top
Iraq
Iraq
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

U.S. - IRAQ INVASION LIKELY TO BEGIN WITH STATE of the UNION, Tuesday

by Michael C. Ruppert
U.S. - IRAQ INVASION LIKELY TO BEGIN WITH STATE of the UNION, Tuesday

U.S. - IRAQ INVASION LIKELY TO BEGIN WITH STATE of the UNION, Tuesday

by
Michael C. Ruppert

January 24, 2003, 1930 PST (FTW) - Serious international developments are indicating that the first stages of the U.S. invasion of Iraq will begin unilaterally no later than next Wednesday and most likely as the President delivers his State of the Union address to Congress on Tuesday night.

The Associated Press reported today, in a story little noticed by mainstream American press, that the Japanese government had today urged all Japanese citizens to leave Iraq as soon as possible. Japan has large numbers of its nationals working in Iraq in various trade and oil-related business ventures. According to a second report today on CNN Headline News the Japanese advisory was specific that all Japanese citizens should be out of the country by next Wednesday at the latest.

The Japanese alert was followed by a simultaneous advisory from the U.S. State Department issuing a worldwide alert to all Americans traveling overseas. According to another AP story, State Department officials tried to downplay the significance of the warning, "but officials were unable to say when the last such advisory had been issued." A worldwide alert for U.S. citizens is extremely rare and suggests that the administration is concerned about a global backlash against Americans traveling overseas. Cautionary advisories are normally isolated to specific countries or geographic regions.

The invasion of Iraq will most likely commence with a massive aerial campaign in which the U.N. and many military analysts have predicted widespread collateral damage with heavy civilian casualties. One recent UN estimate suggested that the total Iraqi casualty count for the entire operation could exceed 500,000.

This decision should not be taken as a surprise. In recent weeks support for the obvious U.S. intentions, both worldwide and at home, has been declining rapidly. At the time this story was written a contemporaneous CNN poll showed that 62% of those responding believed that the United States should not attack Iraq without UN approval. Politically, the Bush administration has seen that this situation is not going to improve. Every delay in an attack to which the administration has already committed not only risks greater military, political and economic opposition but also increases the risk that U.S. ground forces will be engaged in desert fighting in hot summer weather. Recent moves by both the French and Russian governments to approve new trade and development agreements with the Hussein government might also weaken U.S. economic control in a post-Saddam regime.

With crude oil prices at two-year highs and with U.S. oil reserves at 27-year lows the signs of a crumbling U.S. economy made themselves felt again today with a more than 200 point drop in the Dow Jones Industrial average. The Bush administration has apparently decided to roll the dice now in a go-for-broke imperial conquest that has as its primary objective the immediate control of 11 per cent of the world's oil reserves.

In many previous stories FTW has documented how the Iraqi invasion is but the first in a series of sequential worldwide military campaigns to which the United States has committed. All of these are based upon globally dwindling oil supplies and the pending economic and human consequences of that reality. On January 21st, CNN Headline News acknowledged, for the first time, the reality of Peak Oil and accurately stated that "all the cheap oil there is has been found." The story also acknowledged that there was only enough oil left to sustain the planet for thirty to forty years and that what oil remained was going to become increasingly more expensive to produce and deliver.

It is likely that the resiliency of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, in his effort to resist U.S.-inspired strikes by wealthy Venezuelan industrialists, has had an impact on this decision by the Bush administration. Venezuela, which is the third largest foreign importer of oil to the U.S., has seen its U.S. deliveries cut to a fraction of normal levels in recent weeks. Within the last week oil analysts have been predicting shortages and price spikes similar to those of 1973-4 if U.S. oil stocks were not replenished quickly. The administration's apparent decision to launch the attacks against Iraq appears to be at least a partial acknowledgement that Chavez is successfully resisting U.S. pressure to oust him.

Chavez angered multinational investors and financiers recently by moving to increase the share of oil profits retained in Venezuela for the benefit of its people.

Today's announcements signal that the world is entering a period of danger not seen for forty years. That the announcements from the Japanese government and the State Department came on the same day that the Department of Homeland Security became active and its Secretary Tom Ridge was sworn in seems an unlikely coincidence. Previous reporting from FTW had indicated that even massive protests and non-violent global resistance would prove ineffective in preventing an Iraqi invasion. And our predictions that the Bush junta had prepared for all the worst-case scenarios, including domestic unrest and worldwide opposition appear to be vindicated.

The administration has clearly issued a statement to the world. "Screw you. We're going to play this game any way you want to play it. And we're ready for anything that comes."

