagan: The Bush clique had ascended to power through almost the full spectrum of government by this time. Reagan was their Actor / Puppet Placeholder President. (Said act was so convincing to the die-hard true-red conservatives that they still take his speeches for the high-water mark of late 20th century conservative morality, and pine wistful as they commisserate with Glenn Beck about what to do in contemporary national politics. Uh huh.)

      Bush: Ha ha. Let’s just say he had more to lose from any Warren Report revisionism than his checker-piece Ford.

      Clinton: You would have to believe, as many do, that Clinton was actually hostage to the CIA and to the Bush clique (the catch-all word “Mena” serves to extapolate to many incriminating connections). I can’t really state that Clinton was surely as directly connected to the covering up of such black crimes as Bush & Co., and if you have heard the stories and don’t believe them, I can’t make you. But maybe he’s part-and-partisan to the continuity of policy just as every other President in this post-’63 was too.

      * * *

      So there’s the continuous JFK Assassin Clique Thread which runs through all the Presidents.

      I didn’t actually get into the continuity of military-intelligence-finance-oil policy which you referred to, and which the “I Was Just A Naive, ‘Peter Principle’ United States Military Officer” General Wes Clark also referred. (He said that the employment of aggressive, hawk-style military strategy boggled his mind, when he first heard it at high levels in the 1990′s.)

      That continuity of policy is much more patent in its historicity (agreed-upon factualness).

      • lwheel

        the coup in 1963 removed what hawks perceived as a national security threat in jfk. they grabbed the power back from a “coexistence” easing of cold war tensions type of foreign policy. Nixon himself talked about a pretext or cover then go into cuba. if one doesn’t appear through randam events, they will create their own pretext through a provocation. if Obama doesn’t go along and chooses to go Kennedy’s route. history will repeat itself.

    • Gerald Campeau

      the real coup of 11/22/63 continues today with CIA asset Obama makeing rich richer and rest struggling

  • Karl Ihrig

    Since President Obama already ticked Libya and is about to tick Syria off Clark’s list, it isn’t a policy coup. It is policy. There may be a long standing collaboration with Saudi Arabia for geopolitical reorganization for Saudi/Sunni empire building. Kerry now says Arab countries will pay us to strike Syria. Our leaders may be idiots!

  • Gumaro Valle

    is funny but in the 80s a dreamed that the US would occupy all the north of africa and move its troops all over the middle east

  • mpharries

    Has anyone ever corroborated Clark’s assertions? Who was ‘the officer’ who told Clark ‘we’ve’ decided to go to war with Iraq? Does anyone on the planet know who that officer was? Is the name in Clark’s book? And if so, did he corroborated Clark’s assertions?

    • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

      Clark has the integrity to be direct. What makes you think this other might. Better he remains unknown. He told the right man.

    • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

      My Bosnian friend is very grateful to Clark and the way he handled this crisis. She said he made all the difference in the world.

  • Dawn Anewday

    So you’ve never heard of The Project for the New American Century??? PNAC???

  • Pingback: "Iran looms closer"

  • just sayin’

    Any country that does not comply with the world banking cabal makes itself a target.

  • Pingback: Black Hawk Down! Supreme Commander of NATO Visits Burning Man | Burners.Me Burning Man commentary blog

  • Pingback: Call me crazy… | Her Joyful Noise

  • Hendrick Smit

    My question still is: How does Mr. Clark get away with exposing this big plan? He’s still alive. Or is he playing a role in this?

    • crankedyank

      I think it’s obvious that Clark, who had the reputation of a sneak in the military, is connected well enough (a phrase I use with reservation) that he is almost certainly involved as a player, and that his revelation is disinformation (as would almost anything be, from that source) even though it may well be perfectly factual. It’s all a matter of timing.

      • Man on the street

        For most of us unwashed masses, how are we going to distinguish between true inform assign, disinformation, and misinformation?

        Deviants plotters keep making things very complicated! It is like the hand is quicker than the eye? As they get your attention on something, they are busy slipping in another. Very similar to the Evangelical preachers, as they get your attention on war against Muslim terrorists, which we are all in agreement on, they slip in unconditional support for Israel.

        • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

          We cannot know and we can never know. We are in Simulated Reality and all we get is credibility and speculation. Does Clark have credibility. With me he does for Bosnia. And the way he ran for prez. Other than all that I know about as much as you do, perhaps less.

