Under the Spell of Israel

Zionist Gunzels Slaughter A Village

In Palestine, 60 years of carnage and invasion is still ongoing at the hands of some criminal and occupying Zionists.

They have forged a regime through collecting people from various parts of the world and bringing them to other people’s land by displacing, detaining, and killing the true owners of that land.

With advance notice, they invade, assassinate, and maintain food and medicine blockades, while some hegemonic and bullying powers support them.

The Security Council cannot do anything and sometimes, under pressure from a few bullying powers, even paves the way for supporting these Zionist murderers.

It is natural that some UN resolutions that have addressed the plight of the Palestinian people have been relegated to the archives unnoticed. –Ahmadinejad on Zionists

February 25, 2011

No Zionist news is old news!

As Israel carries out their illegal US funded attacks on civilian populations in Gaza, we look back at the origin of Israel, which is rooted in violence and racism; and the video, Who Were the First Terrorists in the Middle East?

When Gilad Atzmon sent this video across from London today I watched it and shook my head. For me the information isn’t all new but it is enlightening and equally suited for those of us in the know as well as people who are just opening their eyes to Israel’s insane, cruel and needless pattern of violence and cruelty and massive war crimes.

The west has been under a spell for decades, dismissing the real history, meaning and implications of Israel; blindly accepting and funding and protecting what truly is a rogue government without question or delay.

Israel, most unfortunately, is guided by a philosophy that they are more entitled. Israel’s approach to resolving real and perceived problems, as I have written before, is similar to gangland mentality where the biggest guns and sharpest knives, are used to decide the outcome of a situation.

Fortunately, everyone in Israel doesn’t believe in ‘Zionism’; the concept that Jewish people are allowed to take land from other human beings because ‘God gave it to them’.

This philosophy burdens not just Muslim and Christian people who live in occupied Palestine, but also Israeli citizens who speak out against the politicized, violent version of Judaism that Israel represents.

Today Israel is defined by its acts of state sponsored terrorism. As this video reveals, the story dates back to Israel’s very first days

We revealed in a recent report; Rahm Emanuel’s Father Specialized in Bus Bombings in Palestine Wayne Madsen Special to Salem-News.com, that Benjamin Emanue, father of Chicago’s newly elected mayor, Rahm Emanuel, was a Jewish terrorist who specialized in the bombings of buses carrying British troops and policemen during the British Mandate in Palestine.

Things are often not how they seem, and as Egypt’s quest for Revolutionary freedom glows, we receive word that an Israeli bomb has just injured 15 people in Gaza.

Israel is such a terrible player in the world political arena; they are deadly and murderous and prejudice and they cross national borders to conduct military action with impudence; as if beyond reproach.

Irgun, the army of Rahm Emanuel’s father, is short for Irgun Zvai Leumi- “National Military Organization” in Hebrew, was a terrorist Zionist group that operated in Palestine, killing innocent Palestinians and British soldiers; blowing up buildings

Rahm and pop- Chicago.. can only hope the apple landed far from the tree. The next Israeli President of the United States?

This is the same group that has been killing the people of Palestine in a cold blooded manner for over sixty years. They must be stopped.

We do wonder if the Israelis are targeting our friends in Gaza who are in the ground putting the news out in real time; people like Ken O’Keefe, our writer who Israel branded a ‘terrorist’ after the deadly incident involving the Gaza Freedom Flotilla and the Turkish ship Mavi Marmara which was attacked by Israel in the dark with murderous intent.

Nine men were killed, one was American, they were all unarmed.

Ken O’Keefe and others overpowered Israeli commandos and disarmed them, taking them captive. To what end? Ken and the other unarmed peace activists protected the captured Israeli soldiers and gave them medical attention. Then they were released.

Ken O’Keefe is a former U.S. Marine who was aboard the Mavi Marmara when it was attacked by Israel during a recent attempt to break the siege of Gaza.

If only Israel played the same way. I am so sick and tired of hearing Muslim people referred to as terrorists when no place in modern history can even slightly compete with Israel’s record number of terrorism events.

This video shows how from the beginning, Israel has only represented death and violence to the world. Nobody denies the fact that Jewish people suffered during the Holocaust, but anyone who accepts their current behavior certainly should equally agree with Hitler’s quest, at least in concept.

There is no race or culture that is entitled to more than another. The world should not be governed by religious concepts or hate.

Salem News

The Terrorist Expatriation Act is new legislation that will strip all Americans of their right to due process, a trial by a jury of one’s peers and a speedy trial.

