President Obama, in a speech on Aug. 31st, 2013, stated he will follow the Constitution and wait for Congressional approval before launching an attack on Syria. And he has dutifully sent this request to Congress. However, since Congress does not return from recess until September 9th, I am doubtful the matter will be allowed to wait that long - if not by Obama, then by the defeated FSA/al Nusra forces (and their backers), the Israelis, French or other shadowy forces.
Here are several scenarios for launch of an attack prior to Sept. 9th:
1. NATO
France says it may strike its former colony first. Just as in Vietnam, also a former French colony, the bulk of the fighting can be sloughed off on the Americans. Under the French constitution, President Francois Hollande can launch a military operation “of less than four months” without parliament approving. (One wonders how knowledge of the duration of a military operation is known a priori?)
France has air assets in the UAR, Djibouti and Corsica that can strike Syria. It has sent several ships into the Eastern Mediterranean, including the frigate Chevalier Paul and the transport ship Dixmude. If any of these assets are damaged in the attack, France can call on NATO for help. President Obama can then respond without Congressional approval as NATO is a treaty obligation. (Mutual defense treaty signed by the US in 1949 - an obligation under the US Constitution) Ditto for any false-flag attack on Turkey, also a NATO member.
2. False flag attack on US forces
The al Nusra, other insurgents, Israel/Mossad or other shadowy forces can launch an anti-ship missile or cavitation torpedo (which can travel at speeds in excess of 200 mph) at six (6) US warships now in the Eastern Mediterranean, which are sitting ducks for such an attack. The attack can be blamed on Syria, allowing the president to respond under the UN Charter, or to call Congress into a special session for a declaration of war.
(Lest I be accused of “anti-Semitism,” it must be remembered that Israeli planes bombed, strafed and torpedoed the USS Liberty in 1967, and even machine gunned its life rafts, in the infamous “Operation Cyanide” designed to allow a US nuclear strike by LBJ on Egypt. The ship was apparently saved by intervention of the Russian Navy, which caused the Israelis to break off the attack. A US rescue mission was apparently called back on orders from the highest levels in Washington. In 1986, alleged Israeli “Operation Trojan” - in which an Israeli transmitter was placed in Tripoli and false incriminating messages broadcast - resulted in Ronald Reagan being tricked into bombing Libya and killing Col. Quadaffi’s young daughter.)
Currently there are over 2000 naval personnel on these ships - enough for a “mini Pearl Harbor” event of the type neocons are fond of based on their PNAC (Project for a New American Century) document. Section V of Rebuilding America’s Defenses -- “Creating Tomorrow’s Dominant Force”—states: “…the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event - like a new Pearl Harbor”
3. False-Flag attack on US embassies, military installations or civilian targets
Once again, any attack such as a chemical or other attack blamed on Syria could allow Obama to act unilaterally under the UN Charter, to respond to the “attack”, or to call Congress into special session. With public support for an attack currently at 20% -- about the percentage of brain-dead voters in the US - only scenarios II or III could provide enough of a bounce for Obama’s request to sail through Congress.
President Obama’s assurances of “limited surgical strikes” and “no boots on the ground” (in the face of a massive supply-transport ship deployed by France and a boatload of US Marines) are eerily reminiscent of the assurances given by LBJ about Vietnam prior to the Gulf of Tonkin false-flag incident. Johnson ran in 1964 with the promise not to escalate the Vietnam War: “We are not about to send American boys 9000 or 10,000 miles away from home to do what Asian boys ought to be doing for themselves.”
However, after the Gulf of Tonkin false flag, Congress passed the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, giving President Lyndon Johnson power to “take all necessary measures” - much like the type of Congressional resolution Mr. Obama is now seeking.
In February 1965, Viet Cong attacked Pleiku, killing eight American advisers. This gave LBJ a pretext for a bombing campaign that lasted more than 2 years. When this didn’t work, LBJ committed troops but said it was a limited (surgical?) mission and that the boys would be home in just six months. However, by April 1967, we had a force of 470,000 men in Vietnam. This gave rise to the “light at the end of the tunnel” myth. This light was not turned off until 1975.
Apparently due to his complicity in “Operation Cyanide” and the resultant murder of US military personnel, LBJ was unable to run for a second term for fear this would become an election issue and embarrass the Israelis. It was not until the 1971 revelations of Daniel Ellsberg in the Nixon-era “Pentagon Papers” that we learned LBJ, the man who upset Americans not because he killed their sons but because he picked up dogs by their ears, had lied to us about the Gulf of Tonkin.
[One month before the 2003 war of aggression against Iraq, Mysiewicz predicted the exact start in his article “Purim 2003: This Year in Iraq?” He also predicted the last Israeli invasion of Lebanon when most pundits and governments believed the Israelis would only strike Gaza]
Copyright 2013 Thomas G. Mysiewicz; Courtesy shamireaders
Back to Top