Obama’s absurd war declarations

The most ridiculous actor in the fictitious US withdrawal from Afghanistan is not President Hamid Karzai, the hustler the US installed as its puppet after the American invasion in 2001.

The real clowns in this charade are those Americans that pretend to believe President Obama when he says the US war in Afghanistan will end on the last day of next year. Obama is, of course, lying through his teeth.

The United States and its NATO allies plan to keep 10,000 to 16,000 troops in the country, occupying nine bases, some of them set aside for exclusive American use – and would remain there at least ten years, through 2024.

Shamelessly, Obama claims these troops – including thousands from the Special Operations killer elite – will have no �œcombat” role. It�™s the same lie President Kennedy told in 1963, when he called the 16,000 US troops then stationed in Vietnam �œadvisors,” and the same bald-faced deception that Obama, himself, tried to pull off, unsuccessfully, in Iraq – until the Iraqis kicked the Americans out.

Barack Obama has arrogated to himself the right to redefine the very meaning of war, having two years ago declared that the 7-month US bombing campaign against Libya was not really a war because no Americans were killed. In Afghanistan, Obama waves his semantic magic wand to transform the past 12 years of war into 10 more years of not-war, simply by changing the nomenclature. This is hucksterism from Hell.

�œThere is zero chance of a zero option.”

If there was a Devil, he would be laughing his butt off at Susan Rice, Obama�™s National Security Advisor and raving Banshee of War, whose assignment is to pretend that the US might choose the so-called �œZero Option” if President Karzai doesn�™t immediately sign away his country to the Americans for the next ten years.

By �œZero Option,” Washington means it might just pick up its killer soldiers and weapons and leave Afghanistan. But that�™s an empty bluff. Since when has the US voluntarily left anyplace it has forcibly occupied? There is zero chance of a zero option. But, I am reminded of the events in 1963 Vietnam, when the Vietnamese president Ngo Dinh Diem and his brother were overthrown and executed in a US-backed coup. Sending the homicidal Susan Rice to get in President Karzai�™s face is definitely some kind of threat.

Far from ending US imperial wars, Barack Obama has expanded the theaters of armed conflict. He tried to keep US troops in Iraq, but the Iraqis insisted on the withdrawal terms and timetable they had negotiated with President George Bush. Iraq is now paying a heavy price, as the US and its allies arm Iraqi al-Qaida and other extremist elements fighting to overthrow the government of neighboring Syria. These US-backed extremists – the same ones the Americans fought against in Iraq for eight years – now wage war against Shiites on both sides of the border.

If there is any hope for an eventual peace in the region, it is that Washington might finally begin to understand that it can no longer control events through brute force, or by using extremists as surrogates in the Middle East and South Asia. Maybe that�™s why the Americans have tried to strike a deal with Iran. Maybe President Karzai thinks the winds of change will be sweeping through his neighborhood, soon, and he doesn�™t want to go out like the puppet he came in.

AT/HJ

Source: Press TV