Crimes of the State

In chess, it is sometimes preferable to sacrifice a high value piece, your queen, bishop, rook or knight, in order to manipulate your opponent into giving up a desired slice of real estate.

Pay close attention to Bush's new strategy, and to his repeated mention of the word "sacrifice", for it may hold the key to understanding what is about to unfold.

A real-world chess "sacrifice" gambit could go something like this.

1. US forces attack the Shi'ite militias in Baghdad.

2. The Shi'ites throughout Iraq retaliate and cut off US supply lines.

3. The US army is overrun in many places suffering huge and catastrophic casualties (the "sacrifice").

4. This stunning defeat causes another "helpful wave of indignation" [1] across the "homeland," preordaining a new US response.

5. The US regime will reinstate the draft, and it will use nuclear weapons in a first strike against Iran, who will be linked to the Shi'ites of Iraq, and thus provide the pretext for this next all-out war.

The pretext to attack Iran becomes the goal of this "sacrifice" ploy, and the scores of dead US troops will be the lives sacrificed (by the criminal
and twice unelected Bush regime) in pursuit of this end.

Many commentators have spoken about the precarious position of US supply lines in Iraq. The army there is high-maintenance, and it cannot last for more than a few weeks without resupply. These supply lines are primarily through Shi'ite controlled territory. This is one reason the "counter-insurgency" (or war of imperial conquest) has focused on Sunni targets thus far. That could all change very rapidly.

Paul Craig Roberts recently wrote:

"By manipulating Bush and provoking a military crisis in which the US stands to lose its army in Iraq, the neoconservatives hope to revive the implementation of their plan for US conquest of the Middle East. They believe they can use fear, "honor," and the aversion of macho Americans to ignoble defeat to expand the conflict in response to military disaster. The neocons believe that the loss of an American army would be met with the electorate's demand for revenge. The barriers to the draft would fall, as would the barriers to the use of nuclear weapons." [2]

To that end, the corporate media (under heavy Zionist influence) has been steadily feeding the public anti-Iran propaganda. Many common citizens now express a bloodlust, and a thirst for preemptive violence toward Iran on message boards across the Internet.

One of the techniques employed was to mistranslate the Iranian president's words [3] time and again (mainly by Israeli propaganda organ MEMRI) to suggest that the Iranian president is threatening an attack on Israel, which his original words in Farsi do not express. It's also an absurd claim, because Israel possesses at minimum 200 nuclear bombs.

 1  |  2