The bill would allow the Department of State to, entirely on its own, take away any American’s citizenship who is accused of having ties to a terrorist network. This would deprive the accused of all their rights as an American citizen, including their right to due process. Americans’ most basic rights are at risk!

Brought to you by Senators Joseph Lieberman and Scott Brown in the Senate and Representatives Jason Altmire and Charlie Dent in the House of Representatives.

Perhaps the most egregious example of such dual loyalty is that of Rahm Emanuel, currently serving as White House Chief of Staff to President Barack Obama. He is both an American and Israeli citizen, a man who served in the Israeli Defense Force in 1991 but not in the U.S. military.

If anyone should be considered to have ties to terrorism it should be Lieberman and Emanuel.

The audacity to propose such a bill from someone who has no alliegance to the U.S. and serves a foreign terrorist government is definitely TREASON: treason, renouncing one’s nationality during a state of war, or serving in the military of a “foreign state.”

If this doesn’t violate essence of our government and policies, I don’t what does. We should exercise our rights in preventing this belligerent bill from passing.  A Bill should be introduced to demand that anyone who serves in this country’s (Senate or Congress) or the Executive Branch, must be a U.S. Citizen with Allegiance to the U.S. and ONLY the U.S.

Tell Congress to oppose this horrendous legislation, and any future attempts to restrict or remove American citizens’ fundamental rights!

Sample Letter

The Honorable [Your Rep]:I am outraged by the introduction of the Terrorist Expatriation Act by Senators Joseph Lieberman and Scott Brown in the Senate and Representatives Jason Altmire and Charlie Dent in the House of Representatives.

This legislation is an assault on my basic rights as an American. In one fell swoop, this bill will take away my right to due process and a speedy trial by a jury of my peers. These are bedrock rights that protect my freedom and are guaranteed by the U.S. constitution.
[Your comments will be inserted here.]

This bill comes following the effective and speedy arrest of Faisal Shahzad less than 72 hours after he attempted to set off a home-made car bomb in New York City. Lieberman and company are offended that the the FBI Agents arresting Shahzad — an American citizen — read him his Miranda rights.

This legislation is un-American and a completely inappropriate response to a well-handled law enforcement situation in New York. Please oppose this horrendous bill and any future attempt to deprive me of my rights as an American.

Sincerely,
[Your name here]
Complete Address

The Irvine 11, UCI and Michael Oren

UPDATE September 23, 2011:

Last week, the public saw the best and worst of Tony Rackauckas. On Wednesday, the Orange County district attorney concluded a thorough yet timely investigation into the death of a homeless man, which resulted in the unusual decision to file charges against two Fullerton police officers.

On Friday, in a case that never should have been filed, a jury delivered guilty verdicts against 10 of the 11 Muslim students who disrupted a UC Irvine speech by the Israeli ambassador to the United States. After one stupid incident, those students will forever have to answer yes if they are asked by, say, potential employers whether they were ever convicted of a crime. Source

No doubt that should that tables have been turned, and should the 11 students had been Jews, UCI, the despicable Tony Rackauckas – who serves foreign interests, AIPAC and the illegitimate terrorist state of Israel, and possibly the media would have all bowed down and dismissed such a case,  citing, naturally that the Jewish students were allowed to object because they were.. the descendants of those who suffered during the Holocaust!

Then we have the surprising comment by Erwin (Hypocrite) Chemerinsky, the dean of UC Irvine’s Law School, who said that although freedom of speech is not an absolute right, university sanctions were enough for the students. He also added that he believes criminal sanctions go too far.

Chemerinsky told The Times last week that “it makes no sense” to use such resources. “It’s so minor.”

This is the same hypocrite who told the students they FAILED THEIR EXAMS even before they had taken them!

♠♠♠

No doubt that many have heard of the Irvine 11 by now.

On February 8, 2010, Michael Oren, a representative of, and the Israeli Ambassador to the U.S.,  was invited to UCI to speak on U.S.-Israeli relations. The speech by Oren was sponsored by the UCI Law School and the Political Science Department.

Israeli Ambassador to the United States Michael Oren was invited by several sponsors, including the law school (of which I am dean) and the political science department (of which I am a member) to speak at the university on Feb. 8.

Erwin Chemerinsky Dean and Distinguished Professor of Law, UC-Irvine School of Law

Michael Oren: Israeli soldier!

