The Likely Implications of a US War Against Syria

One of the major developments being ignored today by domestic media has been the heating up of the war rhetoric by US and her allies against Syria.

From Bloomberg:

The Obama administration is constructing the legal and political justification for a limited military strike on Syria that would demonstrate international censure against chemical weapons, according to a U.S. official.

Any action taken by the U.S. would have a narrow scope and not be aimed at taking out Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, the official said, contrasting it to the allied offensive in Libya that targeted Muammar Qaddafi. A strike would concentrate on Syria’s weapons capabilities.

President Barack Obama and his aides are consulting with U.S. lawmakers and allies such as the U.K. and France about possible military action. French President Francois Hollande said today that Syria’s use of chemical arms must be punished. U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron has summoned Parliament back from its recess on Aug. 29 to discuss the country’s response.

Any action by Obama to intervene in Syria will run up against U.S. public opinion that offers little support for new military commitments in the region. It also would consume political capital as Obama also seeks to get agreement from U.S. lawmakers on fiscal policy, the nation’s debt limit and a new chairman of the Federal Reserve.

As pointed out in the past the relationship between inflation and war are intertwined.

For governments, war serves as diversion for the public from economic troubles usually caused or aggravated by inflationism, and importantly, war serves as justification for expanding control over society’s resources. And wars are mainly financed by inflationism. Of course, wars provide lavish businesses to defense and defense related industries. They also boost the egos of war mongers

Brinkmanship geopolitics in Syria has led to a spike in gold and oil prices. These are signs that shouldn’t be ignored as they will have spillover effects on the economy.

While the US and her allies accuses Syria of having to recently use chemical weapons to justify war, many has  countered that this has been a false flag—or a planted operation. For instance a hacked email from a defense contractor of the British government revealed of a (INFOWARS.com) “plan “approved by Washington” and funded by Qatar to stage a chemical weapons attack in Syria and blame it on the Assad regime”

A war in Syria could mean big trouble for the world.

Paul Craig Roberts, former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury and former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal explains at the Huffington Post:

What is the West’s real agenda? This is the unasked and unanswered question. Clearly, the US, UK, and French governments, which have displayed continuously their support for dictatorial regimes that serve their purposes, are not the least disturbed by dictatorships. They brand Assad a dictator as a means of demonizing him for the ill-informed Western masses. But Washington, UK, and France support any number of dictatorial regimes, such as the ones in Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, and now the military dictatorship in Egypt that is ruthlessly killing Egyptians without any Western government speaking of invading Egypt for “killing its own people.”

Clearly also, the forthcoming Western attack on Syria has nothing whatsoever to do with bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria any more than freedom and democracy were reasons for the attacks on Iraq and Libya, neither of which gained any “freedom and democracy.”

The Western attack on Syria is unrelated to human rights, justice or any of the high sounding causes with which the West cloaks its criminality.

The Western media, and least of all the American presstitutes, never ask Obama, Cameron, or Hollande what the real agenda is. It is difficult to believe than any reporter is sufficiently stupid or gullible to believe that the agenda is bringing “freedom and democracy” to Syria or punishing Assad for allegedly using chemical weapons against murderous thugs trying to overthrow the Syrian government.

Of course, the question wouldn’t be answered if asked. But the act of asking it would help make the public aware that more is afoot than meets the eye. Originally, the excuse for Washington’s wars was to keep Americans safe from terrorists. Now Washington is endeavoring to turn Syria over to jihad terrorists by helping them to overthrow the secular, non-terrorist Assad government. What is the agenda behind Washington’s support of terrorism?

Perhaps the purpose of the wars is to radicalize Muslims and, thereby, destabilize Russia and even China. Russia has large populations of Muslims and is bordered by Muslim countries. Even China has some Muslim population. As radicalization spreads strife into the only two countries capable of being an obstacle to Washington’s world hegemony, Western media propaganda and the large number of US financed NGOs, posing as “human rights” organizations, can be counted on by Washington to demonize the Russian and Chinese governments for harsh measures against “rebels.”

Another advantage of the radicalization of Muslims is that it leaves former Muslim countries in long-term turmoil or civil wars, as is currently the case in Iraq and Libya, thus removing any organized state power from obstructing Israeli purposes.

Secretary of State John Kerry is working the phones using bribes and threats to build acceptance, if not support, for Washington’s war crime-in-the-making against Syria.

Washington is driving the world closer to nuclear war than it ever was even in the most dangerous periods of the Cold War. When Washington finishes with Syria, the next target is Iran. Russia and China will no longer be able to fool themselves that there is any system of international law or restraint on Western criminality. Western aggression is already forcing both countries to develop their strategic nuclear forces and to curtail the Western-financed NGOs that pose as “human rights organizations,” but in reality comprise a fifth column that Washington can use to destroy the legitimacy of the Russian and Chinese governments.

Russia and China have been extremely careless in their dealings with the United States. Essentially, the Russian political opposition is financed by Washington. Even the Chinese government is being undermined. When a US corporation opens a company in China, it creates a Chinese board on which are put relatives of the local political authorities. These boards create a conduit for payments that influence the decisions and loyalties of local and regional party members. The US has penetrated Chinese universities and intellectual attitudes. The Rockefeller University is active in China as is Rockefeller philanthropy. Dissenting voices are being created that are arrayed against the Chinese government. Demands for “liberalization” can resurrect regional and ethnic differences and undermine the cohesiveness of the national government.

Once Russia and China realize that they are riven with American fifth columns, isolated diplomatically, and outgunned militarily, nuclear weapons become the only guarantor of their sovereignty. This suggests that nuclear war is likely to terminate humanity well before humanity succumbs to global warming or rising national debts.

The war criminals in Washington and other Western capitals are determined to maintain their lie that the Syrian government used chemical weapons. Having failed in efforts to intimidate the UN chemical inspectors in Syria, Washington has demanded that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon withdraw the chemical weapons inspectors before they can assess the evidence and make their report. The UN Secretary General stood up to the Washington war criminals and rejected their demand.

This only shows of the tendency of the public to focus on the sensational and overlook the more important events.