An Empire Without a Military Strategy for a Military Strategy Without an Empire, by Thierry Meyssan

 An Empire Without a Military Strategy for a Military Strategy Without an Empire, by Thierry Meyssan




An Empire Without a Military Strategy for a Military Strategy Without an Empire
by Thierry Meyssan

President Obama has stated his strategic doctrine at West Point. In his speech, he reiterated the military omnipotence of the United States, while it is technically surpassed by both Russia and China. Unable to cope with Moscow, he glossed over the loss of the Crimea in silence and instead designated the only worthy enemy: the tactics of terrorism.

While al-Qaeda camps are located in countries under occupation by NATO or NATO members, he announced a comprehensive program to combat them. Finally, he reiterated his support for the "Syrian opposition" and promised that he would not fail to bring them help... when he gets Congressional approval.

On May 28th, President Obama delivered an important speech stating his strategic doctrine on the occasion of the graduation of cadets of the Military Academy at West Point.

Not surprisingly, the President recalled that he kept his promise to repatriate US troops deployed in Afghanistan and Iraq, and to eliminate Osama bin Laden. But what he portrayed as a supposedly laudatory assessment is not one: the GIs returned exhausted from Afghanistan and have fled Iraq before being expelled by the popular resistance. The exorbitant cost of these expeditions, over 1,000 billion, has prevented the Pentagon from maintaining its arsenal. About the death of bin Laden, it is naught but a fairy tale: Osama Bin Laden had nothing to do with the attacks of September 11th and died of illness and was buried in December 2001, as has well certified the British MI6.

One can only admire the US ability to continue this narration of an imaginary reality, however contradicted by solid evidence, and to always be echoed by the Atlanticist media.

In his speech, the president described his country as "the indispensable nation", both militarily and economically the most powerful. Yet neither of these assertions is still true. On May 14th, General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, acknowledged before the Atlantic Council that US armed forces would definitely be surpassed in 10 years if a huge upgrade effort were not made right away; an unlikely effort given budgetary restrictions. The Pentagon notes that the gap in military research is probably irreversible. Russian and Chinese Military technology are now more developed than those of the United States. It is too late to recover. The apparent superiority of Washington holds only because its troops are the only ones deployed worldwide. It therefore exists in certain theaters of operation, but not against Russia, nor against China, which would win in World War. As for the economy, the majority of consumer goods consumed in the U.S. is made in China.

On this spooky basis, in the words of the Washington Post referring only to the relative military weakness of the United States, President Obama announced that his country would not hesitate to intervene abroad when its direct interests are involved, but would use international coalitions to address more distant problems. He said that, unlike during the Cold War, Russia no longer posed an imminent danger, but that the main enemy is terrorism.

So the accession of the Crimea to Russia doesn’t matter. Washington will not fight against it though it describes it as an "annexation" and a grave breach of international law, not hesitating to compare President Vladimir Putin to Adolf Hitler.

Especially after 13 years of "war against terrorism", Washington claims to have eliminated a few fanatics who composed the international leadership of Al Qaeda, but must now face a more serious problem : many affiliated AL-Qaeda groups which have formed almost everywhere in the world.

This "war without end" has the advantage of authorizing everything. Presenting itself since 2001 as acting in self-defense, Washington has authorized itself to violate the sovereignty of other states in order to remove or bombard them, using blackmail at will. To continue this war, President Obama announced the creation of a "counter-terrorism partnerships fund," of up to $ 5 billion. It will aim to train security forces in allied states. Who can believe in such a program? Currently terrorists are trained in the more permanent camps of Al Qaeda, located in the Libyan desert country occupied by NATO. Meanwhile three Al Qaeda camps are installed in Şanlıurfa, Osmaniye and Karaman, Turkey, a NATO member country.

Syrians remember the televised confessions of the Emir of Al- Nosra Front (affiliated to Al-Qaeda) who transported chemical missiles from a Turkish military base to Damascus Ghouta. According to this man, not only were the weapons provided to him by a member of the NATO army, but the order to use them under "false- flag" to justify the bombing of Syria by the United States came from the US.

13 years after the events of September 11, 2001, who can still believe that Al-Qaeda is the main enemy of the "indispensable nation", when even Barack Obama described the elements affiliated with Al-Qaeda as "less capable" than their parent organization in his speech at the national Defense University, May 28, 2013? He said that the danger had become relative and that the United States should no longer make it the priority.

About Syria, President Obama continued at West Point by stating intentions to "help the Syrian people stand up against a dictator who bombs and starves his own people" ( sic). That is why Washington will help "those who fight for the right of all Syrians to choose their own future" (read: not the Syrians themselves who vote to elect their president, but only those who are willing to collaborate with a colonial government made in NATO).