Wikipedia presents Oren as follows: notice how certain points are worded to disguise the ugly truth that this person denounced his U.S. citizenship in favor of becoming an Israeli citizen!

Oren was born Michael Bornstein in upstate New York. His father was an officer in the U.S. Army who took part in the D-Day invasion of Normandy in 1944 and fought in the Korean War.  Oren grew up in New Jersey in a Conservative Jewish household. As the only Jewish boy in a Catholic neighborhood, he says he experienced anti-Semitism on a daily basis.

Of course, this the first line of defense such Zionists use any and every time! In his youth, he was an activist in Zionist youth groups such as USY  and a gold medal winning athlete in the Maccabiah Games.  At 15, Oren made his first trip to Israel with youth movement Habonim Dror, working on Kibbutz Gan Shmuel.

In 1977, Oren completed his undergraduate degree from Columbia University. He continued his studies at Columbia, receiving a Masters in International Affairs in 1978 from the School of International and Public Affairs.

After college, he spent a year as an adviser to the Israeli delegation to the United Nations headed by Yehuda Blum.  In 1979, Oren immigrated to Israel.  In 1979, Oren joined the Israel Defense Forces.

He served as a paratrooper in the 1982 Lebanon War.  His unit was caught in a Syrian ambush on the second day of the war. His commander was killed and nearly everyone was wounded. He then joined a unit stationed in Sidon. Oren married in the summer of 1982 and returned the next day to Beirut.

During the 1991 Gulf War he was Israeli liaison officer to the U.S. Sixth Fleet.  He served as an army spokesman in the IDF Reserves during the 2006 Israel-Lebanon conflict.  During the 2008–2009 Israel–Gaza conflict, he was a media relations officer.

A few years later, Oren returned to the United States to continue his education, studying at Princeton University. In 1986, he earned a Ph.D. in Near East Studies.

On May 3, 2009, Oren was appointed as Ambassador of Israel to the United States by Israeli Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu,

How does a U.S. citizen become a foreign government’s Ambassador? Michael Oren renounced his US citizenship in favor of becoming an Israeli.

“..a solemn ritual that involves signing an oath of renunciation. He [Oren] said he got through it with the help of friends from the American Embassy in Tel Aviv who “stayed with me, and hugged me when it was over.” source

If anything, Oren should have never be allowed in the U.S. again or should have been immediately arrested for treason and for serving in a foreign army, representing a state accused of War Crimes and Genocide as proven by the Goldstone Report.

But that would have been antisemitism! [chuckle]

Michael Oren, born in the US and a dual citizen, is about to become Israel’s ambassador to the US which will require him to give up his US citizenship, the JPost reports. 

No problem, says Oren. Now, the question is: At what moment does a Jewish American who chooses to make aliyah cease being a patriotic American and come out of the closet,  so to speak, as a patriotic Israeli wannabe?

At what point does a Jewish American supporter of Israel become a potential security risk if that person is employed in an agency of the US government?

To say that it is the moment the person announces his or her decision to make aliyah to Israel or give up his American citizenship is ludicrous.

The person who makes that decision could understandably as well as logically be viewed as having been politically compromised at some point before that and therefore it is reasonable for US government officials, particularly in areas where intelligence in involved, to look at Jewish American employees with a degree of suspicion. But when they do, it elicits the predictable accusations of anti-Semitism. source

The act of renouncing US citizenship is a very serious action to take and should not be done lightly. Prior to this it is imperative that you understand what happens as a result. This is not something that can be reversed, revoked or changed once it is completed.

Treason:

1. Convicted For An Act Of Treason Against The United States

Treason is a serious crime, and the Constitution defines the requirements for convicting someone of treason.   Treason is waging a violent war against the United States in cooperation with a foreign country or any organized group.

It includes assisting or aiding any foreign country or organization in taking over or destroying this country including abolishing the Constitution.

Treason also consists of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the US government or of betraying our government into the hands of a foreign power. If you are caught and convicted of treason, you can pretty much count on losing your US citizenship as well as serving lots of jail time.

source

Now then, what about Rahm Emanuel?

Moskal also charged that Emanuel had dual citizenship with Israel and had served in the Israeli Army – Wikipedia

Whose interests are these people serving?

The Irvine 11

Since Michael Oren represents a country which engaged in war crimes and potential crimes against humanity as determined by Justice Richard Goldstone (a Jewish person) and the UN Human Rights Council, it is only natural to denounce and disrupt this terrorist’s speech and/or lies that would defend Nazism, Israeli style.

