So sad to see some otherwise bright people not quite up to scratch with the ongoing attempt by the US at regime change in Venezuela.
Maybe they've never heard of the CIA coups in Iran (1953), Guatemala (1954), or Chile (1973), to name but the tip of the US regime change iceberg last century. But surely, Iraq (2003), Honduras (2009), Libya (2011), and Syria (2011-) have lingered in their memory?
I wish.
So here, I think, is really all you really need to know about what's going on in Venezuela, which is to say all you really need to know about what is going on in the minds of the neocon/ziocon crazies who hold the levers of power in Washington:
"Every ten years or so, the US needs to pick up some small, crappy little country and throw it against the wall, just to show the world we mean business."
Learn those words by heart. They're standard operating procedure for imperial America, and for as long as it believes it has an unfettered right to interfere in, undermine, sanction, or invade other countries in order to facilitate its global corporate agenda of pillage and plunder, they will remain relevant.
The words, of course, come from US neocon warmonger Michael Ledeen, at a time when he was salivating at the prospect the 2003 US invasion, occupation and destruction of Iraq.
Since that time, Ledeen has been pleased to see the devastation of Libya, and no doubt still has his hopes set on that of Syria. While Iran is currently in his cross hairs, no one, including Venezuela, is safe from the neocon/ziocon lust for blood and domination. As the following full-throated howl from Ledeen makes abundantly clear.
(And do I really need to point out here, that for Ledeen - and Trump neocons/ziocons Bolton, Pompeo and Pence - 'tyrants' are those who resist being rolled by the Americans, and 'would-be revolutionaries' are CIA assets such as Venezuela's current US puppet, Juan Guaido?)
"The tyrants are in a jam, and Machiavelli pronounced tyranny the most unstable form of regime. I'd welcome stronger odors of rot in Caracas and Tehran, but there are some even so. I believe we must act. Speeches and sanctions are not likely to suffice. Our allies and the would-be revolutionaries have well-justified suspicions that, when their lives are on the line, the United States will not send in the Marines. Or even the Air Force. Hope they're wrong." (From What does a successful revolution smell like? Faster, please!, pjmedia.com, 1/3/19)
Get it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Suggested additional reading: "The Plot to Attack Iran, How the CIA and the Deep State Have Conspired to Vilify Iran" by Dan Kovalik 1918,
ISBN 978-1-5107-3934-5.
No index but full of factual information on a number of CIA led coups taken from recently released archives and Wikileaks. This book places too much reliance on oil as a primary motive and not enough detail on the real neocon/ziocon motive to make/remake the Middle East safe for the Bandit State despite the abundant evidence. Although the role of AIPAC and Zionist barbarism is covered.
It is great to see the hegemon, like the emperor, has no clothes!
Viva Venezuela, viva Palestina.
The two most salient points being Caracas and Tehran. I have read an analysis which suggested the 'Tehran' aspect of this is dependant on the US acquiring a stronghold in Venezuela, largely to do with oil. I would be interested in your take on this MERC. Are the two interdependent? I'm not sure, I feel the US is antogonising in Venezuela - much like your article suggests - just because. Another topic I have found a surprising ambivalence about is Julian Assange. Not sure why, particularly from those I would expect to hold more skeptical view.
I'm speechless. "A FAIR survey of US opinion journalism found no voices in elite corporate media that opposed regime change in Venezuela." (30/4)
That means the New York Times and Washington Post, among others. Both are regularly recycled in the SMH. Today's SMH ran a pro-Guaido story on the subject from the Miami Herald, side by side with a commentary by... Guaido!
Jesus wept!
Anonymous 2. There was some comment (some of it truly anti-semitic, unfortunately) about this in Off-Guardian yesterday or the day before - look for the comment by George Cornell and the ensuing comments here:
https://off-guardian.org/2019/05/01/zero-percent-of-elite-commentators-oppose-regime-change-in-venezuela/
The article is that by FAIR that MERC mentioned. As an aside, real anti-semitism just buys into the Zionist narrative.
The pitch in the comment there is that Venezuela has been anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian for a while. I don't buy that as a rationale for the current regime change pressure (all in the name of democracy of course). If it were then why are they not pushing for regime change in Ireland. On the other hand, if the US decides to attack Iran - and the drums of war are sounding - there will have to be a backup oil supply. Iran will almost certainly have the capacity and the will to close the Straits of Hormuz, thereby blocking most Gulf oil supplies to the rest of the world. Venezuela would be able to serve that purpose if under US control. In fact, Iran does not have to do anything. Just threatening to do so would make oil tankers going there uninsurable. Watch out for the price at the bowser.
On the other hand, this current Venezuela debacle must surely be making some of those who continue to believe our "elite" media have second thoughts - see MERC's comment above.
"Let's be absolutely clear, America is an oil company. With an army." George Carlin
Post a Comment