http://www.zerohedge.com/news/us-aircraft-carrier-stennis-now-en-route-join-enterprise-and-eisenhower-just-iranian-coast

US Aircraft Carrier Stennis Is Now En Route To Join Enterprise And Eisenhower Off Iranian Coast

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/05/2012 13:09 -0400

Back in early July we wrote that contrary to expectations, veteran Middle Eastern aircraft carrier CVN-74 Stennis would end its shore leave far earlier than expected, and be redeployed back to its usual stomping grounds just off Iran months ahead of schedule. As of days ago, the Stennis has quietly departed Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton and is off. It will join CVN-65 Enterprise (which is doing its last tour of duty ever before being decommissioned) and CVN-69 Eisenhower in the Arabian Sea, aka off the coast of Iran. This will be one of the only times in history when the US has had three aircraft carriers in close proximity to those evil Iranians who are hell bent on global domination. Expect Stennis to reach Iran (and be available to support an Israeli attack of Iran) in the last third week of September. Then determine when the next full/new moon is following the arrival of Stennis at its destination, and buy Brent calls just ahead. Finally,profit.

From Kitsap Sun:

The USS John C. Stennis, with more than 2,000 sailors aboard, left Naval Base Kitsap-Bremerton on Monday to begin what's expected to be an eight-month deployment. The Stennis has only been home since March 2, when it returned from a seven-month deployment in the Middle East. But with tensions remaining high in that region, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta ordered the aircraft carrier back out to sea. The carrier had not been scheduled to deploy until January.

CVN-74 departs on its way to CVN-65 and CVN-69.

http://www.debka.com/article/22334/Massed-US-UK-French-navies-for-drill-simulating-breach-of-blocked-Hormuz

Massed US, UK, French navies for drill simulating breach of blocked Hormuz

DEBKAfile Special Report September 5, 2012, 12:38 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags: Barack Obama

US aircraft carriers

naval exercise

Iran nuclear

Binyamin Netanyahu

USS Stennis aircraft carrier

The third US aircraft carrier, USS Stennis, is moving into place off the Iranian Gulf coast to lead a 12-day naval exercise of 25 nations on Sept 16-27, that will include a large-scale minesweeping drill simulating the breaching of the Strait of Hormuz against Iranian efforts to block oil passage through the strategic waterway. President Barack Obama may see Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu on the last day of the exercise. He hopes to present him with proof of US readiness for military action against Iran and demonstrate that an Israeli strike is superfluous.
The Stennis will join two other aircraft carriers, the USS Enterprise and USS Dwight D. Eisenhower, and their strike groups, which are already on operational duty off the coast of Iran, ready for the drill which kicks off in the strategic Strait of Hormuz on Sept. 16.
US officials say the Stennis will replace the Enterprise, but according to DEBKAfile’s military and Washington sources all three carriers will remain in place opposite Iran in the Gulf region in the coming months. British and French warships are completing their transfer to new stations off Iran for the big exercise in which the Saudi and United Arab Emirates navies will also take part.
In addition to practicing tactics for keeping the Strait of Hormuz open, the exercise will simulate operations for destroying Iranian naval, air and missile bases in the Persian Gulf area.
This war game has three additional objectives, reported here by DEBKAfile’s military sources:

1. To forestall an Israeli offensive against Iran, President Barack Obama wants to convince its leaders as well as Gulf rulers that the US-Western military option for disrupting Iran’s race to a nuclear bomb is deadly serious and ready to be exercised when the need arises – although determining “when the need arises” is the nub of the US-Israel dispute.
The exercise winds up Sept. 27, the day penciled in by the White House for Netanyahu to arrive for talks with President Obama and enable him to show his visitor that there is no need for Israel to act.2. The exercise is intended to convey the same message to Iran, that the US military option is real and genuine and will be exercised unless it halts its nuclear weapons program. The awesome might the US-led coalition is capable of wielding against the Islamic Republic in a prospective war will be brought home to Iran’s military strategists, its Revolutionary Guards, Navy, and Air Force commanders, across their television screens, radar and spy satellites.

3. The drill will assemble massive strength on the spot in anticipation of an Israeli decision after all to cut down the Iranian nuclear menace on its own..