        • Man on the street

          Bosnia was a fabricated war, a la Kiev revolution, Tahrir square,…

        • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

          Yes. The West broke up Yugoslavia on purpose.

        • John Gregor

          Yugoslavia shows what people might do to each other then money for all runs low, and power of the state starts to loose meaning. For years Yugoslavia was maybe not so bad a communist state. Then look what happens?

        • https://sites.google.com/site/themattprather Matt Prather

          I’m sure you will appreciate this writing, as it reinforces your observation:

          I am from Bosnia. You know, between 1992 and 1995 it was hell. For one year I lived, and survived, in a city with 6000 people, without water, electricity, gasoline, medical help, civil defense, distribution service, any kind of traditional service or centralized rule.When it all started some of us were better prepared, but most of the neighbors families had enough food only for a few days. Some had pistols, a few had AK47s or shotguns.After a month or two gangs started operating, destroying everything. Hospitals, for example, turned into slaughterhouses. There was no more police. About 80% of the hospital staff were gone. I got lucky – my family at the time was fairly large (15 people in a large house, 6 pistols, 3 Ak 47s), and we survived (most of us, at least).The Americans dropped MREs every 10 days, to help blockaded cities. This was never enough. Some – very few – had gardens.It took 3 months for the first rumors to spread of men dying from hunger and cold. We removed all the doors, the window frames from abandoned houses, ripped up the floors and burned the furniture for heat. Many died from diseases, especially from the water (two from my own family). We drank mostly rainwater, ate pigeons and even rats.Money soon became worthless. We returned to an exchange. For a tin can of tushonka you could have a woman (it is hard to speak of it, but it is true). Most of the women who sold themselves were desperate mothers. Arms, ammunition, candles, lighters, antibiotics, gasoline, batteries and food. We fought for these things like animals. In these situations it all changes. Men become monsters. It was disgusting.http://sovietoutpost.revdisk.org/?p=72

          For many Westerners and Americans in particular, there is an automatic revile of anything described by the words “socialist,” “communist.” They will disdain anyone suggesting anything good described by those adjectives, or the Big C Noun.

          They will tell you how Communism is a half-baked theoretical paradise that never has and never can be implemented. I suppose you could say I agree with that, except that I would make the distinction that my ideas are more misanthropic and wider in scope than just believing that Communism is all-bad and that what we have in the West instead is the best thing that ever has been and ever will be.

          You see, I don’t believe in idealized capitalism any more than I believe in idealized communism. A subset of the reflexive socialist-hating Westerners — the libertarian idealists — love to wax rhapsodic about some fantasy-land idealized conception of “capitalism”, but that is quite naive.

          It’s just individual persons associating in “clubs” (to use a neutral / positive, generous description of their collective teams — I won’t say “gangs”) that defines our history. To call them “socialist” or “capitalist” in any pure sense is to mislabel and misclassify them, and then usually fall into dogmatic misunderstanding of what’s really happening from there.

          Yes, there is some basis to classify societies as “capitalist” or “communist” but one needs to be aware of the limits of the labels. There’s always definitely been hybridization of policy on both of the supposed sides. Socialist policies encouraged by corporate enterprise in the West, private wealth-focused state-endorsed enterprise in the East. Oligarchy has ruled us all.

          And it’s not great big dichotomous Freedom versus Collectivism ideological conception of history that is really what’s going on our societies, historical or modern. That’s a frame of view but it’s not what’s really going on.

          It is — I say again — just a great many individual people and their associative teams (corporate, state, gang, whatever) that make all the choices.

          So I would support you and those who speak like you. Those who would say “maybe the communism wasn’t even half-bad for the Balkans; freedom and capitalism hurt them.” I support you against the reflexive dogmatists who can see no sins or rottenness in teams formed under the ideological banner of “capitalist freedom,” even as they see every sin and rotten thing in teams under the other banner.

          I just also think that we haven’t gotten any great form of society right yet, and we have a lot of reform in people at the individual levels before we could expect it.

          I’ll leave with this final quote from the same Bosnian. Just because.

          After the war we had guns in every house. The police confiscated lots of guns at the beginning of the war. But most of them we hid. Now I have one legal gun that I have a license for. Under the law that’s called a temporary collection. If there is unrest, the government will seize all the registered guns. Never forget that.

