Way back last August/September 2013 — remember that? Geez, eons ago! — the U.S. Empire appeared to come close to possibly triggering World War III by striking Syria in retaliation for alleged chemical gas attacks by the Assad government. I mean, everybody (or, I should say, everybody that mattered) was on board. The MSM, NATO, missile manufacturers . . .
Instead, the inexplicable happened. After making a big, surprising announcement that he had decided to consult with Congress (we know that was probably a joke, an excuse, a justification, a righteous bowing and scraping to the so-called “separation of powers”, and of course, a way of “saving face” in the geopolitical chess game), Obama pulled back from his own “red line.”
Journalist Sy Hersh now has an article on this tangled imbroglio and how it possibly happened. (Hersh was also featured on democracynow, two days ago.) Here’s an excerpt from another article discussing the Hersh report:
‘Monster strike’ averted
Hersh’s report reveals how the question of enforcing Obama’s ‘red line’ polarized the US establishment. On the one side, figures in the White House were committed to military intervention despite probably being aware that Turkish intelligence played a role in engineering the August 21 attack that crossed the ‘red line’. On the other, Pentagon officials who felt that the evidence to support claims of Assad’s complicity were weak and that military strikes would be a disastrous shortcut to a wider regional war. The latter’s advice was ultimately heeded by President Obama, who likely felt that the costs of intervention would ultimately undermine his position and create disastrous political consequences that would necessitate a greater US military commitment.
In the face of too many unknowns, Obama looked for a way to backpedal out of his vow to strike Syria militarily, which culminated in his calls for congressional approval and the subsequent endorsement of the UN-backed disarmament plan. Although Obama backed off military intervention for purely pragmatic reasons, Hersh’s exposé details how the administration was willing to target military and civilian infrastructure, and enact airstrikes that would have incurred significant civilian causalities – all to ‘punish’ Assad and topple his government.
What especially interests me about the above is that it points to a possible split in the U.S. military, which is also referenced by Cobra, for example, in his latest astonishing missive, where he talks about the “positive military” and the nasty, cabalistic, archon-influenced “Chimera Group.” What’s real here, if anything, I don’t know. But as a cat-and-mouse story, it’s a hoot!
Funny how, the wilder and weirder and more awful it gets, the funnier it feels. Is this just because I’m in denial, that if I allowed myself to fully feel the horror of end-stage all-too-human destructiveness I would throw myself off a parking garage in despair? Or is it because I’m now mostly capable of viewing global 3D dramas from an expanded 5D perspective.