One of the labels which I have been using more and more recently is the “Bosnia v5 Chechnia v4 Kosovo v3 Libya v2 Syria v1” which refers to the fact that the Empire uses exactly the same trick over and over again to justify its military aggressions.
Though history is replete with false flag attacks, the end of the Cold War saw a systematization of a specific complex of measures designed to give a sophisticated illusion of an undeniable fact. Here is how this works:
I will present a theoretical model and one example:
First, a high-visibility target is identified. During the war in Bosnia, the most “visible” location was the city of Sarajevo, and the most “visible” location inside Sarajevo was the Markale market. By “visible” I, of course, mean “visible to the media”.
Second, a specific moment is chosen for the attack. It can be right before or after a crucial negotiation, it can be made to coincide with an election, it can be matched to a religious or secular holiday or whatever other optimal moment in time is preferred. In Bosnia the first “Markale market massacre” was intended to justify the use of NATO airpower against Bosnian-Serb artillery position while the second Markale market massacre was intended to justify a second wave of airstrikes against Bosnian-Serb forces.
Third, the actual false flag attack is conducted with the triple aim of having a maximum amount of killed civilians, to secure the maximal amount of media coverage and to coincide with the exact moment when the forces needed for the military intervention are ready. The need for this maximization of casualties and coverage is explained by the fact that enough military specialists on the ground will inevitable have the expertise to see through the false flag and try to challenge the official version. In Bosnia, the official narrative about the Bosnian-Serb responsibility was almost immediately challenged by no less than the UNPROFOR Commander Sir Michael Rose (for the first massacre) and by the UNPORFOR Sarajevo Intelligence Chief Colonel Andrei Demurenko (for the second massacre). And, just in case anybody has doubts about this, I would note here that the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia has had to acquit the Bosnian-Serbs initially charged with the crime.
Finally, even if the accusation is absolutely ridiculous (like Gaddafi giving Viagra to his soldiers to rape Libyan woman), the vast majority of Western politicians will go along with it just to avoid appearing not “strong” enough “on” whatever entity dares to resist the Empire.
As for those who actually conducted the attack, all they need is “plausible deniability” (a CIA-coined expression meaning that it is possible that the US was not behind the attack). I would even say that all the Empire needs is “short term plausible deniability” just because even if with time the false flag nature of the attack is proven beyond reasonable doubt, nobody cares.
Think of 9/11. By now the fact that the destruction of WTC1, WTC2 and WTC7 was caused by controlled demolition has been proven beyond any reasonable doubt. I would even argue that the US government has implicitly admitted to this through its NIST report on WTC1 and WTC2 and almost explicitly admitted that through its report on WTC7. So what? Does anybody even care by now? Of course not.
Most of the imperial false flag operations have been debunked, in most cases rather rapidly. But in a world ruled by political expediency and, let’s be honest, an almost total indifference to the very concept of “truth”, that kind of debunking, while historically important, is operationally easy to ignore. “We lied? So what? Whatcha gonna do about it”. After Saddams non-existing WMD the very notion that being caught lying is a problem has vanished. Now the imperial politicians can lie all they want, with no consequences for that at all.
Which brings me to so-called “Ghouta” chemical attacks.
Key imperial politicians, Fabius in France, but also UK and Sweden and others, have already stated that this was an attack by Syrian forces. They were in such a hurry to apportion blame that they could not even wait for any investigation. They just “knew”! Fabius even said that the guilty party should be punished by “force”, but something tells me that he did not mean bombing the insurgents should the UN report blame them. Besides, France is *already* bombing al-Qaeda in Mali, how could it possibly do the same thing in Syria were al-Qaeda are the “good guys”?
According to the Anglo media, the US is preparing for cruise missile strikes.
Now, to understand what that really means, one has to understand what cruise missiles stand for in the collective psyche of the US Democrats: Democrats use cruise missiles not only to destroy a target, but also to simply “appear strong” and get the Republicans off their backs. I am thus quite sure that even if the White House fully understands that the Syrian military did not use chemicals 2 days after the arrival of the UN investigation team (if only because the attack might have been organized by the CIA), this will not at all prevent Obama to launch a series of cruise missile strikes just to appear strong, macho, with hair on his chest. It will be easy to tell, by the way:
If the White House launches a sustained cruise missile strike campaign of at least 5 days, with each round of damage assessment followed by repeat attacks – then they are trying to intervene militarily on the side of the insurgency and tip the balance on the ground.