The Netanyahu government found further grounds for going it alone in certain key amendments inimical to Israel introduced in the new Democratic Party’s platform on the Middle East. It is due for endorsement by the convention in Charlotte, Ca. Wednesday, ahead of Obama’s confirmation as the party’s presidential nominee. Those amendments are hardly designed to revive Israel's trust in the president's Middle East policies.
The 2008 platform confirmed a “commitment which requires us to ensure that Israel retains a qualitative edge in the Middle East for its national security and its right to self-defense.” The 2012 platform is amended to “[t]he administration has also worked to ensure Israel’s qualitative military edge in the region,” with no commitment to doing so in the future.
The Democratic platform has also dropped the Democrats’ affirmation of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, leaving its status open for a negotiated peace with the Palestinians.

Also removed is the statement that Palestinian “refugees” should be settled in a future Palestinian state, not in Israel.” The Obama White House has given itself a free hand to follow the Palestinian position on the refugee issue too like on Jerusalem (which he pointedly avoided visiting during his presidency.)
The new platform omits language characterizing Hamas as a terrorist group
The Israeli cabinet held a wide-ranging debate Tuesday, Sept. 4, on Iran after hearing briefings from the Military Intelligence, the Mossad, the Shin Bet and the Foreign Ministry’s Research Department on current Middle East crises, topped by Iran. No bulletins were issued from the closed, classified proceedings.
Some of the participants described the information put before them as “worrying though not frightening.” They implied that the IDF’s level of preparations and alert has not been reduced, sharply refuting the misinformation opponents of direct Israeli action against Iran have circulated widely and planted in media headlines.

http://johngaltfla.com/wordpress/2012/09/03/does-world-war-iii-start-on-september-11-2012/

Does World War III Start on September 11, 2012 ?

by John Galt
September 3, 2012 21:15 ET

One week from today the discussion of the average American citizen and businessman COULDswitch from the results of the Democratic National Convention and the first weekend of the National Football League results to a horrific realization that the world has once again stepped beyond the precipice and into a new era of complete and total suicidal conflict.

Almost exactly eleven years after the attacks on the World Trade Center on 9/11/01.

There are some prophecy experts, web readers, and other commentators offering up similar predictions based on their theories. I have been discussing this possibility on The Voice of Galt radio program for several weeks now and with one week to go, I thought it would be wise to summarize in detail the practical and political concerns which has lead me to speculate as to why this is a potential date for a jumping off point of an attack on Iran by Israel and the ultimate beginning of what will become World War III.

HISTORICAL PRECEDENT

On June 5, 1967, rumors of war which had been building for months became reality when the Israeli military attacked all of their enemies in a brilliant pre-emptive strike before Egypt, Syria, Jordan, and yes, Iraq, were ready to launch an all out final assault to eradicate the tiny nation. The Six Day War would forever alter the balance of power in the region and force the Arabs to confront a true regional super power for decades to come. This war and the revolution in Iran almost one decade later would set the table for the Islamists to engage in the development of WMD’s including nuclear weapons, to provide an offensive or retaliatory capacity against Israel. This last fact has not escaped the attention of the government in Jerusalem regardless of the empty promises of the United Nations and various U.S. administrations.

June 7, 1981 became a true day of historical significance and precedence in the tiny nation as Israeli fighter bombers successfully destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor inside of Saddam Hussein’s Iraq, eliminating the threat of a nuclear attack from the evil dictator who fielded one of the largest military forces in the world at that time. The model for future attacks was set with this daring raid to prevent the manufacture of weapons grade plutonium by a sworn enemy of Israel.

Again in 1982, after months of rocket fire from Southern Lebanon and a detectable increase in munitions being shipped into Southern Lebanon by the PLO’s Soviet bloc allies, Israel had reached its limit and invaded Lebanon. Instead of a short punitive war to destroy as much PLO infrastructure as possible to reduce or limit attacks from Lebanon, the strategic blunder of attempting an occupation of the country resulted in a bloodbath and protracted conflict which cost Israel dearly in the eyes of the world and domestically as politicians were viewed as incompetent for this failed invasion. Ultimately it would take another pre-emptive strike to redeem the military in the eyes of the civilian population and many in the military as well. Unfortunately that attack would not occur for many, many years and would be conducted in secret unlike the Osirak reactor in Iraq.