Moreover, why intervene only in Syria? Because "As the Syrian civil war spills across borders, the capacity of battle-hardened extremist groups to come after us only increases. " In other words, after burning Syria, the United States could be affected by the fire they have lit.

"We will step up our efforts to support Syria’s neighbors — Jordan and Lebanon; Turkey and Iraq — as they contend with refugees and confront terrorists working across Syria’s borders. I will work with Congress to ramp up support for those in the Syrian opposition who offer the best alternative to terrorists and brutal dictators. And we will continue to coordinate with our friends and allies in Europe and the Arab World to push for a political resolution of this crisis, and to make sure that those countries and not just the United States are contributing their fair share to support the Syrian people," he said.

In other words, the White House is having talks with Congress on how to support the personal ambitions of members of the National Coalition. According to press reports, Washington could provide military training in neighboring states and distribute better weapons. Only here’s the rub:

If Washington starts to train and arm Syrian collaborators, it will have to admit to not having done so on a large scale before and having used primarily foreign mercenaries as part of Al-Qaeda.

If 250,000 mercenary jihadists were unable to overthrow the Syrian government over the past three years, how will a few thousand Employees of Western colonization succeed?

Why would neighboring states, already engaged in a secret war, enter into an open war against Syria, with the risks involved for them?

Which more sophisticated weapons could be delivered to the employees of colonialism without the risk of their being used someday against other targets, including Israeli air superiority?

And last, but not least, knowing that all this has been discussed over the past three years, what new factor could lead one to believe that these issues could find a solution today?

Obama’s speech is one of impotence : he boasts of having withdrawn his troops from Afghanistan and Iraq and killing a ghost that, for the past decade, still existed only in the tapes of Al-Jazeera. He announces he would fight the terrorism that everywhere he protects. He declares he will support the "Syrian opposition" more effectively, but immediately tunes into Congress - which could not see bombing the country during the chemical weapons crisis -, confident that it will limit itself to the minimum.

This speech is only a facade of verbiage trying to hide an irreversible decline. He stunned the audience which understood dreams of conquest are at an end. Against all odds, less than a quarter of the 1064 graduates of the Military Academy at West Point applauded the president, while the majority remained unmoved. The Empire is slowly dying.

The Kiev Fascist Junta is on the offensive against civilians in eastern Ukraine.

The Kiev Fascist Junta is on the offensive against civilians in eastern Ukraine.

The fascist crimes against humanity are being perpetrated right in the center of Europe by the US-backed regime in Kiev at this very moment, while you are reading these lines!

According to some experts on the ground, a no-fly zone over the Donbass area needs to be established as soon as possible in order to stop the Kiev regime from unilateral bombing of civilians in those beleaguered areas.

An interview with Natalia Bogomaz from Slavyansk has revealed tragic moments of people -- mostly women and children -- being hampered from leaving the city in the aftermath of the recent bombing by Kiev armed forces' aircraft.

Despite claims of bombing separatists base, military aircraft continued shelling civilians in the city.

Opinion of a Spanish journalist on the situation in Donetsk, Ukraine.

Opinion of a Spanish journalist on the situation in Donetsk, Ukraine.

HAARP

HAARP Scheduled To Be Shut Down By US Military | Collective-Evolution http://www.collective-evolution.com/2014/06/01/haarp-scheduled-to-be-shut-down-by-us-military/ 【from Next Browser】

Cabal

http://www.secretsofthefed.com/35-things-ruling-cabal-want-know/

Assault on the militant point-defense positions in Adra

Syria Update: Assault on the militant point-defense positions in Adra city

SAA army was preparing a retaliation attack on the terrorists and we had arrived to make a documentary about the planned assault on one of the militants’ key point-defense positions. The city of Adra was on the right side of the road. The civilian traffic cars had to dash at a very high speed on that particular passage of the highway. The militant snipers’ firing points were located 500-700 meters away from the road and the snipers were known to be firing at stationary targets. It was dangerous to stop there on the road.   

Those were the outskirts of Adra. Local civilians’ happily welcoming the SAA battle tanks bespoke the fact that the SAA troops were acting on the side of the Syrian people here. Kids were not running away from the tanks in fear and local parents were not hiding their children from the coming army troops. The arrival of armed service men gave hope to everybody. It was clear to everyone that the army troops had arrived to reestablish order and the rule of law in the neighborhood.

Those buildings [we were passing by] had been recaptured from the militants some time before. The peaceful city blocks were already 200 meters behind us at that moment. The driving skills of the tank men were playing the crucial role at this moment. It was important to steer the battle tanks along the narrow alleyways without damaging the surrounding structures.