If the White House launches a one time series of cruise missile strikes lasting 24 or less, and then declares victory and stops, then its just a way to deal with the crazy Republicans and Neocons who always want blood, blood and more blood.
Finally, if the White House orders no strikes at all, then this means that this false flag operation was not a US or NATO one, but an “independent” effort of Wahabi crazies, probably with Saudi or Qatari complicity.
We shall know very soon.
Yes, the missiles will start flying soon.
Obama has invested too much in regime change. And now the ‘red line’ has been run over — but by who we don’t know.
Look at his advisors — Power and Rice. We know what they will be saying.
Even the US military seems to have stopped calling for caution. The NATO and GCC chiefs of staff are meeting in Jordan now.
Obama will be itching to go for more after the events in Egypt.
Saudi is desperate to further capitalize on the coup in Egypt, and to salvage the ‘revolution’ in Syria.
And Israel is terrified of the Resistance Axis winning in Syria.
For the Empire, something has to happen and all of the pieces are in place. And it will bet that HA will be too bogged down in Lebanon to get involved.
This is the first time in 2+ years that I’m worried about an imperialist war in Syria. My stomach feels the same as it did in March 2003.
I agree this is pure nonsense.
But I don’t understand what all the hoopla about chemical weapons is all about. Why is dying in a gas attack so much worse than an artillery barrage?
While I’m not advocating this, it seems like using chemical weapons would be ideal for clearing out rebels in built up areas. A warning can be given in advance so that civilians can leave, as can all fighters who wish to surrender. Then a heavy chemical barrage can kill off whoever is left without having to send in infantry units which will take heavy casualties. Also the homes and businesses in the area would be relatively intact and the civilians can return home later, after the required clean up/decontamination. Which I presume is a lot easier than rebuilding blown up cities.
How is it any worse than mangling bodies with high explosives?
Can’t resist the editor in me…
That final long sentence, is there a key typo in it?
“Finally, if the White House orders ( **NO** )to strikes at all, then this means that this false flag operation was not a US or NATO one, but an “independent” effort of Wahabi crazies, probably with Saudi or Qatari complicity.”
I wonder how Russia feels when they see all this going on? How much longer before the Russians are declared a “rogue” state and they are sanctioned and bombed? It is so depressing I really can not bear to watch.
Good stuff as always S. A couple of points:
But in a world ruled by political expediency and, let’s be honest, an almost total indifference to the very concept of “truth”….
So far as the conduct of US/UK/Western foreign policy is concerned, I prefer the term ‘Machiavellian’, which includes expediency and utter indifference to humanitarian concerns except in so far as they are useful tools to manipulate the gullible. Crucially, it also includes deception as a core principle of operations.
then this means that this false flag operation was not a US or NATO one, but an “independent” effort of Wahabi crazies, probably with Saudi or Qatari complicity.
I’d say it is more likely a carefully planned Israeli initiative – classic stuff for them really. Why?
Well who has the most sophisticated CW capability in the region – probably in the world actually? The following two articles this morning from Debka File clinches the matter for me:
The first alleges the chemicals used contained only a minute proportion of Sarin mixed with regular CS crowd-control agents – Israeli expertise in concocting such brews, together with their refined experience using it, is something of a giveaway wouldn’t you say.
The second contains the following sentence: following the Assad regime’s chemical attack last Wednesday. – No ‘alleged’. It is presented as a proven fact.
I find Debka a VERY useful indicator of Israeli covert policy. It is clearly a shill for Mossad, with deception, kite flying and down-right in-your-face lying the norm. You just have to understand where they’re coming from, that’s all.
AnonymousEditor holds his breath and wonders…
If this was NOT a false flag but an “independent” effort then what dominoes are set in motion if these crazy loose canons release chemical weapons in an Izraeli city?
Izraelis have made it clear historically that they react to attacks not with an eye for an eye but with 100 eyes.
Would crazy be met with crazy times 100?
Ok, let me just say it. Is a gas attack a “red line” for unleashing Izraeli nukes? (“Gasp”)
@Anonymous1: This is the first time in 2+ years that I’m worried about an imperialist war in Syria. My stomach feels the same as it did in March 2003.
