- Precious Metals
- World News
- Alien Deception
- Real Estate
- Freedom's Desk
- Alternative Media
- Bread and Circuses
Dogs of war versus the emerging caravan
Exhibit A: Saudis have put ”on the table” their offer to pay for the entire US assault on Syria. Exhibit B: in case of an attack on Syria, the price of oil is slated to go from $109 to $125 per barrel (base case scenario), with an upside scenario of $150 per barrel. Saudi Arabia will produce 9.8 million barrels of oil a day. Which means if the spike is only the base case scenario, Saudi will gross a super-profit of $156.8 million per day. If it is the upside scenario, then the Saudi super-profits will be $401.8 million per day. Not a bad arbitrage game from Mr Bandar and his gang of Saudi “democrats”.Addendum: each Tomahawk costs only US$1.5 million. With a prospective free flow of Bandar Bush’s cash, no wonder there’s a compatible free flow of Krug at Raytheon’s HQ.
By Pepe Escobar
The dogs of war bark and the emerging-powers caravan … keeps on trucking. That’s the Group of 20 meeting in St Petersburg in a nutshell. Count on the indispensable (bombing) nation – via US President Barack “Red Line” Obama – to disrupt a summit whose original agenda was to tackle the immense problems afflicting the global economy.
Economy is for suckers. Get me to my Tomahawk on time. The Obama doctrine – Yes We Scan, Yes We Drone – reached a new low with its Yes We Bomb “solution” to the chemical weapons attack in Ghouta, Syria, presenting world public opinion in the run-up towards the G-20 with the illusionist spectacle of a “debate” in the US Senate about the merits of a new bout of humanitarian bombing.
What in fact was served was the appalling spectacle of serial wacko Republicans of the John McCain and Lindsey Graham mould squeezing the desperate Obama administration like little lemons. Their Orwellian gambit – “reverse the battlefield momentum” – pushed by the senile McCain, was duly approved by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. This means bombing the hell out of Damascus during a “window of opportunity” of three months, with a possibility of extension. Red Line Obama is on board, assuring, before leaving to Sweden and the G-20, that his former “slap on the wrist” would “fit in” with regime change.
Not even the ghost of Machiavelli would come up with an adjective to describe the whole planet waiting in disbelief to see whether the almost universally despised House of Representatives (15% approval rating, according to RealClearPolitics) decides, Roman Empire style, to give the thumbs down and authorize the bombing of one of the oldest cities in humanity (well, they have an illustrious precedent of applauding Shock and Awe over Baghdad, which topped the Mongols going medieval in the 13th century).
And all this against the will of the “American people” who, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll support this folly by an overwhelming 9%.
Yes We Bomb. But what for? The following exchange might have come straight from Monty Python. Unfortunately, it’s real.
Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey: ”The answer to whether I support additional support for the moderate opposition is yes.”
Senator Bob Corker (R, Tennessee): ”And this authorization will support those activities in addition to responding to the weapons of mass destruction.”
Dempsey: ”I don’t know how the resolution will evolve, but I support – ”
Corker: ”What you’re seeking. What is it you’re seeking?”
Dempsey: ”I can’t answer that, what we’re seeking … “
The Pentagon may be clueless – rather, playing clueless. But Bandar Bush, AIPAC/Israel and vast sectors of the industrial-military complex know exactly what they are seeking. And Secretary of State John Kerry knows not only what they are seeking but also who’s footing the bill, as in “if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost. That’s how dedicated they are to this.”
Keep on reading @ atimes.com