The left-hand side of the alley was under recurrent militant sniper fire and we had to stay behind the tanks using their armor as cover.

At that moment, routine preparations for another anti-terrorist operation - aimed at clearing the town of terrorists - had begun. High spirits among the soldiers prevailed, in a calm anticipation of combat.

It was mere days before the beginning of the operation to capture the militants’ point-defense positions located in a local school building. The following day, we would go to do the reconnaissance.

Andrey Filatov, Victor Kuznetsov, Marat Musin. ANNA-News. Adra, Syria

An Unexpected Reason Americans Are Overweight | Alternet

An Unexpected Reason Americans Are Overweight | Alternet

An Unexpected Reason Americans Are Overweight

The new documentary "Fed Up" reveals how Big Food pushed the government to give out compromised health information.

The documentary Fed Up, released in theaters on May 9, untangles the roots of obesity in America’s youth. Directed by Stephanie Soechtig and narrated by Katie Couric, Fed Up does not shrink from telling viewers how the government’s decades-long capitulation to Big Food and its lobbyists has fostered an epidemic of excess pounds. The national focus on diet, diet foods and exercise is not abating the obesity epidemic and actually making it worse, charges the film.

Examples of capitulation to Big Food are many in the film. In 1977, the McGovern Report warned about an impending obesity epidemic and suggested revised USDA guidelines to recommend people eat less foods high in fat and sugar. The egg, sugar and other Big Food industries, seeing a risk to profits, demanded that guidelines not say "eat less" of the offending foods but rather eat more "low-fat" foods. Ka-ching. They won over the objection of Sen. McGovern.

In 2006, the United Nation's World Health Organization (WHO) released similar food recommendations and then Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) Tommy G. Thompson actually flew to Geneva, according to Fed Up, to threaten WHO that if the guidelines stood, the US would withdraw its WHO financial support. Again, Big Food won.

The U.S. government plays both sides of the obesity street--admonishing people to eat right while pushing the foods that make them fat--because of the USDA's double mission of protecting the nation's health and protecting the health of the nation's farmers. According to Fed Up, the low fat movement allowed the USDA to maximize those split loyalties.

First, in order to maintain taste in low-fat foods (which tend to be bland once the fat is removed), sugar became the evil stand-in. Much of Fed Up examines the role of excess sugar in obesity, metabolic disorder and food addiction, especially in soft drinks. (The film's exposure of Big Food's financially-driven infiltration of public school lunchrooms with junk food is astonishing.) But the low-fat craze had another pernicious effect. All that unused fat had to go somewhere, says Fed Up, and it ended up in the dairy industry's cheese operations. Even as the USDA recommended "low-fat" diets, it worked with the industry group, Dairy Management, to "cheesify" the American diet and even worked with Pizza Hut, Taco Bell, Burger King, Wendy's and Domino's!

Appearing in Fed Up are food experts Marion Nestle, Michael Pollan, Deborah Cohen (author of A Big Fat Crisis), former Food and Drug Administration Commissioner David Kessler, Bill Clinton and award-winning reporter Duff Wilson who uncovered high-level conflicts of interest in the food and beverage industry. Fed Up chronicles the struggle of obese children who have become addicted to food through unethical advertising, snack ubiquity, enabling parents (who also look overweight in the film), bad school environments and, primarily, a government that has caved to Big Food. The government practiced similar complicity with Big Tobacco, Fed Up accurately points out, until the death statistics could not be ignored anymore.

It is too bad that Fed Up ignored what many believe is a bigger reason for American obesity than sugar: Big Meat's use of growth enhancers like antibiotics, hormones, ractopamine and even arsenic. It certainly makes sense that chemicals and hormones that balloon livestock into huge carcasses with no increase in the amount of their feed would have the same effect on people who eat the meat. But only recently has the role of antibiotics in childhood obesity been examined, notably by Martin Blaser of New York University Langone Medical Center. Eighty percent of U.S. antibiotics go to livestock and residues are regularly found in U.S. meat.

While the U.S.' affair with sugar and soft drinks is decades old, it is only since 1997 that Big Ag started treating meat with the asthma-like drug ractopamine, largely unnoticed by consumers, to produce weight gain in animals. It is also in the late 1990s that extreme obesity and heightened asthma rates (sometimes linked to hormones) surfaced in children. Ractopamine, antibiotics, the beef hormones oestradiol-17, zeranol, trenbolone acetate and melengestrol acetate and arsenic (used by U.S. poultry producers for weight gain) are all prohibited in most of the EU. Europe also has much lower obesity rates than the industry-pleasing U.S. which Fed Up so well describes.