FEATURE ARTICLE

Supporting War, Deploring Peace, How US Media Operate

Supporting War, Deploring Peace, How US Media Operate
 
Stephen Lendman 
Date: 06-24-2019
Subject: WAR: About that War

Supporting War, Deploring Peace, How US Media Operate

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org - Home - Stephen Lendman)

Both extremist right wings of the US war party never met a sovereign independent state it didn't want to rape and destroy.

US media are willing accomplices, supporting what demands denunciation. 

Today's key geopolitical issue is whether Trump regime hardliners will get DJT to go along with their rage for war on Iran.

It could be one major US-staged false flag away, something much more significant than regional incidents so far. The risk is ominously real as Pompeo and Bolton seek coalition partners for attacking Iran militarily.

The NYT criticized Trump for reversing an order to strike Iranian targets last week, saying his "bark is consistently worse than his bite."

Hardly so about a US president at war in multiple theaters against nations threatening no one, escalating conflicts he inherited, along with waging all-out war by other means against Iran and Venezuela.

All of the above are flagrantly illegal, the highest of high crimes against peace, what the Times and other establishment media ignore.

The Times: Trump's reversal of an order to strike Iranian targets "intensified global doubts about the president's judgment and the power wielded by the United States."

What's key is that no order for an attack that could easily escalate to full-blown conflict ever should have been issued. Stepping back from what could prove catastrophic was a good thing — while not eliminating a repeat episode, next time perhaps not rescinding an order for war.

A neocon/CIA-connected Washington Post opinion piece called for striking Iranian targets "to avoid a wider war" — with no forethought of the unlikelihood of things going this way if the Pentagon terror-bombs Iranian sites.

The notion of going to war to prevent it is madness. Virtually certain to provoke a strong response, things could easily escalate to all-out war if this tactic is used.

Former CIA operative/US war department official Michael Vickers falsely accused Iran of "th(ree) act(s) of aggression against US military aircraft in two weeks," blaming its ruling authorities for the Gulf of Oman and other regional incidents it had nothing to do with.

Throughout Islamic Republic history, it never attacked another nation preemptively — what the US, NATO, Israel, and their rogue partners do repeatedly. Their aggressive record is well documented.

The idea of waging war to prevent it, promoted by Vickers, reflects longstanding perpetual US wars for perpetual peace Republicans and undemocratic Dems abhor — always at war with one or more nations throughout most of the post-WW II era.

Vickers: "…Iran's most recent attacks on US military aircraft and international shipping (sic) cannot go unanswered" — even though no Iranian attacks occurred, not recently or earlier.

Vickers: "Shooting down unmanned aircraft (was) an act of aggression…"

False! A hostile US spy drone illegally entering Iranian airspace, along with ignoring multiple warnings to leave, led to what happened.

Downing the plane was legal, an act of self-defense supported by international law, what clearly the US would have done if an Iranian aircraft entered its airspace without permission, most other countries likely doing the same thing.

According to the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, "every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory."

Intruding without permission is a hostile act. Iran was legally entitled to defend its airspace by downing the intruder, a provocative US act.

Self-defense isn't "aggression," what preemptively attacking other nations without just cause is all about — how all US wars are waged, based on Big Lies and deception.

A separate WaPo piece criticized Trump for waffling on Iran, accusing him of having "cold feet," adding "(h)is hesitations and zigzags with Iran are…a disaster for him."

International law is clear and unequivocal. Preemptive attacks on other nations without Security Council authorization constitute naked aggression — the "supreme international crime against peace."

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman). Contact at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."

http://www.claritypress.com/LendmanIII.html