The push for war on the part of the British Empire stems from their recognition that their system of rule—the monetary system—is dead. The intention to launch war has been most blatant since the murder of Ghadaffi under the guise of humanitarian regime change. Subsequent to that hideous act the timeline for transitioning into full-fledged general warfare, via staged conflicts in Syria and Iran, has been contracting and the efforts to stop it have become all the more important.
The arch of present events is shaped by this monetary empire's desperate attempt to force nations like Russia and China into submission over their defense of sovereignty of nations. However, the resistance opposing this war drive, primarily expressed by Russia, as well as key ranking figures in the U.S., has thus far been relatively successful.
Yet, it must be kept in mind that the more successful this resistance is, the more desperate the lunatics behind the drive become; thermonuclear annihilation is a very plausible outcome. The only final solution to end the stranglehold that the Empire has held is to end the Empire once and for all by ridding the planet of it's failed monetary system and returning to the principles of an American Credit system and physical economic development.
Get Involved, Call: 1-800-929-7566
Despite messages apparently delivered by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu earlier this week that Israel might attack Syria again, and a general hype in the media about that possibility, leading retired military figures are speaking out against such action.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon, at a press conference at the offices of RIA Novosti press service in Moscow May 19, said that with regard to convening an international conference to end the war in Syria,"As I've been asked by the parties to convene this conference under the auspices of the United Nations, I'm now actively engaging with all the parties: the U.S., Russia, the United Kingdom, Franc
In further comments to the media on May 17, following a meeting in Sochi with U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki Moon and Russian President Vladimir Putin, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov dismissed Western criticism of Moscow for supplying weapons to Syria's government.
The Austrian government has issued an official position paper, now circulating among EU member states, in opposition to the British-French proposal for lifting the arms embargo in Syria. Dated May 13, the document is a cogent summation of the reasons why the lifting of the EU embargo would be politically and legally unacceptable.
First, the political reasons:
Over the past few months a debate has emerged over whether or not the 2001 Authorization to Use Military Force (AUMF), passed by Congress in the aftermath on Sept. 18, 2001 in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, is adequate for how the so-called war on terror is now being waged by the Obama Administration.
An article by Tom Cocks released by Reuters news service on May 13, confirms what readers of LarouchePAC and EIR have known for almost two years: that the Tony Blair-inspired regime-change policy, implemented by his puppet, President Barack Obama against Muammar Kaddafi in August 2011, provided advanced weaponry for insurgent guerilla attacks against the governments of Mali and Nigeria.
Robert Gates, interviewed on CBS' Face the Nation on Sunday, reiterated his opposition to U.S. military involvement in Syria. Excerpts from the interview follow:
Her Majesty's government must be very worried about the possible implications of the agreement, earlier this week, that U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made with his Russian counterpart, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, to hold a peace conference on Syria, that would bring together representatives from both the Syrian government and opposition forces.
Appearing on Fox & Friends on Friday, attorney, journalist and talk show host Geraldo Rivera questioned whether the CIA annex in Benghazi was involved in running guns through Turkey to the Syrian opposition.