Without an investigation, Donald Trump used the deadly chemical attack in Syria to begin international preparations to forcibly oust the president.
By: Claire Bernish?/?The Free Thought Project? ?Falling in unfortunate lockstep with a succession of belligerent previous presidents, Donald Trump is fomenting?retaliatory military measures against Syria for a horrific chemical gas attack that killed at least 86 innocent people, dozens of them children ? even while imperative questions swirl regarding who, precisely, carried out the atrocity.
While the West?s propaganda machine summarily crucified Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ? deeming him a monstrous oaf?deserving of the worst possible retribution ? calmer minds exhorted U.S. officials to consider the simplest of legitimacy litmus test questions before decimating Syria:
What could Assad possibly stand to gain from gassing his own people to death?
Not only that but, most necessitously, what could a hasty military response accomplish ? mere days after a degree of diplomacy indicated an end to the conflict on the horizon ? besides killing yet more Syrians and jarring the world into war?
Beyond the supremely suspect timing and nature of the chemical attack ? and a conspicuous lack of extenuating details ? Trump would have lacked sufficient motive to remain embroiled in the fraught, multi-faceted proxy war playing out in Syria.
The savagery of the magnitude officials and corporate presstitutes painted Assad willing and capable, however, proffers a convenient humanitarian facade with which this war without winners can rage in perpetuity.
Or, at least for the foreseeable future.
And that is, after all, the business of the President of the United States ? a position whole swaths of the world could rightly term, Warmonger-in-Chief.
Our business is war.
And business ? with billionaire mogul, rumored con-man, swamp-filler, and previously-professed anti-bombing Syria advocate, Donald Trump, at the helm ? is booming.
In fact, Trump and his administration said to hell with campaign directives promising lessened American interventionism, and instead harkened back to dubious military actions undertaken by former Presidents George W. Bush ? of Afghanistan and Iraq ill-repute, among others ? and Barack Obama, whose own designs on Syria had to be thwarted in much the same fashion by a concerted revival of the anti-war movement in 2013.
And those theaters ? each, bristling, geopolitically speaking ? hardly comprise the entirety of the list of current U.S. military engagements. They don?t call us hegemonic imperialists without sound reason ? various iterations of the U.S. military now exist in more than 150 nations.
Give or take a few disputed lands, there are only 195 nations on the entire planet.
That, alone, would have any neutral observer convinced of America?s plan for global domination ? though, in theory, that isn?t actually a thing.
Trump, rather than opportune popularity engendered from his Golden Boy, anti-establishment presidential candidacy, has instead let loose officials who eat, drink, and sleep war ? but the repercussions this time around likely won?t be held to protracted imbroglio, as Afghanistan and Iraq became.
No, this time around, bloviating on Assad?s depraved act prior to neutral, international investigation and analysis will land the United States a deeply notorious role as the impetus for World War III ? the Idlib gassing, no matter the actual responsible party, its equivocal Ferdinand Moment.
Syria?s allies, and allies of allies have wearied of U.S. warmongering ? and its truer antecedents of power, control, and plunder ? so, doubtless, won?t exercise reserve and caution under an onslaught of military might against the annihilated nation.
Keep in mind, even those tertiary alliances include totalitarian regimes with a fondness for displaying the military might of their own ? including nuclear capabilities ? and worse, willingness to employ the latter sans hesitation under the right circumstances.
And Trump has done nothing to assuage fears an unbridled military assault on Syria wouldn?t present precisely those circumstances ? whether for Russia, Syria?s staunchest ally, or any number of others anxious to expel the U.S. from the Middle East.
Of course, it wouldn?t be an American presidency if proposed were only a single field of engagement ? after all, the U.S. military budget for Fiscal Year 2017 tops a mind-numbing $582.7 billion, for which Trump seeks an increase of $54-billion ? the same amount he plans to subtract by eliminating scores of nonmilitary programs that budget funds.
In short, he?s requested an obscene sum on top of a profane total ??because of war, in 2017, is just what we do ? never mind those mountains of blood money eclipse the total military spending of the next five nations ? combined.
Trump?s feckless alignment with the warmongers and profiteers ? months after indicating otherwise, and years after excoriating Obama for the same, but ultimately failed, plan ?? doesn?t end with just Syria.
North Korea, unamused with U.S. defense systems assisting its neighbor to the South, has repeatedly tested nuclear and ballistic missiles ? ordinarily, hollow posturing made darkly portentous by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson?s chillingly terse statement Wednesday after Pyonyang?s latest launch:
?North Korea launched yet another intermediate range ballistic missile. The United States has spoken enough about North Korea. We have no further comment.?
Iciness over North Korea quickly extended to Assad and what must be done concerning Syria ? about which every indication screams brute show of force ? as Tillerson blithely stated,
?[I]t would seem there would be no role for him to govern the Syrian people.?
Russia, the secretary of state underhandedly patronized, should ?consider carefully their continued support for the Assad regime.?
Worse, Tillerson advised, ?steps are underway? for an international coalition to forcibly remove Bashar al-Assad from the presidency.
Without seeking Congressional approval. Without an investigation to determine whether Assad played any role, much less bore total responsibility, for the chemical attack in Idlib. Without proving the action?s necessity or engendering support from the American populace.
Indeed, this stampede toward Syria is a collision course with the world ? there will be no winners this time around.
There will, however, be scores of innocent lives erased, damaged, brutalized, and traumatized because greed trumps all ? and Trump knows a thing or two about greed.
As this situation continues to evolve at warp speed, it remains unclear when this overthrow campaign will commence ? but nonetheless seems an inevitability.
And when it does, the response to the incursion will decide whether Trump has, indeed, ushered in a terrifying World War III.