Biden Bombing of Iraq & Syria "Harkening Back to the Days... Cheney" & Bush made Endless Wars & the possible War with Russia
"If
there is one man I can imagine...
turning Cold War II into World War III, it is the self-anointed heir of
FDR, Joseph Robinette Biden." - Bloomberg's Niall Ferguson
Pulitzer winner Glenn Greenwald, reported that the Joe Biden bombing of Iraq and Syria "harkening back to the days of John Yoo and Dick Cheney" and the RINO George Bush endless wars:
In its statement justifying the bombing raids, Biden's Pentagon barely even bothered to pretend any of this is legal. It did not cite either the 2002 AUMF for Iraq or the 2001 AUMF authorizing the use of force against those responsible for 9/11 (a category which, manifestly, did not include Iran, Iraq or Syria). Instead, harkening back to the days of John Yoo and Dick Cheney, the Biden Defense Department claimed that “as a matter of international law, the United States acted pursuant to its right of self-defense,” and casually asserted that “as a matter of domestic law, the President took this action pursuant to his Article II authority to protect U.S. personnel in Iraq."
Those claims are nothing short of a joke. Nobody seriously believes that Joe Biden has congressional authority to bomb Syria and Iraq, nor to bomb “Iranian-backed” forces of any kind. As The Daily Beast's long-time War on Terror reporter Spencer Ackerman put it on Sunday night, discussions of legality at this point are "parody” because when it comes to the U.S.'s Endless Wars in the name of the War on Terror, “we passed Lawful behind many many years ago. Authorization citations are just pretexts written by lawyers who need to pantomime at lawfulness. The U.S. presence in Syria is blatantly illegal. Such things never stop the U.S.”
That is exactly right. The U.S. government is a lawless entity. It violates the law, including its own Constitution, whenever it wants...
...
Having to watch the Bush/Cheney and Obama/Biden operatives who ushered in this permanent state of illegality and lawless wars prance around during the Trump years as noble defenders of the sacred rule of law — all while being celebrated and profiting greatly — was nauseating in the best of times. American elites do not care about the rule of law or the Constitution. Ignoring it is how they empower themselves at the expense of the citizenry. That is why very few will care about the fact that Biden (indulging the fiction for a moment that it was he) ordered the bombings on two countries without the slightest whiff of legal authority to do so.
While it feels frivolous even to raise questions of legality — since so few in Washington care about such matters — the real overarching question is the simplest one. Why does the U.S. continue to have a military presence in Iraq and Syria? What conceivable benefits redound to American citizens from the massive expenditures required to keep U.S. troops stationed in these two countries, the risk of those troops’ lives, the endless acquisition of bombs and other weapons to fight there, and the obvious but severe dangers from triggering escalation with powerful militaries that — unlike the U.S. — actually have a vital interest in what takes place in their bordering countries?
While the ordinary American only suffers from all of this, there are definitely some sectors of U.S. society which benefit. The corporation that Biden’s Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin left in order to run the Pentagon — Raytheon — needs ongoing troop deployment and permanent warfare for its profitability. According to The New York Times, it was “Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III and Gen. Mark A. Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, [who] briefed Mr. Biden on attack options early last week,” after which "Mr. Biden approved striking the three targets.” So Gen. Austin's colleagues on the Raytheon Board of Directors, as well as his comrades on the Boards of General Dynamics and Boeing, are surely thrilled with this attack.
Indeed, anyone invested in endless war in the Middle East — including the entire U.S. intelligence community and the weapons industry which feeds off of it — must be thrilled by all of this. [Glenn Greenwald (greenwald@substack.com), "Biden's Lawless Bombing of Iraq and Syria Only Serves the Weapons Industry Funding Both Parties," You’re on the free list for Glenn Greenwald]
Moreover, will Biden start World War III with this bombing of an ally of Russia?
Last year, Greenwald, who is a co-founder of the Intercept new outlet renowned for its accurate journalism on intelligence, reported Joe "Biden’s top national security advisers and now Biden himself have, with no evidence shown to the public, repeatedly threatened aggressive retaliation against the country with the world’s second-largest nuclear stockpile":
With the Democrats, under Joe Biden, just weeks away from [possibly] assuming control of the White House and the U.S. military and foreign policy that goes along with it, the discourse from them and their media allies about Russia is becoming even more unhinged and dangerous. Moscow’s alleged responsibility for the recently revealed, multi-pronged hack of U.S. Government agencies and various corporate servers is asserted — despite not a shred of evidence, literally, having yet been presented — as not merely proven fact, but as so obviously true that it is off-limits from doubt or questioning.
