March 31, 2015


Remember a year or so ago when Obama and John Kerry were telling us that the US HAD to go to war in Syria because their leader had used chemical weapons against rebels? Because Assad's alleged use of sarin on his own people was just too barbaric for us to just sit back and do nothing. The war propaganda machine kicked into high gear and Americans were horrified nightly by news footage of Syrian children being gassed. Most of you scoffed at anyone who suggested that this war plan for Syria made no sense because the US itself has repeatedly used chemical weapons. The article below contains proof that we did. And that it harmed our own soldiers because the military didn't bother to follow it's own protocol to protect them.

We ended up going into Syria anyway, not to protect children from chemical weapons. We went in to combat ISIS, the horrible group created in Iraq--in a large part because the US had destroyed Iraq acting upon Bush's lies. ISIS sprang from the chaos we brought to Iraq and you still believe anything any US president says about the need for war? The goal is perpetual war, because that keeps their campaign donors paid. There isn't even a need for the US to combat ISIS, no matter how many people they've beheaded or burned in cages. Many of ISIS's neighbors are heavily armed and could squash ISIS. But they don't have to step up to that plate, because our corrupt White House would rather jump in to any conflict to create work for defense contractors using our tax dollars. As they've just jumped into Yemen. We're providing weapons for the Saudis to attack Yemen, one month after Obama praised that the "Yemen model" was a model for success in fighting terrorism. This praise came right before we closed the US Embassy in Yemen, their president fled in a boat and the country exploded in violence. Sounds like a real success story, don't it? Why don't we just admit that we understand nothing about our foreign policy? How could we understand something which makes absolutely no sense?

In the article linked below you can see how much the government really "supports the troops"--ignoring their own safeguards to protect soldiers from discarded chemical weapons remnants. Oh well. The soldiers are unfortunate collateral damage. Which is perhaps why Obama switched to drones. Well, at least for a little while.

Now you didn't hear much about this because our corporate media was too busy psychoanalyzing a german pilot. An independent group just determined that 1 million Iraqis were killed. Google "one million dead in Iraq", hit news and see how no news outlet you recognize comes up. In a war we should have never started. A war which Hillary supported. Who's the terrorist now? I'd say it was the country that killed 1 million people for no reason. At least ISIS, however gruesome, has a religious motive--however misguided I feel it is-- and doesn't kill just for greed as the US does.

NY TIMES: Under Secretary Brad R. Carson acknowledged that the military had not followed its own policies for caring for troops exposed to old and abandoned chemical munitions that had been scattered around Iraq, and he vowed improvement.

To me, the scandal is that we had protocols in place and the medical community knew what they were, and yet we failed in some cases to implement this across the theater,” he said. “That was a mistake, and I apologize for that. I apologize for past actions and am going to fix it going forward.