Only time will tell if they are correct.

http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/012403_invasion.html

Add Your Comments

Comments (Hide Comments)
by this thing here
"War as continuation of the abscence of politics by other means." - J. Baudrillard

because the american government, for decades, has no policy regarding the middle east, it will have war. because the american government has no consistently applied principles regarding the middle east, it will have war. because the american government has failed to do the hard work of diplomacy, it will have the easy work. war.

this second war against iraq is not a sign of success, or a sign of brilliant policy and principle in action. it is a symptom of the abject failure of the american government in dealing diplomatically, economically, and politically with the middle east.

the american government has failed so badly, for so long, that it is sadly true when many say, "what other choice do we have but war?"

the question that has to be asked is: what is the cause of terrorism? what is the cause of saddam?

i don't buy it that these things are random and arbitrary. that little fairies sprinkled some evil dust over the middle east, and from out of nowhere, up springs hezbollah, or saddam, or osama bin laden, or al-qaida.

nor do i buy it that it is all the fault of islamic culture. or that arab people are racially inferior to western people, which essentially is what that theory is trying to say in a nice way.

nor do i buy it that the entire thing is all america's fault.

but unfortunately, looking back on history, the crap and the shit and anger and the hatred that we know well today goes a long, long way back. america and europe have their finger prints all over it.

iraq had a government. it wanted to nationalize it's oil. britain and america said no. ever since then, iraq has been a home of coups and despots and oppression. iran had a government. it wanted to nationalize it's oil. america said no. ever since then, there has been despots, revolutions, and religious extremeists.

i think it is blind and idiotic to assume that these failures of the past have no bearings on the events of today. i think that the failures of european, and now primarily american, policy in the middle east has led to hatred and animosity, the fuel of terrorism, and the political capital of ruthless leaders like saddam. both terrorists and despots THRIVE on that hatred. but the point is, they are symptoms of it. when you have hatred like that, you will have osama and saddam.

the problem becomes how does the american government deal with symptoms, when the underlying disease is that lingering hatred? do you treat the symptoms, or do you tackle the disease?

and it is sad that the answer that my government wants to give, is to treat merely and only the symptoms. with war, no less. war as a failed policy by other means. this is treating an infected, open wound, by rubbing it with feces. this is pouring fuel on a fire. this is treating hate with hate.

for a net gain of what?

how many wars will it take to get people to stop hating you?

and the american government will say, "it could take a few. or could take an infinite amount."

how many people have to die before there's nobody left to kill?

"and the american government will say, "maybe a few. maybe millions."

how much fecal matter can be rubbed on an open wound to prevent infection?

how much fuel can be poured on a fire until it goes out?

how much more paint does it take to paint yourself out of a corner?

if you kill someone enough, will they like you?

how hard do you have to press a gun into someone's ribs until they like you?

how long do you have to keep it there to keep them liking you?

how much more occupation will it take until there are no more terrorists in israel?

how much more suicide bombings will it take until there is no more occupation of palestine?

how many more wars will america have to fight until there are no more more terrorists?

how many more wars will america have to fight until there are no more saddams?

how many more decades of forcing a failed policy does it take to make up for decades of forcing a failed policy?

for a net gain of what...

saddam's about to get his ass kicked back to allah.

america's about to win that minor battle in a big way.

but america's fixin' to lose the big war just the same...

it's not about the fight, or saddam, or the invasion. it's about what comes after. that's where the road is going to divide on america real quick.

by valeriefromthe916 (theoriginalcoyote2003 [at] hotmail.com)
damnit amen to that. this government that i have just been privaleged to grow up with has made so many fucking mistakes its not even funny. bush has blinders on, he wants war because its all he can do now.

i wish so badly i could just tell him face to face how wrong he is... he needs to be told that hes in the wrong. hes going to kill millions of people, even his own, because he wants his fucking oil and respect from the middle east. fuck that. it pisses me off that we dont even get a goddamned say in this whole thing, we're just along for the ride. it will not suprise me if bushs little invasion sparks a nuclear war- hell if i were hussein, thats how i'd sure react. bush is on very very weak ground for his attacks. us amercans are going to feel the brunt of this war because in a short time the whole entire world will hate us. hate. its a strong word, but right now....its what bush is acting on. hate and greed. fuck this.
by and it was almost over
I'd take pity on the American people, who I'd have seen in massive demos on the news, and I'd target the White House and Dick Cheney's nuclear bunker in his house. I'd get the home addresses of everyone in the White House. Those are the places where I'd launch my strikes, whatever they would be.

But of course, then the American people would freak like they did on 9/11 and another Bush would come along and be raised into power. His name would be Lieberman.

The best we can hope for is that Saddam can keep the oil fields aflame long enough to make it pointless for the Bushies to be there. As it is the troops are going to get cancer - they're supposed to use DU again - and whatever else from when the fires start.

I saw a UK group that's trying to work with the military to ensure that civilians have a way out, and aren't just trapped.
by Chuck Tichenor Sr.
Why don't the Rhinestone Cowboy give all this important information to the American People and to those countries who ponder joing a coalition but are in the dark about Mr. Bush's great revelations he will make about Arak, Oh yes he promised that Colin Powell would handle that little chore, is your head spinning Mr Powell, you are pushed behind the gun
the Gun that may not be smoking.
all we want are the fact's Man What are yo hiding and oh' yes what kind of baloney is that statement about the economy still growing just not fast enough ..Wrong!
Can you get your head out of that silver lineing long enough to look around you Mr. president I notice wherever you are surrounded by a group of your great admirer's, Sucker's, I call them I am a patriotic veteran of Korean day's but I f you won't give us facts then no american blood for oil. Chuck
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$210.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network