Any questioning of this claim will be instantly vilified by the Democrats’ extremely militaristic media spokespeople as virtual treason. “Now the president is not just silent on Russia and the hack. He is deliberately running defense for the Kremlin by contradicting his own Secretary of State on Russian responsibility,” pronounced CNN’s national security reporter Jim Sciutto, who last week depicted Trump’s attempted troop withdrawal from Syria and Germany as “ceding territory” and furnishing “gifts” to Putin. More alarmingly, both the rhetoric to describe the hack and the retaliation being threatened are rapidly spiraling out of control.
Democrats
(along with some Republicans long obsessed with The Russian Threat,
such as Mitt Romney) are casting the latest alleged hack by Moscow in
the most melodramatic terms possible, ensuring that Biden will enter the
White House with tensions sky-high with Russia and facing heavy
pressure to retaliate aggressively. Biden’s top national security
advisers and now Biden himself have, with no evidence shown to the
public, repeatedly threatened aggressive retaliation against the country
with the world’s second-largest nuclear stockpile. [Glenn Greenwald (greenwald@substack.com), "With Biden's New Threats, the Russia Discourse is More Reckless and Dangerous Than Ever,"
You’re on the free list for Glenn Greenwald. For the full experience, become a paying subscriber.]
The Global Village Space news outlet apparently asked the question:
Will Biden "presidency risk plunging the world into a catastrophic third world war"?
The news outlet admitted that President Donald Trump has been a peace president:
"Nevertheless, despite the occasional show of force, Trump has shown remarkable restraint during his four-year presidency against the advice of his national security advisers who wanted more proactive engagement of the US military in conflict flashpoints, such as Syria, Iran and Afghanistan, to the point that some generals in the top-brass of the US military even accused him of being Putin’s 'useful idiot.'”
"In addition, despite having to contend with the Bush and Obama [/Bicden] administrations’ legacy of myriad wars and proxy wars across the Middle East region, Trump has even announced a significant drawdown of the US forces from Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq and even the US strategic ally Germany." [https://www.globalvillagespace.com/op-ed-will-biden-presidency-risk-plunging-the-world-into-a-catastrophic-third-world-war/]
The Global Village Space says that deep state war hawks apparently know that a Joe Biden win would risk bringing about a endless wars president and therefore support him despite the possibly of him starting World War III :
"To name a few Trump aides who resigned or were sacked, they include former national security adviser John Bolton, former national security adviser H.R. McMaster, former defense secretary Jim Mattis, former White House chief of staff John Kelly, former director of national intelligence Dan Coats, former Navy secretary Richard Spencer and former chief of staff at the Department of Homeland Security Miles Taylor."
"In fact, scores of former Republican national security officials recently made their preference public that they would vote for Joe Biden instead of Donald Trump against party lines."war
"What does that imply?"
"It
implies that the latent conflict between the deep state and the elected
representatives of the American people has come to a head during the
Trump presidency... "
"... On another occasion, he ruffled more feathers by telling the reporters: 'I’m not saying the military’s in love with me. The soldiers are. The top people in the Pentagon probably aren’t because they want to do nothing but fight wars so all of those wonderful companies that make the bombs and make the planes and make everything else stay happy.'”
"In conclusion, to answer the oft-repeated question as to how the Biden Presidency would look like, how the “Sleepy Joe’s” vice presidency looked like, as Trump often derisively taunts him on social media and in speeches. His presidency would be no different from his uneventful vice presidency."
"Joe Biden is a typical establishment Democrat who would play into the hands of the US national security establishment like Bill Clinton and Barack Obama before him. But considering the backdrop of a New Cold War with Russia, his presidency could risk plunging the world into a catastrophic Third World War." [https://www.globalvillagespace.com/op-ed-will-biden-presidency-risk-plunging-the-world-into-a-catastrophic-third-world-war/]
In 2014, ex-President Barack Obama's former Defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, agreed that Biden was a war hawk according to the Los Angeles Times:
"Gates takes special aim at some of Obama’s top advisors, including Vice President Joe Biden. Biden, he charges, 'has been wrong on nearly every major foreign policy and national security issue over the past four decades.'”