After another misadventure inside of Lebanon, the Israeli government warned the Islamic world in not so subtle terms that they would not permit the proliferation of nuclear weapons in the region. On September 6, 2007, this policy was enforced using the Israeli Air Force (IAF) against the Syrian nuclear weapons facility at al-Kibar. The destruction was total and conducted without the approval of the Bush administration which insisted on pursuing a diplomatic solution, much like the Obama regime is attempting currently with Iran. What made this attack significant was the overwhelming force used to destroy the site and the fact that it did not occur during a new moon; a tactic the United States military favors.

Interestingly enough, the lunar phase of September 6, 2007 is almost identical to what we will see seven days from now:

SENSE OF URGENCY

The United States under a Presidency which has openly declared disdain for the Israeli government and openly embraced its enemies as well as causes contrary to the interests of the West has caused the Israeli government to prepare for life without an American ally over the next decade barring the election of Mitt Romney or dissolution of the United States into several smaller nations. This pressure to act before Iran demonstrates a successful offensive capability to deploy at minimum an effective EMP device over Western Europe and Israel and worse, a primitive low yield nuclear weapon to attack Israel’s cities means that time is running out before they succeed.

This motivation to act is best demonstrated by a story from the Jerusalem Post on Friday, August 31, 2012:

PM tells US ‘time has run out’ on Iran diplomacy’

The story can be summed up in the very first sentence:

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu got into a diplomatic shouting match with US Ambassador Dan Shapiro over US President Barack Obama’s handling of Iran’s nuclear program, saying “time has run out” for diplomacy, Yediot Aharonot cited a source as saying on Friday.

This is the clearest signal that the Israeli government is prepared to end the obfuscation and act unless the United States or West decides to engage Iran decisively. In the last few weeks there appears to be an acceleration within Israel of distribution of gas masks and other WMD gear according to some blog reports. While the official media denies these stories, the apparent sense of urgency first noted within the Israeli media as stories of IDF facilities being hardened and redundancy programs being implemented nationwide months ago.

In addition, the front page of Sunday’s New York Times, the official organ of the Obama regime, leads off with this story indicating some sense of panic within the American regime:

To Calm Israel, U.S. Offers Ways to Restrain Iran

AN INSULT TO OBAMA AND ISLAM

While September 11th is a celebratory day for many within the Islamic world for their successful strike against the “Great Satan” it would be quite ironic if Israel turned the table on the newly empowered radical Islamist governments of Libya, Mali, Tunisia, Turkey, and of course Egypt by successfully attacking Iran and diminishing their ability to manufacture nuclear weapons. The insult to the radicals would be followed up by an exchange which could, I repeat could, provide the opening and excuse for the IDF to eradicate both Hezbollah and the threat of Syria’s chemical and biological weapons stockpile. This opportunity is a once in a decade chance for Israel to eliminate the threat to the north and topple Bashar al-Assad in Syria by weakening the remnants of his military to a point where the rebellion would succeed.

Unfortunately for the Obama administration an attack next Tuesday, or sooner, would be a clever and strategic method to return the insults he leveled at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by taking the focus off of Il Douche’s post convention bounce and instead refocusing the American media on a problem which could have been solved by both the Bush and Obama administration but instead deferred due to incompetence and ignorance rather than a practical approach to foreign policy and false promises to assist movements for freedom and liberation such as was destroyed in Iran while Obama ignored them.

This backhanded slap in the face of the Obama administration would create an air of crisis where to satisfy his “foreign” (translation: Arab) contributors he might receive pressure to support and impose sanctions against Israel. That would of course increase Jewish contributions to Mitt Romney and tilt the election sufficiently enough in the United States to rid the Israelis of the buffoon in D.C. while diminishing his foreign policy record to the point of historical irrelevancy at the same time.

THE TIMING IS RIGHT

The United States military is on high alert in the Persian Gulf which actually assists the Israelis in such an attack, especially if calls for air/sea rescue occur. In addition, the weather is projected to be calm and clear over much of Iran according to long range forecasts (via Accuweather.com):

In fact as of this evening, there is no evidence of sand storms or adverse weather conditions over the Persian nation:

If these conditions hold over the entire region, it would be one of the few perfect weather openings for both an air and sea launched (SLCM’s) assault on the Iranian facilities. While the damage may not permanently disable the program, it would be an open declaration of war and a warning to the regime in Tehran that Israel can and will attack at will. If Syria and Hezbollah overstep their abilities and attack Israel, then that provides the other opening needed to weaken Tehran’s international capabilities and perhaps encourage another uprising against the mullah’s.