Israel continues to commit war crimes by maintaining a 3 year siege on Gaza, which is nothing less than collective punishment, in contravention to Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Israel is also expanding settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, in direct opposition to U.S. policy!

The 11 students who peacefully left the room and did not resist arrest, are accused of disrupting this terrorist’s [Oren’s] speech! Erwin Chemerinsky threatened the students as they walked out with: “YOU ARE FAILING YOUR EXAMS!”

Erwin C You are failing your exams!

Video

The Audacity of this professor to retaliate with such threats! Is this not anti-Semitism? Will he simply select every Muslim sounding name from his class roster and simply FAIL them? This man is an education terrorist and should be banned from teaching! Period!

UCI: the Hypocrisy

Protection from Discrimination & Harassment

Harassment and discrimination is prohibited by University policies and procedures. Unwelcome, severe, and persistent behaviors that are unlawful and interfere with another person’s rights and educational opportunities will not be tolerated. Visit the OEOD website for more information on nondiscrimination and harassment policies.

Statement from Chancellor Michael Drake on Behalf of the UC Irvine Campus Community

Feb. 23, 2010

On numerous occasions during the past year, I have spoken and written about the manner in which we discuss and debate our differences, our values and how we use those values to guide our decision-making.

As you may have read, earlier this month I was very disappointed when some members of our community seemed more comfortable engaging in confrontation than collaboration, and in trying to close channels of communication rather than opening them.

As a brief frame of reference: Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren had been invited to speak on campus by a number of campus and community organizations (I bet it was Erwin and only Erwin and whoever he would threaten with anti-Semitism if they did not accept and agree with his invitation).

His speech was repeatedly and systematically interrupted by a group of students. The individuals involved were removed by campus police immediately, and are facing disciplinary proceedings.

Our primary goals are to ensure a UCI experience that delivers the highest standards of academic preparation, and an unparalleled richness of intellectual and cultural diversity. We are committed to growing our students as whole people. [but allow your professors to threaten students with failing them if they disagreed with his political views?]

All of our students learn that at UCI, whether we agree or disagree with someone’s views, we respect the right of everyone to share their experiences, insights and ideas. This is how we grow. This is among our greatest contributions as a learning community.

The 11 students have pending criminal charges and have been threatened with university disciplinary actions. Spokespersons of UCI have stated that the students may be dismissed or suspended for standing up in protest.

While the students’ speech was protected, the University seems to be sending a political message. The disproportionate response of the University and the Irvine police is undeniably due to outside pressures and lobbies!

UCI had a 30% fee hike and decrease in the quality of their education. This is due to the recession which has left California nearly bankrupt! Rather than funding our universities, the U.S. Government maintains approximately $4 billion a year of military aid to Israel: the only nuclear arsenal in the Middle East!

US tax dollars must not support a state which commits war crimes, particularly when tax dollars would be better utilized paying for students’ classrooms and tuition!

Another War Criminal’s speech interrupted!

U.S. dropped 26,000 bombs on Muslims/Arabs in 2016: Obama Doctrine

Note that none of these countries were a threat to U.S. interests and are not the enemies of the U.S.

 

January 5, 2017

According to an analysis of Defense Department data from the Council on Foreign Relations, a non-partisan think tank, the majority of the bombs were dropped in Iraq and Syria.”

“The U.S. also dropped more bombs in Libya in 2016 than it did in 2015. Nearly 500 bombs were dropped in the North African country that has essentially been ungoverned since the fall of dictator Muammar Gaddafi in 2011.”

“There were 34 American bombs dropped last year in Yemen, where the war began in 2015.

That’s fewer than the 58 bombs the U.S. dropped there that year. The U.S. supports Saudi Arabia in the conflict, although it announced in December it will limit military support following criticism about the role American weapons and technology have played in civilian casualties. In 2016, 14 bombs were dropped in Somalia, which has faced decades of instability, and three were dropped in Pakistan.”

The Big Lie About the Libyan War

I never read nor reblog anything from the CFR’s Foreign Policy but I caught the headline and read it. I just needed to make a single correction regarding the false flag attack that was blamed on Col. Qaddafi in 1998. Otherwise the article seems pretty accurate and I am wondering why, all the people exposed here have served well the NWO agenda. Basically this is one more negative review of Hillary’s book. The Israeli regime had their own complaints about the book when she mentioned the unmentionable words: “Jewish occupation” in regard to Palestine. Read about that HERE

March 22, 2016 FP

In this fifth anniversary week of the U.S.-led Libya intervention, it’s instructive to revisit Hillary Clinton’s curiously abridged description of that war in her 2014 memoir, Hard Choices.