"Obama worried that top Pentagon officers, including Petraeus and Adm. Michael Mullen, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs, were giving him 'the bum’s rush' in pressing for more troops in Afghanistan early in his first term, Gates says. He blamed Biden, among other aides, for that." [https://www.latimes.com/nation/nationnow/la-pn-gates-book-obama-20140107-story.html]
Read more at: https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/joe-biden-could-end-up-being-a-wartime-president
Copyright © BloombergQuint
On August 31, Bloomberg's Niall Ferguson said that endless wars Biden could start "World War III":
"If there is one man I can imagine... turning Cold War II into World War III, it is the self-anointed heir of FDR, Joseph Robinette Biden." [https://www.bloombergquint.com/opinion/joe-biden-could-end-up-being-a-wartime-president]
In 2020, Biden is threatening war with Russia like his collaborator "Hillary Clinton threaten[ed] war with Russia" in 2016. [http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/09/wikileaks-hillary-clinton-threatens-war-russian-media-wont-even-report-video/]
Is 2020 war hawk Biden a replay of 2016 war hawk Clinton on starting World War III?
If Donald Trump had not won the presidential in 2016, was Clinton thinking of starting World War III?
Does Hilary's collaborator Biden want to do in 2021 what Clinton couldn't do in 2017 if he can by the massive voter fraud Biden Steal illegally and fraudulently assume office and become an Anti-President or Fake President?
In 2016, liberal Green Party candidate Jill Stein said:
'Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the prime minister of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, saying that the threat of nuclear war is hotter now than it has ever been in all of history, you’ve got to take that pretty seriously. And when you have Hillary Clinton then beating the war drums against Russia, and essentially saLeupp, that if she’s elected that we will declare war on Russia.'"[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-26/fact-check-trump-right-clinton-might-cause-ww3]
The British International Business Times UK reported that Hillary
Clinton, on August 31, 2016 at the American Legion National Conference, said:
"As President, I will make it clear that the United States will treat
cyberattacks just like any other attack. We will be ready with serious
political, economic, and military responses.'" [http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/clinton-us-should-use-military-response-fight-cyberattacks-russia-china-1579187]
The U.S. mainstream media with few exceptions didn't report, and in fact
covered-up, Hillary's threat to start a war with Russia over the
Wikileaks exposure of the Clintons corruption which she alleges is from
Russian intelligence.
Wikileaks said:
"@wikileaks
Tufts University professor of History Gary Leupp, who is no friend of Trump, in Counterpunch.org which has Ralph Nader as a contributor, says the "corporate media" is covering up Clinton's extreme hawkish war record and says she has "all but declared war on Syria." Leupp said:
"Clinton’s policies are in contrast highly predictable on the basis of her record and recent public pronouncements...[s]he has all but declared war on Syria...Trump...maybe citing the Jeff Sachs quote about her supporting every war proposed by the military or CIA...could win. However frightening that might be, would a Clinton victory be less frightening?"[http://www.counterpunch.org/2016/05/03/hillary-clintons-foreign-policy-resume-what-the-record-shows/]
As Counterpunch.org Paul Street said in agreement with Leupp, "Clinton is the greater evil when it comes to World War III."
Trump made the statement that Hillary's Clinton's no-fly zone policy over Syria could lead to WWW III.
Is that fiction or fact?
Fact check on Clinton's Syria policy as leading to war with Russia:
Zero hedge.com/news reported on :
"The Washington Post points out that a vote for Clinton is a vote for escalating military confrontation in Syria and elsewhere:
The Republicans and Democrats who make up the foreign policy elite are laying the groundwork for a more assertive American foreign policy, via a flurry of reports shaped by officials who are likely to play senior roles in a potential Clinton White House.
***
The studies, which reflect Clinton’s stated views, break most forcefully with Obama on Syria .... call[ing] for stepped-up military action to deter President Bashar al-Assad’s regime and Russian forces in Syria.
***
Most of the studies propose limited American airstrikes with cruise missiles to punish Assad ....
***
Last year, Obama dismissed calls for a no-fly zone in northwestern Syria — a position advocated by Clinton — as 'half-baked.'
