America’s Total War

America’s Total War

President Obama promised change, but there’s little of it in his war policies, which are harsher than those of George W. Bush.US drone bombings often target not just “terrorists” but all “military-age males in a strike zone as combatants.”

“Unless there is explicit posthumous intelligence proving otherwise”, that is.

As an extensive recent report in The New York Times explains, for all practical purposes Obama is applying what can best be described as a Total War Doctrine, bringing government, military and media propaganda PsyWar under one strategy.

The concept of “Total War” – war involving not just the military but all civilians irrespective of age or sex, together with the entire infrastructure of a country – became a horrible reality during the 20th century, driven for the most part by steering scientific discoveries and technological progress towards unlimited use in warfare.Total War is very much alive today and is being spearheaded by the United States and its Allies.

This is being abetted on all fronts by US, European and global mainstream media that willingly oblige.In the case of Obama’s Total War Doctrine, the media go along with US official policy, and describe the murder of innocent people who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when American democracy-building drone bombs fall, as “militant combatants”.

You see, Total War requires intense and constant psychological warfare to convince public opinion – both at home and abroad – that “our boys” fighting “to spread peace and democracy”, always do the “the right thing” by killing “the right people” who threaten America, Europe, Israel and the rest of the West; in other words, by only killing “militant terrorist combatants”.

That’s the way Orwellian Newspeak has described US-led wars since 1945 – whether fought by the US alone, or together with allies like Britain, EU countries and Israel, or by puppet proxies.The list is very long: Korea, Vietnam, Panama, Dominican Republic, Palestine, Egypt, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Iran, Africa, South America, Cambodia, Laos, Cuba, El Salvador, Falklands, Nicaragua, Grenada, Serbia…The death-toll runs into the tens of millions and has kept rising and rising.

Who’s next?Syria, Iran? Sudan? North Korea? Venezuela?After 9/11, things went from bad to worse.

The world today is confronted with a Super-Power hegemon increasingly out-of-control that harbors a small, compact and extremely powerful group of Global Power Masters embedded deep inside US/UK/EU public and private power structures, controlling unbeatable navies and air forces, super high-tech troop armies, unmanned drones, military satellites, napalm, cluster and bunker-buster bombs, electronic surveillance, and secret weaponry like the unexplained HAARP installations.

Add to this, the tens of thousands of ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs pointed at target countries by the small Western nuclear club – the US, UK, France and Israel – and things start looking bleak indeed.

All of it is backed by unlimited funding – both official and clandestine – in the US and Allies.And when money falls short, well… there are always “other means and sources”…Which is when spook agencies launder and recycle trillions of drug, arms and organized crime monies to finance covert and illegal operations; or when top officials engineer Iran-Contra type deals…

It all adds up to “America’s Total War” policy.Not total war against any one specific country, but against ALL countries the US, UK, France and Israel believe support “terrorists”, or that have sovereign national governments they don’t like, or – more pragmatically – countries blessed with huge oil, gas, mining, water and food reserves that the Exxons, BPs, Monsantos, Chevrons and Barrick Golds want to lay their grubby hands on, only to then recycle trillion-dollar profits through JPMorganChase, Goldman Sachs, CitiCorp, HSBC, Deutsche Bank…

America’s Total War Machine costs trillions of US, UK and European taxpayer dollars and euro, to which we must add further trillions created out of thin air by the Federal Reserve and European Central Banks’ printing presses, which further erode the dollar and the euro so that, in the end, the whole world ends up paying the bill for America’s Total War through currency debasement.

America’s Total War on Terror is fought everywhere, against everyone, and has no end in sight.

Those tens of millions of naïve Americans and Europeans who thought Obama could change things ushering in a “kinder, gentler world”, should look again: when it comes to US foreign policy, there never was and there never will be any real difference between Republicans and Democrats.

So, if you happen to be just walking down the streets of some town in Pakistan or Afghanistan, and by chance stroll by a US “terrorist target” and you’re killed by a drone bomb, you are no longer a “civilian casualty”; you’re not even “collateral damage” anymore!Because – Presto! – the Obama Total War Doctrine has just turned you into a “militant terrorist combatant”.