        • John Gregor

          Thanks for the very good and useful response. Dimitri Orlov about going back and visiting the Sovier Union during the last years as native speaker and compares and contracts the USA at cluborlov.com

        • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

          My best friend whom I met online is also Bosnian. Your comment feels very influenced by Zizek to me. To meet more people who are thinking like you you need to go to the facebook page for Global Center for Advanced Studies. My friend and I are there among many others and many are studying for degrees with GCAS where Zizek, Badiou, Caputo, Crockett,and many others are teaching.

  • Pingback: General Wesley Clark: Reveals the PLAN | roger hollander

  • Pingback: Is America Helping Al Qaeda Take Over Syria? - Investing Video & Audio Jay Taylor Media

  • Pingback: President Obama's Middle East policy is demonstrably failing - Page 22

  • crankedyank

    A policy coup; interesting and unsurprising. It dovetails with my take on Putin’s good offices in pulling President Obama’s chestnuts out of the fire regarding the Syrian gassings. Why would Mr. Putin want to do something which helps the POTUS in a difficult situation? IMO opinion it was because President Obama was installed in his office in the first place only because he could be played as a useful idiot by the same covert clique behind the “policy coup,” as well as the other more generally recognized and conventional coups that have preceded it in the decades since “the good war.” This is a group Putin would like to thwart in whatever adventitious manner that presents itself. Why would these sinisters deem a bright, sophisticated and charismatic man such as Barack Obama as great patsy material? In their eyes and given the president’s background, base and political tendencies, he neither had nor could he have made the kind of connections in the necessary circles who could have alerted him to and shepherded him away from the blunders they were expecting him to make. The “usual listers” were counting on him to eventually get badly out of step with lumpen America and go too far, which he nearly just did. Yet another war in Syria would have been the “policy coupsters” dream scenario and would have enabled them to follow a discredited Obama into office as saviors of The Republic thus empowering the Russians’ worst case subset of American rulers. With no small sense of irony I find myself thanking heaven for Mr. Putin, who skillfully played his cards against forces of darkness who have proven themselves far more effective than those he is intimately familiar with.

  • Lincoln Chase

    This is and has been the Capitalist-Globalist agenda. Nothing new. The sheeple are allowing it-Nothing new!

  • InnerCynic

    Clark is a rat. I wouldn’t believe anything this fellow has to say. This is the same lunatic who was more than willing to start a war with the Russians during the Kosovo charade. At least the British had the sense to say, “No” to his insane demand that they kill the Russians and take over the airbase they’d speedily controlled. He’s not to be trusted on any level.

  • Liberal Dogma

    The key term is “attack”.
    I do not consider military support to vetted, organized opposition groups opposing a brutal leader unleashing his Army in indiscriminate slaughter as an “attack”
    25 missiles flying into the Assad palace/bunker, that is a long overdue “attack”.

    The old story of course can’t mention the appalling use of chemical weapons on families, but the widespread torture was already condemned by the U.N. and others.

    REGIME CHANGE in Syria has been called for openly: the proposed peace conferences have the premise that Assad is vacating his seat.

    • metanoic

      Creating a vacuum they can’t fill is potentially bad for business. The elitists don’t have enough forces at their disposal to gain true control of all or even a few of the countries mentioned so they settle on temporary destabilization, this way no one can have it.

  • Zack B

    And the justification is that Uncle Sam wants “our” oil.

  • Harper R.

    The General will probably be JFKd for reporting our plans for the Middle East.

    • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

      Not now. His info can be folded into the party line where it will be be harmful to the official narrative.

  • Pingback: Ukraine: We All Get the Tyranny We Deserve | The Diary of my Insomnia

  • Pingback: » Blog Archive » Putin serves a useful function

  • Pingback: Ukraine: We All Get the Tyranny We Deserve - Investing Video & Audio Jay Taylor Media

  • Pingback: RUSSIA Yesterday and Russia TODAY | twicemodern

  • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

    WWW decides. Authoritarian.

  • http://twilightirruption.blogspot.com/ abbeysbooks

    I feel the same as you about Clark. My gf in Bosnia is still so grateful for the way he handled that intervention.

More in Criminal Justice, Fresh Takes, Our Investigations (137 of 812 articles)