Clinton takes the reader from the crackdown, by Muammar al-Qaddafi’s regime, of a nascent uprising in Benghazi and Misrata; to her meeting — accompanied by the pop-intellectual Bernard-Henri Lévy — with Mahmoud Jibril, the exiled leader of the opposition National Transitional Council; to her marshaling of an international military response.

In late March 2011, Clinton quotes herself telling NATO members, “It’s crucial we’re all on the same page on NATO’s responsibility to enforce the no-fly zone and protect civilians in Libya.”

Bernard Henry Levy has been involved in sparkling the Libyan tragedy and murder of Qaddafi. In the New York Magazine from Dec 26, 2011, Benjamin Wallace-Wells spoke of the French ‘philosopher’ as if he were referencing a messiah that was not afraid to promote violence ”for the greater good of mankind”.

Just two paragraphs later — now 15 pages into her memoir’s Libya section — Clinton writes: “[By] late summer 2011, the rebels had pushed back the regime’s forces. They captured Tripoli toward the end of August, and Qaddafi and his family fled into the desert.” There is an abrupt and unexplained seven-month gap, during which the military mission has inexplicably, and massively, expanded beyond protecting civilians to regime change — seemingly by happenstance.

The only opposition combatants even referred to are simply labeled “the rebels,” and the entire role of the NATO coalition and its attendant responsibility in assisting their advance has been completely scrubbed from the narrative.

In contemporary political debates, the Libya intervention tends to be remembered as an intra-administration soap opera, focused on the role Clinton — or Susan Rice or Samantha Power — played in advising Obama to go through with it. Or it’s addressed offhandedly in reference to the 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. special mission and CIA annex in Benghazi.

But it would be far more pertinent to treat Libya as a case study for the ways that supposedly limited interventions tend to mushroom into campaigns for regime change. Five years on, it’s still not a matter of public record when exactly Western powers decided to topple Qaddafi.

“Any one of you Might be Next”- Col. Muammar al-Qaddafi

To more fully comprehend what actually happened in Libya five years ago, let’s briefly review what the Obama administration proclaimed and compare that with what actually happened.

On March 28, 2011, U.S. President Barack Obama addressed the nation: “The task that I assigned our forces [is] to protect the Libyan people from immediate danger and to establish a no-fly zone.… Broadening our military mission to include regime change would be a mistake.” Two days later, Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon declared, “The military mission of the United States is designed to implement the Security Council resolution, no more and no less.… I mean protecting civilians against attacks from Qaddafi’s forces and delivering humanitarian aid.”

The following day, Clinton’s deputy, James Steinberg, said during a Senate hearing, “President Obama has been equally firm that our military operation has a narrowly defined mission that does not include regime change.”

From the Defense Department, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Michael Mullen informed David Gregory of Meet the Press, “The goals of this campaign right now again are limited, and it isn’t about seeing him go.” Meanwhile, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates echoed the administration line: “Regime change is a very complicated business. It sometimes takes a long time. Sometimes it can happen very fast, but it was never part of the military mission.” (Emphasis added.)

“Palestine is Arab and must be liberated from the river to the sea and all the Zionists who emigrated to the land of Palestine must leave.” Saddam_Hussein

Now, contrast Gates’s assertion in 2011 with what he told the New York Times last month:

“I can’t recall any specific decision that said, ‘Well, let’s just take him out,’” Mr. Gates said. Publicly, he said, “the fiction was maintained” that the goal was limited to disabling Colonel Qaddafi’s command and control. In fact, the former defense secretary said, “I don’t think there was a day that passed that people didn’t hope he would be in one of those command and control centers.”

This is scarcely believable. Given that decapitation strikes against Qaddafi were employed early and often, there almost certainly was a decision by the civilian heads of government of the NATO coalition to “take him out” from the very beginning of the intervention.

On March 20, 2011, just hours into the intervention, Tomahawk cruise missiles launched from a British submarine stationed in the Mediterranean Sea struck an administrative building in Qaddafi’s Bab al-Azizia compound, less than 50 yards away from the dictator’s residence.

political witches Susan Rice, Samantha Powers, Billery Clinton

(This attack occurred just 100 yards from the building that Ronald Reagan authorized to be bombed by F-111s a quarter-century earlier in retaliation for a Berlin discothèque bombing ordered by the Libyan leader.) UPDATE: On 25 August 1998, German TV exposed apparent CIA and Mossad links to the bombing of the disco La Belle. Just as the dictator somehow survived the attack on his personal residence in 1986, he also did in 2011.