Naturally, when drone attacks kill 30, 40 or 100 civilians the US officially brand as “militant terrorists”, they know full well that they haven’t got a clue whom they’re murdering: it could be a local pizza delivery boy, or a milkman, or a high school student, or a newspaper vendor or… what the heck!!Simply brand him/her a “militant terrorist combatant” and close the US Military’s briefing report.The Western media will anyway obediently report that more “militant terrorists” were just killed in America’s Total War on Terror (or Britain’s, or the EU’s, or Israel’s…).

And don’t you dare say that the Obama Doctrine carries no US Stars-and-Stripes style Justice: because should it later be “posthumously proven” that you we not a militant terrorist but just some guy walking his dog, then America might re-label you as a “civilian casualty”, or even “collateral damage”.Gosh, I’m feeling better already!!

When the US went into Global Total War on Terrorism mode, these inhuman, hypocritical, criminal, deadly and lying tactics became an integral part of Western-style “democracy” unleashed on our troubled world.

Today, billions of people are wondering where all this is taking us; when will it stop?

The key question is: how can we stop a group of immensely powerful countries that are way out-of-control?If we are ever to achieve some partial peace, we must first put an end to today’s Total War.

Adrian Salbuchi for RT

Adrian Salbuchi is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio/TV commentator in Argentina.


SOCOM Slapdown!–Adm. McRaven Doesn’t Get Desired Expansion of Powers

Elite Military Forces Are Denied in Bid for Expansion

Kathleen Flynn/The Tampa Bay Times, via Associated Press

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton with Adm. William H. McRaven, left, the top officer of Special Operations Command, at a command gala dinner in Tampa, Fla., last month.

WASHINGTON — In late April, the military’s Special Operations Command presented the State Department and Congress with an urgent request for new authority to train and equip security forces in places like Yemen and Kenya.

The request, which included seeking approval to train foreign internal security forces that had been off-limits to the American military, was the latest effort by the command’s top officer, Adm. William H. McRaven, to make it easier for his elite forces to respond faster to emerging threats and better enable allies to counter the same dangers.

Given the command’s influence in shaping American strategy toward extremism, the proposal seemed to have momentum. President Obama and his Pentagon’s leadership are tapping Special Operations troops more to hunt militants and train foreign security forces in Africa, the Middle East and Latin America. And Admiral McRaven is a White House favorite, especially after he oversaw the Navy SEAL raid that killed Osama bin Laden.

But in a rare rebuke to the admiral and his command, powerful House and Senate officials as well as the State Department, and ultimately the deputy cabinet-level aides who met at the White House on the issue on May 7, rejected the changes. They sent the admiral and his lawyers back to the drawing board with orders to use security assistance programs already in place, particularly one created last year by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and the defense secretary at the time, Robert M. Gates, for just these types of issues.

“Right now, anything Socom wants they pretty much get — they’re hot,” said one senior Congressional aide involved in the deliberations, using the command’s nickname. “But this was a nonstarter. They were overly zealous.”

The episode offers a rare window into the sometimes uneasy relationship between the powerful Special Operations Command, whose dynamic boss, Admiral McRaven, is pushing hard to achieve broad changes to his forces, and the more traditional interests of Congress, the State Department and some top military commanders. In this case, Congressional and State Department officials shared the command’s goals, but lawmakers said it was moving too fast and its request was causing “unnecessary confusion and friction.”

Admiral McRaven’s broad goal is to obtain new authority from the Defense Department to move his elite forces faster and outside normal Pentagon deployment channels. That would give him more autonomy to position his personnel and their fighting equipment where intelligence and world events indicate they are most needed. It would also allow the Special Operations forces to expand their presence in regions where they have not operated in large numbers for the past decade, especially in Asia, Africa and Latin America.

At a time of declining Pentagon budgets and a waning public appetite for large wars of occupation, the Obama administration hopes to rely more on foreign troops and security forces to tackle extremist threats abroad. These new realities have led to a larger debate within the military about its future priorities, and not all senior officers welcome Admiral McRaven’s ambitious proposals, suspecting a power grab that might weaken the authority of regional commanders.