***
Even pinprick cruise-missile strikes designed to hobble the Syrian air force or punish Assad would risk a direct confrontation with Russian forces."[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-26/fact-check-trump-right-clinton-might-cause-ww3]
"'The most liberal presidential candidate still running – Green Party candidate Jill Stein – says:
"Under Hillary Clinton, we could very quickly slide into NUCLEAR WAR with her declared policy in Syria." '
She explains:
Hillary Clinton wants to start an air war with Russia. Let’s be clear: That’s what a no-fly zone means. It is tantamount to a declaration of war against Russia.
***
The most likely nuclear threat right now is with Russia. There’s no doubt about that. When you have Mikhail Gorbachev, who was the prime minister of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, saying that the threat of nuclear war is hotter now than it has ever been in all of history, you’ve got to take that pretty seriously. And when you have Hillary Clinton then beating the war drums against Russia, and essentially saying that if she’s elected that we will declare war on Russia.'"[http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-10-26/fact-check-trump-right-clinton-might-cause-ww3]
Even Hillary Clinton admitted her Syrian policy would "kill a lot of Syrians" according to the British BBC News:
"But in a 2013 speech to Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs, Mrs Clinton
said establishing a no-fly zone would 'kill a lot of Syrians', according
to a transcript disclosed by Wikileaks."[http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37766786]
On October 26, 2016, the BBC News reported that the highest-ranking military officer in the US armed forces, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Marine Dunford, told the Senate Arms Services Committee:
"Right now, senator, for us to control all of the airspace in Syria it would require us to go to war, against Syria and Russia." [http://www.bbc.com/news/election-us-2016-37766786]
Stop for a moment of silence, ask Jesus Christ what He want you to do now and next. In this silence remember God, Father, Son and Holy Ghost - Three Divine Persons yet One God, has an ordered universe where you can know truth and falsehood as well as never forget that He wants you to have eternal happiness with Him as his son or daughter by grace. Make this a practice. By doing this you are doing more good than reading anything here or anywhere else on the Internet.
Francis Notes:
- Doctor
of the Church St. Francis de Sales totally confirmed beyond any doubt
the possibility of a heretical pope and what must be done by the Church
in such a situation:
"[T]he Pope... WHEN he is EXPLICITLY a heretic, he falls ipso facto from his dignity and out of the Church, and the Church MUST either deprive him, or, as some say, declare him deprived, of his Apostolic See."
(The Catholic Controversy, by St. Francis de Sales, Pages 305-306)
Saint Robert Bellarmine, also, said "the Pope heretic is not deposed ipso facto, but must be declared deposed by the Church."
[https://archive.org/stream/SilveiraImplicationsOfNewMissaeAndHereticPopes/Silveira%20Implications%20of%20New%20Missae%20and%20Heretic%20Popes_djvu.txt]
- "If Francis is a Heretic, What should Canonically happen to him?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2020/12/if-francis-is-heretic-what-should.html
- "Could Francis be a Antipope even though the Majority of Cardinals claim he is Pope?": http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2019/03/could-francis-be-antipope-even-though.html
- LifeSiteNews, "Confusion explodes as Pope Francis throws magisterial
weight behind communion for adulterers," December 4, 2017:
The AAS guidelines explicitly allows "sexually active adulterous couples
facing 'complex circumstances' to 'access the sacraments of
Reconciliation and the Eucharist.'"
- On February 2018, in Rorate Caeli, Catholic theologian Dr. John Lamont:
"The AAS statement... establishes that Pope Francis in Amoris Laetitia
has affirmed propositions that are heretical in the strict sense."
- On December 2, 2017, Bishop Rene Gracida:
"Francis' heterodoxy is now official. He has published his letter to the
Argentina bishops in Acta Apostlica Series making those letters
magisterial documents."
Pray an Our Father now for the restoration of the Church by the bishops by the grace of God.
Election Notes:
- Intel Cryptanalyst-Mathematician on Biden Steal: "212Million Registered Voters & 66.2% Voting,140.344 M Voted...Trump got 74 M, that leaves only 66.344 M for Biden" [http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/intel-cryptanalyst-mathematician-on.html?m=1]
- Will US be Venezuela?: Ex-CIA Official told Epoch Times "Chávez started to Focus on [Smartmatic] Voting Machines to Ensure Victory as early as 2003": http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2020/12/will-us-be-venezuela-ex-cia-official.html
http://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2021/01/a-hour-which-will-live-in-infamy-1001pm.html?m=1
http://catholicmonitor.blogspot.com/2021/01/epoch-times-show-crossroads-on-capital.html?m=1]