By Steven Jonas, MD
In 1846, following the annexation of Texas in 1845, President James K. Polk, a Democrat, took the United States to War with Mexico, claiming that the Mexican Army had “spilled American blood” on U.S. soil (http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/379134/Mexican-American-War). Late in 1847, a young first-term Whig Congressman from Illinois introduced into the House what came to be known as the “Spot Resolutions” (http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/lincoln-resolutions/). In it he requested that the exact spot where the supposed Mexican attack on US troops took place be determined.
There were in fact at the time grave doubts, especially among Whigs who were opposed to further southwestward expansion of the US and abolitionists who were opposed to further expansion of the territories anywhere in which slavery would be legal, that Polk’s claim was accurate. The Resolutions were never acted upon in the House, the Mexican War was won by the US which resulted in a very significant expansion of the nation, and the Congressman lost at the next elections, in part because of his sponsorship of the Spot Resolutions. Interestingly enough, in his career Abraham Lincoln won only one other election at the national level.
In 1898, following a long period of revolt in Cuba against their Spanish imperial overlords, the US entered into what came to be known as the Spanish-American War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish%E2%80%93American_War). The signal event was the sinking of the U.S. battleship Maine in Havana harbor. Strongly pro-war forces in the U.S. claimed that the Spanish had sunk the ship and that claim was taken for fact in the United States. The Spanish claimed that there had been an internal explosion. The actual cause of the sinking is still in dispute, but Cuba became a U.S. colony in all but name until the Revolution of 1959. Following the defeat of the Spanish in the Philippines, the U.S. fought a four-year war against Filipino independence forces. The Islands then became a U.S. colony until the end of World War II.
In 1967, the “Tonkin Gulf” incident (see Appendix) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Tonkin_incident), led to the significant expansion of the U.S. War on Viet Nam, later expanded to Cambodia and Laos. The Johnson Administration used the incident (actually two separate incidents, the first of which was never reported by the Administration), claiming that Vietnamese motor torpedo boats had fired on a US destroyer, to justify the very significant escalation of the conflict it subsequently undertook. In fact, it was subsequently determined that in the first the US vessel fired three rounds, the Vietnamese none and in the second, no Vietnamese vessels were even present on the scene.
In 2001 of course came “9/11,” the true story of which is matter of major ongoing dispute (https://www.greanvillepost.com/2012/10/09/911-revisited-again/#more-40700) (although one would never know that for the dispute receives no attention in anything approaching the “mainstream media”). But certainly all of the claims of the Bush Administration that Saddam Hussein had “weapons of mass destruction” and was possibly (or surely, according to some war-hawks like British Prime Minister [otherwise known as “Bush’s poodle] Tony “They’re ready to attack with WMD in 45 minutes” Blair) organizing to use them came to naught. One of the two most embarrassing moments in the career of former General and Secretary of State Colin Powell came at the famous UN Security Council “biological weapons” moment. It proved to be entirely false. (The other, much less well-known, was that as a young officer in Viet Nam, Powell was part of the command structure that at first attempted to cover up what came to be known as the My Lai Massacre [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Lai_Massacre]. Whether he was actually aware of what he was doing has never been made clear.) And of course during the whole run-up to the invasion the Chief UN Weapons Inspector, Hans Blix, was reporting that he could find no WMDs (http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/17862-msnbc-documentary-of-the-bush-war-on-iraq-filling-in-some-gaps).
[pullquote]“Nothing ever changes in US foreign policy——the stunning crimes, the sickening hypocrisy, the false flag events manufactured to trigger wars, justify coups, and grossly mislead public opinion; the slavish collaboration of the media and hawkishness of the Congress——because such murderous lies and policies represent the objectives, methods of governance and interests of the ruling plutocracy. It’s a class question. Until the American people get rid of the plutocrats and their hanger-ons, such atrocities will continue as day follows night.” —P. Greanville [/pullquote]
And so, US military history is filled with false flags and possible false flags (and these aren’t the only ones). As for the moral high ground claimed in the Syria situation, the U.S. does have its own long history in chemical/biological warfare. Just to name a few examples, during the Indian Wars of the 1870s, the U.S. Army purposely sent smallpox infected blankets onto Indian Reservations. The devastating results on humans of the use of the defoliant Agent Orange in Viet Nam are still being felt by both Viet Nam and surviving U.S. Servicemen. (It happens that last November 22 [!] a good friend of mine, ex-Marine Jack Dalton, one of the last surviving Viet Nam vets poisoned by Agent Orange, died of complications of that poisoning.) The effects of the use of depleted uranium artillery ordnance will likely be felt in Iraq for decades. The US was at least knowledgeable of if not complicit in the use of chemical weapons by Hussein in the Iraq-Iran War (http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2013/08/28/cia-files-implicate-washington-in-chemical-weapons-use-agains-iran/). And of course the US is the only nation ever to have used THE weapon of mass destruction.