“I was trying to figure out how to stand in front of this juggernaut that is the Special Operations Command, particularly in today’s world,” Adm. Timothy J. Keating, a former head of the military’s Northern and Pacific commands, said at a Special Operations conference in April in Washington. “I don’t fundamentally understand what needs fixing.”

While it is not unusual for branches of the armed services or combatant commands to lobby Congress for troop benefits or weaponry, like new fighter jets or artillery systems, the Special Operations Command’s hurried pitch because of the pending legislation did not go down well.

In its request in April, the command sought a new $25 million fund to buy uniforms, build barracks and ferry foreign troops rather than using existing Pentagon and State Department aid programs that could have added months to the process. That required changes in the law, so the command asked to tuck them into a Pentagon budget bill the House was poised to pass.

In a three-page, confidential draft legislative proposal, the command argued that by coupling the proposed changes with its existing special fast-track acquisition authorities, it could provide “a fast turnaround resource for dealing with breaking issues.” Special Operations officers would work closely with American ambassadors in each country and the State Department to support foreign policy goals.

SCO Offers New Pattern for Peaceful Co-existence, Development

Chinese President Hu Jintao (R) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) walk after reviewing an honour guard during a welcoming ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on June 5, 2012. (AFP Photo / POOL / Mark Ralston)

Chinese President Hu Jintao (R) and Russian President Vladimir Putin (L) walk after reviewing an honour guard during a welcoming ceremony at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing on June 5, 2012. (AFP Photo / POOL / Mark Ralston)

SCO Offers New Pattern for Peaceful Co-existence, Development

Web Editor: dingxiaoxiao
Eleven years ago, it was the shared aspiration of China, Russia and central Asian nations to enhance common security and economic cooperation that led to the birth of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

As the leaders of SCO member countries gather in Beijing this week to chart the multinational body’s course of development over the next decade, the organization has already done a great deal to fulfill its duties.

It has provided this tumultuous world with a new way to promote regional peace, stability and prosperity among nations that have stark differences in race, religion and cultural heritage.

Since the organization’s birth, SCO member states have been persistent in seeking out security and safety by building up mutual trust and carrying out disarmament in border areas. They have also collaborated to prevent terrorist attacks and crush transnational crime and drug trafficking.

Thorny border disputes between member countries, which used to threaten peace and security in the region, have been met with reasonable settlements that rest on equitable negotiations.

SCO members have also seen their trade grow at a rapid pace over the past ten years, a rare accomplishment in the wake of a sluggish global economic recovery.

Extensive oil and natural gas reserves in the region have prompted robust energy cooperation among SCO members and observer states, and played a significant role in guaranteeing energy security and fueling more dynamic economic development for not only the region, but also the entire world.

Additionally, SCO members have worked to coordinate their stances on regional and global issues, especially the social upheaval that began to rock western Asia and northern Africa early last year.

They have collectively called on others to respect sovereignty and territorial integrity, as well as refrain from interfering in the internal affairs of other countries.

However, some media organizations and observers have described the SCO as “the new Warsaw pact,” a counterbalance to NATO and the United States.

Some even say that Russia and China seek to obtain regional domination by manipulating the will of the rest of the organization’s members.

These groundless conclusions are nothing but a product of an obsolete Cold War mentality, as well as the habitual neglect of facts.

Despite being the largest SCO members, China and Russia have never attempted to “bully” other SCO states. What’s more, according to its founding principles, the SCO does not intend to aim at any third party and would always stay inclusive.

From its start, members of the SCO have chosen to come together and engage with each other through equitable cooperation, rather than replaying the dramas of old through confrontation and domination.

The SCO’s accomplishments and its spirit of emphasizing mutual trust, equality and negotiation have offered an enlightening alternative for all nations that wish to live in peace and harmony.

Amb. Robert “Snake” Seduces India with Even More Poisonous, Ego-Flavored Fruit

[The only reason why India has any money at all to invest in American Pipe Dreams is because India spends relatively nothing at all on social support programs.  India is a strange place, where poverty and suffering are a way of life for most of the country, while the upper caste maintains their “superior” aloofness, just the kind of partners that a “Neocon” Obama needs.  The American Pied Piper path forward is one where a handful manage to prosper by draining funds away everyone else.  India’s fat cow industrialists, the 48 Billionaires, can only afford to amass unimaginable fortunes at the expense of the half-billion starving.  The fortunate (or underhanded) 48 can continue to prosper, or join the Indian exodus of upwardly-mobile Hindus fleeing to the West, while the other half of the country doesn’t even have toilets.] 