Keep an eye out on the weeks ahead as the instability in the financial and geopolitical arena could well provide another historical window of horror, terror, and fascination for all of us to observe.

and.......

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Global_Economy/NI05Dj03.html

US complicit in Israel war plans for IranBy Kaveh L Afrasiabi

After supplying Israel with the massive bunker-buster bombs that would be critical in any Israeli military strike on Iran, the US government now wants to have it both ways, trying to shield itself from any backlash by insisting it would not be "complicit" in such an Israeli gambit.

General Martin Dempsey, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, raised some eyebrows last week, especially in the Israeli media, by stating publicly: "I don't want to be complicit if they [Israel] choose to do it." As if intent on convincing Iran of US's determination to stay out of a Tehran-Tel Aviv duel, over the

weekend there were unconfirmed reports of secret talks between Tehran and Washington, although this has been adamantly denied by the White House.

Regardless, according to various sources, including Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah, Iran could strike at US bases in the region if attacked by Israel. This echoes the sentiment of several Iranian military officials including commanders of the revolutionary guards who have warned in the past of making no distinctions between US and Israel if the latter dared to attack Iran.

From Iran's vantage point, Iran's threat against the US forces stationed in Iran's vicinity acts as a deterrent against any Israeli strike and, therefore, the US's attempt to jettison itself out of the equation is actually an inducement to the military scenario, much as it is interpreted in Israel and the West as a sign of US's disapproval of an Israeli strike.

According to a Tehran political science professor who spoke with the author on the condition of anonymity, the US's "neutrality posture" rings hollow because Washington has supplied the "30,000 pounds deep-earth penetrators" that will likely be used against Iran. "During the Iran-Iraq war Iran made the mistake of not holding the Western suppliers of chemical weapons to Saddam Hussain accountable and Iran will not make that mistake again," says the Tehran professor.

Regarding those bunker-buster bombs, last September the US admitted that it had delivered 55 of those monster bombs (sure to inflict major "collateral damage") to Israel, after being approved by the Obama administration in 2009. In effect, this means that by making the fateful decision to arm Israel with the necessary military muscle to initiate a unilateral attack on Iran, the US has sealed its image as "complicit" irrespective of how its top generals want to create a safe buffer for their forces in the region; this is not to mention the likely US intelligence sharing with Israel that would go into preparation for any attack on Iran. Henceforth, the only scenario whereby Iran would not retaliate against the US would be a US guarantee that the US-made bombs would not be used by Israel, ie, a virtual impossibility. This is partly because although the US arms sales to Israel are rationalized as purely defensive and, yet, Israel's rationalization of "preemptive strike" on Iran as an act of "self-defense" brings it into line with the terms of those arms sales.

Regardless of such pseudo-rationalizations that would certainly not wash with the rest of the international community, in light of the Tehran summit of the Non-Aligned Movement last week that resulted in a unanimous statement in support of Iran's nuclear program, not to mention Germany's and France's warning to Israel not to attack Iran, it is amply clear now that US would inevitably be dragged into any Iran-Israel conflict. This could well take the form of naval confrontations in the Persian Gulf in case Iran retaliates by closing the Strait of Hormuz.

Meanwhile, as if realizing that Israel has a great deal of work to do to convince the Western governments and publics regarding the imminent Iran "nuclear threat," Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's new tactic is to exhort the West to draw a "clear red line" on Iran. Yet, chances are that Netanyahu's call will go unanswered, due principally to the absence of a legal justification for the western opposition to Iran's possession of dual nature nuclear technology that gives it latent nuclear weapons capability.

In other words, neither the US nor any of its Western allies can possibly declare a "red line" on Iran's nuclear weapons capability by virtue of its potential to cross the threshold of "weaponization" above all by producing weapons-grade enriched uranium. But, as long as all of Iran's enrichment activities are monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and there is no evidence of either military diversion or weapons-grade enrichment, Iran theoretically remains immune from the impositions of any "red line". "In essence what Israel is requesting from Americans is to draw an arbitrary line," says the Tehran professor, adding that the US "would only isolate itself in the world if it appeased Israel."

Tehran's counter-strategy has been to give further assurance of its peaceful nuclear activities, in part by showcasing the enrichment facilities to the visiting Mongolian president over the weekend. Such efforts are meant to alleviate the international concerns over the latest IAEA report that cites a doubling of Iran's centrifuges in the underground facility known as Fordo.

