-Caveat Lector-
>
> Krasnaya Zvezda
>
> September 18, 2001
>
> FIRST WAR OF THE 21ST CENTURY
>
> The United States is not ready to fight internationl terrorism The US
> government is drawing the wrong conclusions from this tragedy
>
> Author: Yuri Pankov
>
> [from WPS Monitoring Agency, www.wps.ru/e_index.html]
>
> RELYING ON ITS NATO ALLIES, THE UNITED STATES HOPES TO BE ABLE TO
> DEFEAT TERRORISM ALL ON ITS OWN. LIKEWISE, IT HOPES TO CREATE A WORLD
> TO SUIT ITSELF. WASHINGTON STILL HOPES TO BE ABLE TO TAME TERRORISTS
> AND USE THEM IN FUTURE AGAINST ITS REAL OR IMAGINED ENEMIES.
>
> Several years ago, analysts began to note an increase in the
> numbers of terrorist groups, their size, development of military
> power, and more extensive contacts between them. These assumptions
> were subsequently confirmed when Arab instructors were found to be
> working with guerrilla detachments in Chechnya, and Chechen
> mercenaries in Kosovo; when the flows of money circulating in the
> world of international terrorism were uncovered.
> Washington and some Western capitals apparently drew inadequate
> conclusions at the time, resolving to use the factor of terrorism to
> promote their own goals. First Kosovo and then Macedonia were chosen
> for implementation of the Western theory of "controlled terrorism".
> Terrorists received moral and material support in both cases. Albanian
> terrorist organizations in Yugoslavia even coordinated their actions
> with NATO aviation.
> Russia found itself under unprecedented pressure because of the
> counter-terrorist operation in Chechnya. Emissaries of Chechen
> guerrillas were received in Washington and European capitals, while
> Moscow was threatened with international sanctions. The West was even
> suspected of manipulating the Taliban in order to undermine what
> stability there was on the southern borders of Russia and the CIS.
> It soon became clear that there could be no such thing as
> "controlled terrorism". As soon as terrorists spread their wings, they
> turn against their former patrons. It happened in Kosovo, and
> something similar is now happening in Macedonia. What happened in the
> United States last week is best described by the relatively new term
> "terrorist attack". Some analysts don't rule out the possibility that
> the terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington are just the
> start of a bona fide terrorist war against the United States.
> The US Administration is also talking about a "war" nowadays.
> However, judging by Washington's intention to use bombs against
> terrorists, it appears that the United States doesn't understand what
> kind of war this is going to be. Analysts, including American
> analysts, say traditional weapons and methods typical of conflicts of
> another generation cannot be effective against large-scale terrorism.
> "All too frequently, criminal infrastructures cannot be destroyed
> by our high-precision weapons systems," said General Wayne A. Downing
> of the US special forces, long before the events of September 11. "As
> a rule, these gangs don't have fixed locations and the criminals live
> in densely-populated areas under the guise of ordinary citizens. It is
> there that they hide weapons and ammunition. The use of high-precision
> weapons systems will only result in numerous civilian casualties,
> while the criminals will not be affected." Downing was referring to
> Israel. Short of personnel, Israel could not maintain effective
> control over the security zone in southern Lebanon, from which
> Hezbollah was launching missiles. In desperation, Israel opted to try
> high-precision weapons systems. The results are well known: numerous
> casualties among noncombatants and condemnation of Israel by the
> international community. The terrorists received further confirmation
> of their own immunity.
> If the United States now follows suit, the international support
> it presently has will soon fade. Much will be recalled: Hiroshima and
> Nagasaki, Vietnam, Iraq, Yugoslavia... The air strikes against
> Yugoslavia showed that civilians die under such attacks, while regular
> troops even retain their military hardware, virtually untouched. Small
> gangs and bases in Afghanistan would be even more difficult targets...
> On the other hand, in declaring war on international terrorism,
> the United States should be prepared to effectively defend its own
> territory. Specially-trained armed forces are needed to do so. In the
> United States, this is the job of the National Guard. It is uncertain
> as yet whether the National Guard will be adequate against large armed
> formations, or whether it can be relied on to maintain security for
> the nation and strategic sites. Particularly problematic is the
> security of American companies and embassies in other regions of the
> world, and the security of Washington's NATO allies in Europe.
> War against terrorism on the global scale is primarily about
> politics. This is what Washington needs to think about seriously - the
> Washington which nurtured plans for global dominance and made advances
> to terrorists. It is important for the United States to understand
> that simply increasing military might and attempting to bully the rest
> of the world into submission (including the countries it disdainfully
> calls rogue states) is no solution. Experience shows that terrorism
> knows no borders, it doesn't fear brute force, and it expands rapidly
> under favorable circumstances. And conditions will be favorable - in
> the form of anti-American sentiments - if there are strikes against
> Afghanistan and some other Arab nations.
> But there is a simple and easy way forward for Washington. The
> United States should return to the international community as a fully-
> fledged member, and join other countries in looking for ways of
> countering international terrorism. However, this would mean
> abandoning some US goals. First and foremost, it would have to abandon
> its strategy of a mono-polar world under US dominance.
> The latest reports from Washington indicate that different
> conclusions are being drawn there. Relying on its NATO allies, the
> United States hopes to be able to defeat terrorism all on its own.
> Likewise, it hopes to create a world to suit itself. Washington still
> hopes to be able to tame terrorists and use them in future against its
> real or imagined enemies.
> Moreover, the United States would not mind gaining some political
> dividends from the tragedy. Contrary to all logic, Washington is
> presenting the hijacked airliners as another pretext for a missile
> shield, one which would end strategic parity.
> Washington has also found another pretext for the existence (and
> enlargement?) of NATO. For the first time ever, the Americans intend
> to invoke Article 5 of the NATO founding charter: which stipulates
> joint defense if any NATO member is attacked. It doesn't matter to
> Washington that this document was written under entirely different
> circumstances, and meant to apply to entirely different situations.
> Even the Americans themselves don't know whom NATO members are going
> to fight.
> And yet, Washington is clutching at the tragedy as a precedent,
> probably in order to be able to direct subsequent developments
> according to the same old script. Instead of humanitarian disasters,
> as in Kosovo, terrorist attacks may now be used as an excuse for armed
> aggression.
> Apparently, the United States is still preparing itself for wars
> for global dominance. It is not yet prepared to challenge
> international terrorism, not even morally prepared. We can only hope
> that President Bush's European colleagues will share some of their
> experience with him - if Washington is prepared to listen, that is.
> Unfortunately, not everyone is prepared to learn from the mistakes of
> others.
>
> -------------------------------------------------
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