India can become a world power: US official

Washington: The US has invested much of its time and energy to foster its relations with India because it believes India has the institutional capacity to become a world power, a top American official has said.

“It (India) does have the institutional capacity. That’s why we invested so much of our time and energy to this relationship,” Robert Blake, assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, said Monday ahead of next week’s India-US strategic dialogue.

Assistant Secretary of State for South and Central Asian Affairs Robert Blake. Reuters

“We believe it because there is growing strategic convergence between our two countries. We are two great democracies. We are two great market economies. And perhaps most of all we have capacity for innovation,” he said.

Blake made the remark in response to a question after speaking on “The United States and India: Continued Strategic Engagement” at an event organised jointly by the Asia Society, East West Center and India-US World Affairs Institute.

Looking at the growing strategic convergence between the two nations and the rapid strides made by the two sides in their ties over the last 10 years, Blake said: “It is not an exaggeration to say that even the sky is not the limit because we are talking about cooperation in space as well.”

Over the last three years, he said, the two countries have expanded areas of cooperation to reflect 21st century needs, partnering across diverse areas such as education, clean energy and defence.

Commending the crucial role of the Indian American community in fostering closer India-US ties, he said: “All of you are committed to shape and guide one of the defining bilateral relationships of the 21st century.”


EU-Russia summit covers wide agenda, from Partnership for Modernisation to Syria

EU-Russia summit covers wide agenda, from Partnership for Modernisation to Syria

EU-Russia relations are enjoying their best dynamics for years, President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy said following the EU-Russia summit in St Petersburg on 3-4 June, but there is still much to be done “to untap what is potentially possible.”

Van Rompuy described the results of the two last years – the Russian WTO accession, the Partnership for Modernisation, and the common steps towards visa free travel – as remarkable, and welcomed “President Putin’s commitment to bringing this work further together with the EU”.
The European Council President highlighted the following points:
·          On the economy, Europe is facing “testing times”, but remains determined to work its way through the challenges, he said, adding: “there is no way back for the Euro. There is only the way ahead towards more integration.
·          On EU-Russia bilateral relations, Van Rompuy said the summit had reconfirmed the need for an ambitious and comprehensive bilateral New Agreement, including trade and investments, as the best basis for a closer Partnership, and welcomed the idea of the Eurasian Economic Union based on the WTO-rules.
·          The EU-Russia Partnership for Modernisation remains one of the priorities, Van Rompuy said, stressing that a vibrant civil society should be seen as “an integral part for real modernisation.
·         On human rights, the European Council President welcomed Russia’s “readiness for public debate on human rights, as exemplified by the recent hearing in the Russian State Duma,” adding the next round of EU-Russia Human Rights consultations would take place in Brussels on 29 June.
·          EU and Russian leaders also touched upon a range of foreign policy issues, includingthe situation in Syria, which Van Rompuy described as appalling. He said despite some diverging assessments, the EU and Russia fully agreed that the Annan Plan as a whole provided “the best opportunity to break the cycle of violence in Syria, avoiding a civil war, and in finding a peaceful lasting solution.” In his words, the EU and Russia need to combine their efforts in order for this to happen, and to find common messages on which they agree. “We need to work towards an immediate stop of all forms of violence in Syria, and towards process of political transition,” Van Rompuy said.
On Iran, the EU and Russia are working closely together and with other partners to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, Van Rompuy said.
As regards the Common Neighbourhood, the Council President reiterated the EU’s support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia calling on Russia fully to implement the 2008 commitments. Finally, he said the EU welcomed Russia’s constructive approach in the ‘5+2’ negotiations in the Transnistria conflict.
In a separate statement, European Commission President José Manuel Barroso said the EU-Russia summit in Saint Petersburg had confirmed the important shared interests and willingness of both partners “to build stronger relations and work even closer together.”
At a press conference concluding the first day of the summit, Barroso described the EU-Russia Partnership for Modernisation as being “in a phase of full implementation”, adding he was happy to say that President Putin saw it as a priority. “Russia is engaged in a very important process and we are very proud to be partners of Russia in that regard,” President Barroso said.  (EU Neighbourhood Info)
Read more
Van Rompuy Remarks
Barroso Statement
EU-Russia Summit – background memo
EU Neighbourhood Info Centre webpage – Russia

