USA har før vist at magt er ret. At en krig er illegal har kun betydning, hvis man er svag og taber stort. Ellers er alt tilladt.
Den eneste måde amerikanske politiske ledere vil kunne holdes ansvarlig for illegal krigsførelse er hvis amerikanerne selv fører en retssag. Og givet at store grupper i begge partier er for et angreb på Iran vil der ske det samme som med de amerikanske torturbødler fra Bush-tiden. Obama gav dem amnesti.
Se Europas fremtid når de afrikanske stormagter vil regerer.
Meget lig situationen med Libyen, men med den forskel at Trump ikke virker som en krigshøg. Det er hans administration som presser på for aggressionskrig. Kan iranerne modstå presset burde denne krigstrussel forsvinde.
The United States has a long history of provoking, instigating, or launching wars based on dubious, flimsy, or manufactured threats. In 1986, the Reagan Administration plotted to use U.S. military maneuvers off Libya’s coast to provoke Muammar Qaddafi into a showdown. The planning for Operation Prairie Fire, which deployed three aircraft carriers and thirty other warships, was months in the making. Before the Navy’s arrival, U.S. warplanes conducted missions skirting Libyan shore and air defenses—“poking them in the ribs” to “keep them on edge,” a U.S. military source told the Los Angeles Times that year. One official involved in the mission explained, “It was provocation, if you want to use that word. While everything we did was perfectly legitimate, we were not going to pass up the opportunity to strike.”
Qaddafi took the bait. Libya fired at least six surface-to-air missiles at U.S. planes. Citing the “aggressive and unlawful nature of Colonel Qaddafi’s regime,” the U.S. responded by opening fire at a Libyan patrol boat. “The ship is dead in the water, burning, and appears to be sinking. There are no official survivors,” the White House reported. In the course of two days, the U.S. destroyed two more naval vessels and a missile site in Sirte, Qaddafi’s home town. It also put Libya on general notice. “We now consider all approaching Libyan forces to have hostile intent,” the White House said.
Sidst redigeret af Vymer : 17th May 2019 kl. 07:25 AM.
En britisk journalist, Patrick Cockburn, som har givet god dækning af diverse krige i Mellemøsten startet af USA & venner som en af de få vestlige journalister. Han har ramt plet ganske godt i modsætning til fx. dansk presses ideologiske journalister, så han er definitivt en person der er værd at lytte til.
We don’t have a strategy in the Greater Middle East. We merely have a variable roster of enemies.
On War With Iran, It's Trump Versus the Founding Fathers
Is America Ready for John Bolton's War With Iran?
In reality, if U.S. military policies in the Islamic world actually retain an overarching purpose, it is simply to persist and do so without thinking too deeply about costs and consequences. Elevating Iran to the status of existential threat is ideal for these purposes.
This is where the drumbeat of a possible showdown with the ayatollahs has played such an important role. Recall the tenor of the discussion in recent days about the possible direction of U.S. policy. First, there was the leaked Pentagon report of a war plan—100,000 troops earmarked for commitment. Then there was the leaked “defensive” deployment of 10,000 troops to protect U.S. forces already there.