Home | About | Donate

Could War With Iran Be on Washington’s Agenda?


#1

Could War With Iran Be on Washington’s Agenda?

William Hartung

In the splurge of “news,” media-bashing, and Bannonism that’s been Donald Trump’s domestic version of a shock-and-awe campaign, it’s easy to forget just how much of what the new president and his administration have done so far is simply an intensification of trends long underway. Those who already pine for the age of Obama -- a president who was smart, well read, and not a global embarrassment -- need to acknowledge the ways in which, particularly in the military arena, Obama’s years helped set the stage for our current predicament.


#2

Since war with Iran (between the US & Iran of course) is certainly on Israel's extremist/terrorist agenda, it is therefore on Washington's! The total subversion of US sovereignty, politics, Congress, Presidency, and foreign policy by Israel and their foreign agents - AIPAC et al - has come to more than they could have dreamed when they began "getting America into their fight", and American independence and "honest broker" status (cough) are forever compromised/destroyed, along with our honor and many Americans from Israeli attacks and killings of civilians - most covered-up or silenced!

Never Forget! USS Liberty attack over 200 dead and wounded!

http://www.ussliberty.org/findings.htm Admiral Thomas H Moorer - Chair - Commission on Liberty attack by Israeli air & sea forces (unmarked) - findings of fact

http://www.gtr5.com/


#3

"The nation needs its military men as brave and dedicated public servants. We can get along without them as mentors and opinion-molders. These roles have never been and, in a time when subtlety of mind and meticulous attention to questions of right over might ought to command us, should not now be their proper business."...J. William Fulbright. The Pentagon Progpaganda Machine, 1971.

There are no Senator Fulbrights, or Eugene McCarthy's, or George McGoverns, anymore.


#4

Obama and Trump do have a lot in common; as Commanders-in-Chief of the armed forces, they are both war criminals.

Trump knows American foreign policy is a virtual military, fascist, dictatorship designed to protect the hubris and hegemony of the world wide Amerikan Empire. Trump, like Obama before him, has no choice but to acquiesce; otherwise Trump knows he would not be able to remain office for very long.

Trump is already on thin ice, by the frenzy of bellicosity about wanting to be friendly with Russia. Trump will do what he is told to do in Iran.


#5

I won't question Mr. Hartung's acumen and access to pertinent information in forming this analysis. I hope he is wrong about attacking Iran which would be a human tragedy of immense proportions, and it is frightening how the clueless one has lined his cabinet with neocon war-hawks.

What I found most interesting in the above was his reporting that Tillerson has been marginalized and the State Department neglected and underfunded. Of all of Trump's appointments Tillerson, in my opinion, has the potential to be the most influential and the most effective in international affairs. For the last several weeks I have been researching Tillerson's and Exxon-Mobile's involvements with the Russian energy sector, that most critical of all Russian industries, and have been working on an editorial piecing all of this together.

The premise I am assuming is that we (humanity) are now in the early middle stage of the modern global energy conflict. Whether civilian or military, all of Trump's appointments are global warming/climate change deniers, and with the appointment of Tillerson there is the potential to form a US/Russian alliance that will seal the fate of humanity into an accelerating climate Armageddon. The Russian politburo has decided they will not even consider debating the Paris Climate Agreement until 2018, and Russia's continuing economic survival depends almost exclusively on robust oil and gas exportation and consumption.

For the last 20 years Russia and Ukraine have been locked in a economic-political battle concerning the natural gas that transits Ukraine through Russian pipelines. Neither party has operated in good faith and the economic packages proffered to Ukraine (by the EU/US and by Russia) that immediately preceded the Maiden coup were meant to partially alleviate Ukraine's mounting (natgas) debt to Russia. In the two years immediately preceding the coup Royal Dutch Shell and Chevron signed joint development agreements with Ukraine interests to develop Ukraine's shale gas deposits, Shell in the larger field in the east and Chevron in the lesser field in the west. With the onset of a de facto civil war, both Chevron and Shell have backed out of those agreements. It is of no small consequence that the eastern Ukraine deposit almost exactly maps under that area being contested by pro-Russian separatists. Likewise, the Crimea, both on and offshore, is supposed to have substantial oil and gas potential.

This only scratches the surface of what may lie behind Russia's concern over the next POTUS, as there are apparently new and lucrative finds in most of the 'Stans lying between Russia proper and Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. Presently the only economically viable routes to market for that oil and gas are through Russian territory and the Russian pipeline infrastructure already in place. Just how tangled is the web that has been woven? Well, for starters it is US petro interests that hold the majority of joint development agreements in these heretofore hinterland 'Stans; not Russia, not China, and not the EU.

And then there is Tillerson's saber rattling in the South China Sea. Here again is Tillerson's involvement with Exxon -Mobile, Gazprom and Rosneft. This US/Russian consortium already has in place and operating joint development agreements with Viet Nam, Thailand, and Malaysia, both on and offshore, and China is frantic about the consequences.

After becoming CEO of Exxon-Mobile in 2006 Tillerson negotiated multi-billion dollar joint development agreements with the Russian entities Gazprom and Rosneft to develop gas and oil fields in Russian-claimed areas of the Arctic, and for which he was awarded a Russian State medal of appreciation by Putin. The Ukraine conflict and the ensuing sanctions have severely impacted progress on those projects.

But the above article supposedly concerned the US and Iran. Late last summer Saudi Arabia finally was pressed into agreeing (within OPEC) to reduce its oil production to help stabilize oil prices which it purposely destabilized, and in the meantime the Iran/P5+1 agreement went into effect which for Iran meant a re-normalization in the world economy. Specifically, Iran insisted the right to resume its own oil production to pre-sanction levels. Iranian oil re-entering the market will ensure that oil prices remain low, causing further turmoil amongst all of the world oil players.

There is much, much more; enough perhaps for a book rather than a mere speculative editorial. But the overwhelming conclusion I'm forming is that all of humanity is now under the gravest of threats by jostling global petro consortiums. Somewhere in my boxed-up library is James Kunstler's book The Long Emergency. Events now lead me to believe that the length of that emergency has now been considerably shortened.


#6

Don't understand this characterization of Trump's hand being forced in regard to Iran. He campaigned on confronting Iran, and surely you understand he is no reluctant supporter of AIPAC.

Regarding Trump and Russia. Dossier aside, the likelihood that Trump has ever held a genuine position of peace toward Russia is less than zero, so to speak. That's not how Trump views anything. Anything.

Neocon driven coup in Ukraine is a fact. Business ties between Trump and Russia are also facts, especially when considering Trump Administration ties to Russia now with Tillerson.

One doesn't have to dive very deeply into discerning Deep State motives to understand potential alliances existing and extending in regard to long standing Trump business interests and now apparently petro business interests via Tillerson.

Trump hasn't a bone in his body that regards any friendly relation arising from some consideration of peace.

That we can surely know about Trump.


#7

Thanks for your perspective.