Same here. I can’t believe that they would be evil and, especially, DUMB enough to do that, but then usually they are, aren’t they?! But then, I have been waiting for an attack on Iran for years now, also with that feeling in the stomach, but it has not happened so far. Maybe God almighty will stop them again this time…
@Lysander:But I don’t understand what all the hoopla about chemical weapons is all about. Why is dying in a gas attack so much worse than an artillery barrage?
I understand what you are saying and I agree that all weapons kill. But I do agree that nukes, chemical munitions and biological warfare are different. Why? I would quote Hegel who said that quantitative differences eventually yield a qualitative differences. Yes, all weapons kill, and yes, all murders are horrible. But there is a matter of degree. Then there is the problem of targeting. While all weapons have more or less important potential for ‘collateral damage’, chemical and biological munitions have a special potential to hit non-combatants. Finally, I think that the way a person suffers and dies from these weapons is considered particularly horrible and I would tend to agree. Does that make sense?
@Anonymous2: That final long sentence, is there a key typo in it?
LOL! Yes, you are right, I need to correct that. I do so many typos that hunting for them fills me with despair. And check, and recheck, and then, of course, the typo that I miss is a crucial one. I have done that SO many times! And usually I miss a “no” or “not” which totally reverses the intended meaning of the sentence… Oi vey!
@Anonymous3:I wonder how Russia feels when they see all this going on? How much longer before the Russians are declared a “rogue” state and they are sanctioned and bombed? It is so depressing I really can not bear to watch.
Here I can reassure you: Russia is 100% safe. Not only because of its nukes and ability to obliterate the USA, but also because of a VERY rapidly rearming conventional forces. Did you know that the US and Russian air forces are already pretty much on par with each other and that by 2020-2025 the Russian ones might actually be significantly more powerful? But already by now Russia is truly in no danger of being attacked militarily. This is why they are using all the *OTHER* dirty tricks to subvert Russia and get a ‘regime change’ there.
@Wikispooks: Crucially, it also includes deception as a core principle of operations.
Yes, of course, that is true.
Thanks for the answer before, Saker.
“Did you know that the US and Russian air forces are already pretty much on par with each other and that by 2020-2025 the Russian ones might actually be significantly more powerful?”
Wow!! Is that really true? Can you point to any good reading materiel? Also, what would be the implications of such a thing since it is already clear that the west was NEVER going to attack Russia directly anyway?
@Lysander: Wow!! Is that really true? Not quite yet, but its getting there fast. There was recently a pretty decent article about that in a Russian journal here: http://telegrafist.org/2013/08/21/80085/. You can google-translate it and see if you can understand it. The bottom line is this:
US F-15, F-16 and F-18 are getting old. The F-22 was superb, but over-priced and too specialized (and with issues). The F-35 will not even be a real 5th generation aircraft. The B-2 is not very useful (can’t even carry cruise missiles), the B-52 are ancient and the only modern US bomber is the B-1, which is also not exactly brand new.
The Russians are fielding absolutely fantastic 4++ generation aircraft like the SU-35S, SU-34 and MiG-31BM and soon they will begin fielding the 5th generation T-50 PAK-FA which is vastly superior to anything the US has or will have by 2015-2020. The Russians are also working on a advanced bomber (PAK-DA) and upgrading their Tu-160s and Tu-22M3s.
I would also add that the Russians are taking the lead in the sophistication of their air-to-air missiles whereas the US has pretty much stagnated in this field for a while already.
Frankly, I think that the F-35 is already a total disaster, and I honestly wonder how the US will deal with that problem.
There are, by the way, some truly superb US aircraft still out there. The C-17 is not young any more, but it still is a fantastic aircraft. And the A-10 is outright ancient, but still an extremely potent aircraft. But the US hasn’t all that many left.
None of that means anything by itself. There is INFINITELY MORE to air warfare than aircraft specs. But what this does show is that the almost infinite superiority of the USAF in the 1990s is now over.
And as was so well pointed out in a previous post referring to the capabilities of the Syrian army in spite of their inferior equipment, “It is not the size of the dog in the fight, but the size of the fight in the dog.” In this regard, it seems Russia has the upper hand.