Yet, Iran's position is that it has not breached its obligations by increasing its enrichment activities that are "fully monitored by the IAEA inspections as well as cameras," to paraphrase Iran's envoy to the IAEA, Ali Asghar Soltanieh in a recent conversation with the author. In fact, the US media often give the misleading impression that Fordo is outside the IAEA inspection regime and that the atomic agency would fail to detect any weapons grade enrichment and or military diversion.

Conclusion: Need for new US-Iran dialogue
In conclusion, there are compelling reasons for a bilateral US-Iran dialogue that would cover both the nuclear standoff as well as a host of regional issues, including Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. Indeed there is more than sufficient reason for a superpower and a regional power to set aside their hesitations and engage in face-to-face communication on a broad range of issues of mutual concern.

With respect to Syria, Iran has endorsed Egypt's proposal for a four-country contact group consisting of Egypt, Turkey, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, which is a timely regional initiative to address the deadly Syrian quagmire. Lakhdar Brahimi, the UN special envoy on Syria, has explicitly opposed the idea of foreign intervention in Syria, and the economically hard-pressed Europeans simply lack the resources to embark on a Libyan-style "no-fly" operation. These, together with the huge influx of radical Jihadists into the Syrian civil war, raise the chances for the regional effort mentioned above. The Israelis and their lobbyists in Washington may dread the mere thought of a behind-the-scene US-Iran talks, yet few in the US nowadays fail to recognize the importance of such an initiative.

and......

http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/09/02/press-tv-nato-secretly-authorizes-syria-attack/

Press TV: NATO Secretly Authorizes Syria Attack

Nato Secretly Authorizes Syrian Attack

———-

By Press TV and Gordon Duff

——–

Monday, August 28, 2012, in a meeting in Brussels, NATO military leaders in consultation with “telephonic liaison” with officers of military forces in several former Soviet Republics, major African states, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states came to a combined decision to act against Syria.

Two issues were on the agenda:

How climate change in Greenland will effect geopolitics, immigration and military affairs for the EU and

Syria and the potential for Russian and Chinese intervention.

Iran was not an official agenda item but it is an unspoken conclusion that, if China and/or Russia stand aside for interference by NATO in Syria’s internal affairs, this will be seen as an authorization for incursions into Iran, a systematic “Balkanization” based on a prescribed formula of “manufactured and simulated internal political and social strife.”

No announcement was made, no plans or timetable published, simply a vote on authorization of force which passed unanimously by member and included non-member states unanimously.

News stories throughout North America and Europe earlier in the day were filled with reports of mass killings by the Syrian Army and the presence of Iranian troops in Syria. True or not, these stories represent a pre-staging for the NATO conference.

The critical reporting issue involves rhetoric. We moved, yesterday, from discussions of “fighting” to “systematic execution of hundreds of civilians.”

No video nor photos were included to verify neither claims nor sources given other than reports from “rebel forces.”

Recent consultation with friends in the Pentagon as to Syria’s air defense system indicated that the US has, in place, a play to destroy the command and control capability of Syria’s system.

The problems are twofold:

Russian technicians man the Syrian system

The S300P2 system Syria uses is extremely “robust”

An additional political consideration is a simple one, there is no UN authorization. Both Russia and China have vetoed even sanctions against Syria much less authorized an attack.

Thus, there is no existing authority capable of justifying an attack.

In an interview this week at the NAM (Non-Aligned Movement) conference in Tehran, attended by 120 member states, a huge defeat for NATO interests in the area, this interview yielded some substantive and surprising facts.

Press TV: Certain powers have been trying to isolate Iran, actually, by not holding such a conference at such a high ranking level. As you said, this all has failed.

Now tell us about all the sanctions against Iran which have propagated against Iran, that Iran should be isolated, but as you said it’s all been failed. What is really important is that the agenda of the 688-point draft document which talked about, as you call and urge all countries to make the world free from any nuclear weapons.

You were a senior expert in the IAEA as an inspector. Tell us about that and also with the particular focus on Israel which has not yet signed up to the NPT.

Abu Shadi: I oppose strongly any kind of accusation on any state based on intelligence information. All the accusations given to the nuclear program in Iran is based only on intelligence information. There is no single proof that Iran is deviating from its commitment from the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

I am very surprised that the Security Council took four decisions, sanctions against Iran just because of rumors that the intelligence source may think there is something.