Later that day, Vice Adm. William Gortney, director of the Joint Staff, was asked by the press, “Can you guarantee that coalition forces are not going to target Qaddafi?” Gortney replied, “At this particular point, I can guarantee that he’s not on a targeting list.”

When it was then pointed out that it was Qaddafi’s personal residence that had been attacked, Gortney added, “Yeah. But, no, we’re not targeting his residence. We’re there to set the conditions and enforce the United Nations Security Council resolution. That’s what we’re doing right now and limiting it to that.”

In fact, not only was the Western coalition not limiting its missions to the remit of the U.N. Security Council resolutions, but it also actively chose not to enforce them. Resolution 1970 was supposed to prohibit arms transfers to either side of the war in Libya, and NATO officials claimed repeatedly that this was not occurring. On April 19, 2011, a brigadier general stated, “No violation of the arms embargo has been reported.”

Three weeks later, on May 13, a wing commander admitted, “I have no information about arms being moved across any of the borders around Libya.” In fact, Egypt and Qatar were shipping advanced weapons to rebel groups the whole time, with the blessing of the Obama administration, while Western intelligence and military forces provided battlefield intelligence, logistics, and training support.

 

Wars for the state of fake Israel

Yet, the most damning piece of evidence comes from  a public relations video that NATO itself released on May 24, 2011. In the short video, a Canadian frigate — the HMCS Charlottetown — allegedly enforcing the arms embargo, boards a rebel tugboat and finds small arms, 105mm howitzer rounds, and “lots of explosives,” all of which are banned under Section 9 of Resolution 1970. The narrator states, “It turns out the tugboat is being used by Libyan rebels to transport arms from Benghazi to Misrata.”

The Charlottetown captain radios NATO headquarters for further guidance. As the narrator concludes, “NATO decides not to impede the rebels and to let the tugboat proceed.” In other words, a NATO surface vessel stationed in the Mediterranean to enforce an arms embargo did exactly the opposite, and NATO was comfortable posting a video demonstrating its hypocrisy.

In truth, the Libyan intervention was about regime change from the very start.

In truth, the Libyan intervention was about regime change from the very start. The threat posed by the Libyan regime’s military and paramilitary forces to civilian-populated areas was diminished by NATO airstrikes and rebel ground movements within the first 10 days. Afterward, NATO began providing direct close-air support for advancing rebel forces by attacking government troops that were actually in retreat and had abandoned their vehicles. Fittingly, on Oct. 20, 2011, it was a U.S. Predator drone and French fighter aircraft that attacked a convoy of regime loyalists trying to flee Qaddafi’s hometown of Sirte.

The dictator was injured in the attack, captured alive, and then extrajudicially murdered by rebel forces.

The intervention in Libya shows that the slippery slope of allegedly limited interventions is most steep when there’s a significant gap between what policymakers say their objectives are and the orders they issue for the battlefield.

Unfortunately, duplicity of this sort is a common practice in the U.S. military. Civilian and military officials are often instructed to use specific talking points to suggest the scope of particular operations is minimal relative to large-scale ground wars or that there is no war going on at all.

Note that it took 14 months before the Pentagon even admitted, “Of course it’s combat,” for U.S. soldiers involved in the ongoing mission against the Islamic State in Iraq. Meanwhile, the public learned just this week — only because Staff Sgt. Louis F. Cardin was killed on Saturday — that there is a previously unannounced detachment of Marines in northern Iraq providing “force protection” for the Iraqi military and U.S. advisors.

The gradual accretion of troops, capabilities, arms transfers, and expanded military missions seemingly just “happens,” because officials frame each policy step as normal and necessary. The reality is that, collectively, they represent a fundamentally larger and different intervention.

Yet, this was never the military mission that the Obama administration repeatedly told the world it had set out to achieve. It misled the American public, because while presidents attempt to frame their wars as narrow, limited, and essential, admitting to the honest objective in Libya — regime change — would have brought about more scrutiny and diminished public support.

The conclusion is clear: While we should listen to what U.S. and Western officials claim are their military objectives, all that matters is what they authorize their militaries to actually do.

Micah Zenko
March 22, 2016