As for Syria, doubts have been raised, apparently even by US intelligence about just who used the current batch of chemical weapons (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/us-syria-conflict_n_3834544.html?ir=World&utm_campaign=082913&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-world&utm_content=Title). There is condemnation of possible U.S. intervention in the Syrian civil war from abroad, by parties not directly connected to the conflict in any way (http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-opinion/defending-the-indefensible-in-syria/article5069786.ece). The independence of Doctors Without Borders, which has given credence to the charge that the weapons were used by the Syrian military, has been challenged (http://www.syrianews.cc/doctors-borders-war-propaganda-syria/).
And so, is this another in the history of U.S. false flag attacks (in this case organized by whom — BIG mystery) produced to justify going to war, sometimes to expand territory, sometimes to prevent the peaceful expansion of socialism, and sometimes to create, revive, and further Permanent War (URL: http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18007-the-permanence-of-permanent-war; http://truth-out.org/buzzflash/commentary/item/18021-permanent-war-offers-profits-for-the-ruling-class-ashes-for-the-rest)? Sen. John McCain, one of the most permanent of the Permanent Warriors (remember “50 years in Iraq”) is beating the Syrian War Drums most loudly. But if President Obama thinks that he would be getting any credit from the Republicans if does go ahead with any kind of attack, he should take a look at what former Sec. of Defense Rumsfeld had to say about his approach (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/08/29/donald-rumsfeld-obama-syria_n_3836355.html).
In its history the U.S. has been roped into war by false flag attacks or possible false flag attacks on a number of occasions (and the list above is not a complete one in any way). We can only hope that this time around, President Obama, who seems always to, like Bill Clinton, just crave Republican approval, even though deep down he must know that he will never get it, will not do what many (but not all) of them (and many military-industrial complex captive Democrats too) want him to do, and that is just continue the Permanent War, for no good reason (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/borowitzreport), other than just continuing it.
Senior Contributing Editor Steven Jonas, MD, MPH is a Professor of Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook University (NY) and author/co-author/editor/co-editor of over 30 books. Besides his work with TGP, he serves as a columnist for BuzzFlash@Truthout, and Editorial Director of and a Contributing Author to The Political Junkies for Progressive Democracy (http://thepoliticaljunkies.org/). Dr. Jonas’ latest book is The 15% Solution: How the Republican Religious Right Took Control of the U.S., 1981-2022: A futuristic Novel, (Brewster, NY, Trepper & Katz Impact Books, Punto Press Publishing, 2013, http://www.puntopress.com/jonas-the-15-solution-hits-main-distribution/), and available on Amazon.
_______________________________
APPENDIX
“We still seek no wider war.” – Lyndon Johnson, August 4, 1964
There were thunderstorms over the Gulf of Tonkin on the evening of August 3, 1964. Two American warships, the USS Maddox and the USS Turner Joy were patrolling the area ten miles off the east coast of North Vietnam. The night before, three North Vietnamese PT boats had attacked the Maddox in retaliation for South Vietnamese commando raids on North Vietnamese military bases on July 31.
As South Vietnamese boats continued to harass North Vietnamese defenses along the coastline, electronic instruments on the U.S. warships gave readings indicating that another North Vietnamese torpedo attack was underway. The Maddox and the Turner Joy fired on the apparent targets without actually sighting the enemy. Despite the lack of information and the plausible doubts about whether a second North Vietnamese attack was really taking place, President Johnson followed the recommendation of his joint chiefs of staff and Defense secretary Robert McNamara and ordered the first U.S. bombing raid against North Vietnam.
Appearing at a late-night televised press conference on August 4, forty-six years ago this evening, President Johnson publicized what would become known as the Gulf of Tonkin Incident:
“The determination of all Americans to carry out our full commitments to the people and to the government of South Vietnam will be redoubled by this outrage. Yet our response, for the present, will be limited and fitting. We Americans know, although others appear to forget, the risk of spreading conflict. We still seek no wider war.”
LBJ signs Tonkin Resolution.
Johnson did not mention the covert Central Intelligence Agency role in the July 31 raids or the absence of definitive confirmation of the second North Vietnamese attack. A few days later, concerned that the American destroyers had fired because of confusion and nervousness, Johnson confided to an aide, “Hell, those dumb stupid sailors were just shooting at flying fish.” Publicly, however, he displayed no traces of doubt. On August 7, with opinion polls showing that 85 percent of Americans support for an increased U.S. role in Vietnam, President Johnson gained congressional passage of the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution. After only forty minutes of deliberation, the House of Representatives unanimously approved the resolution; in the Senate, all but two senators voted for it.
Note how deep the American vessels and their South Vietnamese allies were in North Vietnamese waters. Who was provoking whom?
The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution provided the president the power to “take all necessary steps, including the use of armed forces” to repel attacks and support allies in Southeast Asia. Although it did not specifically include a declaration of war, President Johnson now possessed wide latitude to commit American troops and resources to Vietnam. This power allowed Johnson to support an anti-Communist ally, to honor the containment-of-Communism policy of his slain predecessor, and to increase his popular appeal during the final months of his presidential campaign against Arizona Republican senator Barry Goldwater.
