HOME | POLITICS | SPORTS | LIFE | SCI/TECH | OPEDS | HELPFUL TIPS
|
Aug. 25, 2006 It seems almost impossible for there not to have been a causal link between Syria’s withdrawal, monitored by the US, of the troops that were long stationed in Lebanon. The withdrawal of 40,000 troops was complete in April of 2005. What precipitated the demand by the US for the Syrian withdrawal was the assassination of Lebanon’s retired Prime Minister Rafik Hariri on February 14, 2005. A UN report sponsored by the US and UK implicated Syrian officials, and it was widely assumed that Bashar al-Assad, the Syrian President, was behind the assassination. Damascus has until this day denied involvement in the assassination. Naturally, Israel at least sided with the US and the UK, if it did not actually engineer the whole Syrian withdrawal scheme. It will be remembered that US and UK mounted a collage of lies to justify the invasion of Iraq, probably at the behest of Israel’s henchmen in the American government and media. So, it is not really of the nature of an unjustified piece of slander or cynicism to consider them capable of being parties to a stratagem for the conquest of Lebanon by Israel. After all, do the US and the UK really have anything to fear from Lebanon, except reprisals for unjustified provocations? This line of reasoning would lead one to consider the possibility that Israel may have assassinated Hariri as a false-flag operation, to make it look as though Syrian thugs had done it, thereby giving the US and the UK a basis for insisting upon the implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 1559. It is ironic that Israel, which always flouts UN resolutions, should be so vociferous about Resolution 1559. Zuhair al-Siddik, a retired Syrian policeman, was reportedly bribed to utter a false deposition to Detlev Mehlis of the UN, implicating Syrian officials. Robert Fisk and others have reported on this. With Syrian troops back in Syria, all Israel needed to do was provoke, fake up or wait for a minor incident as a pretext to invade Lebanon. This would explain the disproportionate Israeli response. This is a little reminiscent of Adolf Hitler’s ploy of dressing German soldiers in Polish uniforms and having them ‘invade’ Germany. Today we think of Hitler as a monster beyond all conception, but at the time of his attack on Poland, he had taken only Austria and Bohemia. The millions of deaths that make his name synonymous with infamy hadn’t taken place yet. Then in August of 2005, Israel began its withdrawal from the Gaza Strip. Was getting Jews out of the future theatre of war a deliberately planned prelude to the ongoing invasion? It would be hard enough to believe that this was merely coincidental even without the concomitant fact of the Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon. The fact that Israel seemed to be resisting George W. Bush’s insistence on the withdrawal there and in the enclaves in the West Bank may have been a mere theatrical, staged to make it look as if Israel had been only reluctantly withdrawing, when in reality it was probably an Israeli idea to start with. They may have been anticipating or planning to provoke an incident to justify an invasion. Now with its two flanks being dealt with, Israel will be in a position to make or participate in an attack on Iran, while George W. Bush hands over American weapons, money and blood as if they were going out of style. ------------ About the author Thomas Keyes: I have written two books: A SOJOURN IN ASIA (non-fiction) and A TALE OF UNG (fiction), neither published so far. I have studied languages for years and traveled extensively on five continents. Email: udikeyes@yahoo.com Comment on this article here! ------------ All articles are EXCLUSIVE to Useless-Knowledge.com and are not allowed to be posted on other websites. ARTICLE THIEVES WILL BE PROSECUTED! |
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