Russia Dismayed by Syria Rebels Ceasefire Rejection

Russia Dismayed by Syria Rebels Ceasefire Rejection

Members of Free Syrian Army. Archive

Members of Free Syrian Army. Archive

MOSCOW, June 5 (Marc Bennetts, RIA Novosti)

Russia is disappointed in the decision by Syrian rebels to pull out of a ceasefire that was an integral part of a United Nations peace plan for the conflict-torn Middle Eastern country, a leading Foreign Ministry official said on Tuesday.

“This is, of course, sad and extremely negative,” Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov said.

He also said a U.S. State Department delegation would arrive in Moscow later this week for talks on how to resolve the crisis in Syria.

A spokesman for the rebel Free Syrian Army told Reuters on Monday that insurgents had pulled out of the faltering truce stipulated by UN envoy Kofi Annan’s six-point peace plan and had begun attacking soldiers to “defend our people.” The statement came after a British-based activist group said rebels had killed some 80 soldiers over the weekend.

The spokesman also said rebels were calling for the UN observer mission in the country to become a “peace enforcing mission.” He also said the rebels would welcome the imposition by the international community of a no-fly zone and a buffer zone.

UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon reiterated on Monday that Annan’s plan “remains central” to halting more than 15-months of bloodshed in Syria.The UN has sent 300 observers to Syria to monitor a ceasefire that has failed to take hold since it was supposed to come into force on April 12.

And the European Union and Russia said at a summit in St. Petersburg on Monday that, despite “diverging assessments” they both agreed that Annan’s faltering peace plan remained the best chance of halting the spiraling violence in Syria.

The St. Petersburg summit came a day after Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, in a televised address, denied that government forces were to blame for the May 25 massacre of over 100 people, including dozens of children, in the Syrian town of Houla. Assad said the killings were an “ugly crime” that even “terrorists” would balk at carrying out.

The United Nations, citing eyewitnesses, has said pro-Assad militia fighters were responsible for the slaughter. Russia has criticized Syria over its shelling of the town, but says it does not rule out that rebels carried out the majority of the killings as a “provocation” ahead of a visit by Annan to Syria.

Syria announced on Tuesday that it would expel the ambassadors of a host of Western countries, including the United States, Britain and France. The move comes after Syrian envoys in the West were told to pack their bags in the wake of the Houla massacre.

The Kremlin has come under international pressure to take harder line on embattled Assad regime.

Russia has denied that it is protecting Assad or that it has any special interests in Syria, but has twice – along with China – vetoed UN resolutions against Damascus over what it calls a pro-rebel bias.

Moscow has, however, fully backed Annan’s plan, which calls for the withdrawal of heavy weaponry from urban areas and a ceasefire to end 15-months of spiraling violence there.

Putin said in February in a pre-election campaign article that Russia would not allow a repeat of the “Libyan scenario.” Russia abstained from the March 2011 UN Security Council vote on the resolution that led to NATO airstrikes against forces loyal to Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi and his eventual death at the hands of rebels.

The UN says over 9,000 people have died since the revolt against Assad’s 11-year rule began last year.

Panetta Urges India To Pull America’s Chestnuts Out of the Afghan Fire

Panetta to encourage India for larger role in war


US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta –  File Photo by AP

NEW DELHIDefense Secretary Leon Panetta has arrived in India where he will encourage leaders to take a more active role in Afghanistan.

India has played a somewhat limited role in the war, largely doing economic development and reconstruction.

US defense officials said Panetta will talk with Indian officials about possibly helping to train the Afghan army and police.

The discussions are likely to roil America’s already tense relations with Pakistan, which has long had a rocky, distrusting relationship with India.