I think this policy should be changed. The Security Council and its way of veto, and its limited number only to the big powers should be changed. I think that will also be one of the points to be addressed in this conference. I believe strongly that that situation, which is actually politically influenced by the West, should be changed.

With respect to your second part about the NPT, in fact, almost all the states in the world respects the Non-Proliferation [Treaty] except the five weaponized states, which they should reduce their weapons which didn’t happen up until today, and the three or four states which did not sign the NPT including Israel. Israel is the only state in the Middle East who did not sign the NPT.

None of the Western countries who are accusing not only Iran but before also Iraq, Libya, Syria and even Egypt, did not consider any accusation to what the Israelis are doing. I believe this bias in the international organization should be stopped.

Shadi makes some particularly interesting points and raises some concerns few had noticed. His most damning statement, of course, is that the Security Council, a carryover from a war 70 years ago, certainly a demonstration of oligarchic rule at the United Nations, has been directed at Iran.

In particular, he notes that the council’s unilateral and undemocratic decisions, followed by nations, China and Russia, who defended Syria, were aimed at Iran but backed by no presentation of facts or even qualified intelligence assessments. In fact, since Colin Powell’s humiliating WMD presentation before the UN, no “American fact” has been taken seriously nor is likely to.

CNN quotes a top Powell aid:

A former top aide to Colin Powell says his involvement in the former secretary of state’s presentation to the United Nations on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction was “the lowest point” in his life.

“I wish I had not been involved in it,” says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a longtime Powell adviser who served as his chief of staff from 2002 through 2005. “I look back on it, and I still say it was the lowest point in my life.”

ACTUAL RISKS AND RAMIFICATIONS

Top intelligence analysts in private consultation fear a larger Middle East war. “Russia and China won’t stand back, not with the US planning a unilateral move on Africa and its resources. It’s like 1947 again with Truman and the Marshall plan, encirclement, but a war over, not just resources but a world war against what has now seen as the real threat, what Americans call the “middle class.”

Thus, taking Syria without taking Iran is “not in the cards.” Here I return to the words of H. G. Wells, in his War of the Worlds. His grasp in this fiction well over a century old reflects on our times in a curious and wonderfully literate manner:

“No one would have believed in the last years of the nineteenth century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man’s and yet as mortal as his own; that as men busied themselves about their various concerns they were scrutinised and studied, perhaps almost as narrowly as a man with a microscope might scrutinise the transient creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water.

Yet across the gulf of space, minds that are to our minds as ours are to those of the beasts that perish, intellects vast and cool and unsympathetic, regarded this earth with envious eyes, and slowly and surely drew their plans against us.

The immediate pressure of necessity has brightened their intellects, enlarged their powers, and hardened their hearts. And looking across space with instruments, and intelligences such as we have scarcely dreamed of…

And we men, the creatures who inhabit this earth, must be to them at least as alien and lowly as are the monkeys and lemurs to us. The Martians seem to have calculated their descent with amazing subtlety–their mathematical learning is evidently far in excess of ours–and to have carried out their preparations with a well-nigh perfect unanimity.”

Martians, this is how NATO and Israel look on the world, as expressed through the prose of Wells. Their gaze “cool and unsympathetic,” as drone warfare and their plans, calculated acts of false flag terror, kidnappings, assassinations, the abomination of mythical news reporting.

The end of the road, this path of “hubris” could well be world war, least of all fuel price increases that collapse the currencies and economies.

Talking of death is nothing as we are now pre-staged to look on life as nothing, all victims are “militants” if you want them dead or “collateral damage” when you err.

Iran’s position chairing NAM makes them a harder target. The general criticism by many NAM members, the dictatorial rule of the United Nations by the Security Council, has not prevented the Syrian conflict from becoming a threat to world peace.

For Iran, their choice seems, on the surface, to be in aiding Syria, negotiations, using oil leverage with India, China and others and predicting how the west is plotting.

If Iran falls, it will be only another domino.

Catharsis Ours

Tuesday, September 4, 2012

World War 3 Watch - As Fall arrives and the world watches to see whether War with Iran and / or Syria ( or a wider Middle East War ) breaks out , three articles to consider regarding the geopolitical chessboard