State Department Uses 'Nuclear Option' Propaganda to Justify More Preemptive War

Guest Post by Eric Blair

Yesterday, the State Department "quietly" warned that Syria's nuclear weapons program "may still be in operation" and their other suspected WMDs threaten the region. In other words, the final push for another war is being sold using the same marketing strategy that's been proven to work time and time again.




Foreign Policy magazine writes:

This week, the State Department sent a diplomatic demarche to Syria's neighbors Iraq, Jordan, Lebanon, and Saudi Arabia, warning them about the possibility of Syria's WMDs crossing their borders and offering U.S. government help in dealing with the problem, three Obama administration officials confirmed to The Cable. For concerned parties both inside and outside the U.S. government, the demarche signifies that the United States is increasingly developing plans to deal with the dangers of a post-Assad Syria -- while simultaneously highlighting the lack of planning for how to directly bring about Assad's downfall.

Syria is believed to have a substantial chemical weapons program, which includes mustard gas and sophisticated nerve agents, such as sarin gas, as well as biological weapons. Syria has also refused IAEA requests to make available facilities that were part of its nuclear weapons program and may still be in operation. (My emphasis)

Swap out the word "Syria" for "Iraq" or "Libya" and we've all read this press release for the business of war before. What worked for attacking an innocent Iraq worked for attacking an innocent Libya. And now it's also being used as an excuse to destroy two more nations which have never even threatened the West: Syria and Iran.

Even the blind should notice the same trends leading to war:

• Claim the leaders are bad guys (which is not difficult because most leaders are).


• Incite, fund and arm rebels (terrorists) to lure those governments into fighting back.


• Claim the leaders are killing their own citizens (which almost all leaders do including the good ole U.S.).


• Slap economic sanctions on the government while simultaneously creating a shadow government, central bank, and economy for the puppet rebel leaders.


• Scare domestic populations until they're okay with more war.


• Bypass any authority to commit tax money and troops for war.


• Drop billions of dollars in bombs by remote control destroying innocent life and infrastructure.



• Murder the former leader in cold blood if need be.


• Consolidate any and all resources into the hands of Western cartels.


• Fund these same cartels with more tax dollars to reconstruct the devastated war zone.


• Rinse and repeat.

The only difference lately is that "providing aid to terrorists" is no longer used as an excuse for war. Perhaps, this is because Israel and NATO, led by the U.S., are the only ones currently aiding terrorists, as they did to oust Gaddafi in Libya, and who they are now arming to instigate a civil war against Assad in Syria. They're even openly funding terrorists in Iran to do the exact same thing. Furthermore, the FBI has proven to be the only provider of aid to supposed domestic U.S. terrorists.




But you, Activist Post readers, already know all this. But understand that WMD is not just any propaganda, it's the "nuclear option" of propaganda. It's the only way to claim these countries are a threat of any kind, because they have very little or no history of actually attacking the West. And they will keep beating this WMD war drum because it works.



Whether the wars in the Middle East are really about oil, central banking control, or military-industrial profits seems irrelevant to the general public who have been only conditioned to believe in simple concepts like good versus evil. Obviously, everyone naturally views their side as good. Despite extraordinary evidence of our side's grotesque misdeeds, making the mental leap that we're the worst of the bad guys seems to be too big a gap to close for most people.



In the most recent GOP debate, a resolved Ron Paul received groans and boos from the crowd for attempting to explain the "just war" principle of using military for defense only when referring to Iran. He then received an awkward silence when he explained that war should only be acceptable if the people's representatives vote for it per the Constitution. Similarly, he heard crickets with his historical perspective of the USSR's thousands of proven nuclear warheads pointed at America to show what little threat Iran actually poses. Finally, he tried to explain that war is a bad idea economically; that we simply can't afford it.




Nothing seemed to sway much of the audience. They only see good and evil. And they've been told Iran and Syria are evil. Therefore, the evil doers must be dealt with through death and destruction like all the other GOP candidates advocate.



By the way, the Obama Administration supports the exact same war mongering as is obvious by the State Department's rhetoric and actions outlined above. Yet, anti-war liberals keep supporting him because he's their chosen "good guy". Bill Maher, who vehemently opposed the Iraq War, recently donated $1 million to Obama's war chest. These days, it seems political views on contraception trump issues of war and peace for liberals and conservatives alike. So it goes; we will have more illegal wars, but at least we'll have a heated debate about condoms in public school.



Somehow the masses, who are the only ones who can stop the bloodshed, continue to buy the propaganda and rubber stamp the murderous aggressive wars. The gullibility of the masses has surpassed embarrassing levels, and unless there is a rapid awakening, we are surely headed for blood.


Original Article