April 2, 2003

Hitler or Bush - Poland or Iraq

====================================================
"Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant"

(They make a place into a barren wasteland
and then call it peace.)

- Galgacus, Caledonian chief about the Roman Empire
quoted by Tacitus in 'Agricola,' 30)
====================================================

1. Who said the following?

Was it Hitler to German's living under 'tyranny' in Poland
or Bush to Iraqi's living under 'tyranny' in Iraq?

"We're coming with a mighty force to end the reign
of your oppressors. We are coming to bring you
food and medicine and a better life. And we will
not stop. We will not relent until your country is
free."

Answer:

 http://www.canada.com/national/features/iraq/story.html?id=9BEF17C1-26 4C-48DA-BC9D-2054981258F7

2. What invasion is being described here? Poland or Iraq?

I removed the obvious clues from the text.

"The first wartime news reports illustrate the regime's skillful propaganda. Footage depicting an artillery barrage against a frontier town, and of refugees who had fled the regime to escape persecution, illustrates the Supreme Leader's claimed justification for invasion.

Scenes of homeland security preparations in major cities, the call-up of reservists, and an armaments factory show the nation's preparations. In the enemy-controlled port of X, troops fire the war's first shots as they assault the city's post office, where regime-sympathizing guerrillas were barricaded.

The lightning thrust of the army shows infantry and armor acting with battlefield discipline and coordination remarkable for a combat- inexperienced force. Scenes of a sortie and the point-blank bombardment against the enemy's bases are included.

The Supreme Leader's dramatic appearances were liberally included in the campaign films. Here is The Supreme Leader at war: grim and calculating at a military conference, light- hearted among soldiers at an army field kitchen, proud and confident while reviewing his advancing infantry, apprehensive and excited when watching the climatic bombardment of the enemy's capital.

Poland or Iraq?

 http://www.ihffilm.com/20.html

====================================================

Analysis: The Poland/Iraq comparison is much, much stronger than outlined above.

First, consider the parallel with NATO and Hitler's Axis powers. Hitler used his defense/military treaties to drag other countries into his wars. Bush tried to do the same with NATO. Clinton did the first dry run for this abuse of NATO in Yugoslavia. Even more repugnant is how Bush used the UN inspections for what was essentially a reconaissance mission prior to the war.

The WW II comparision gets even closer when you recall Hitler's siege of Stalingrad and Leningrad. Hitler was thwarted at Stalingrad after trying to take the city street-by-street, house-by-house. Recall also Hitler's desire for Russian oil:

 http://www.thehistorychannel.co.uk/classroom/gcse/staling.htm

"The Battle of Stalingrad (August 1942 - February 1943) was the decisive World War II Soviet victory that stopped the German southern advance and turned the tide of the war. At Stalingrad Soviet armies began the series of offensives that were to take them to Berlin.

The first onslaught of Operation Barbarossa in 1941 had carried the German armies to the outskirts of Moscow and Leningrad. In summer 1942 Hitler's main target was the oil fields of the Caucasus - their capture would deprive the Russians of their fuel supply."

Hitler treated Leningrad much like Basra is being treated now. Leningrad was surrounded and shelled for 2+ years, its residents starving and freezing, along with the German troops surrounding it. Sounds like Basra and Baghdad, except that Axis-of-Oil forces are cooking in the desert heat, instead of the winter cold.

Now I put it to you: BUSH HAS ALREADY WON THE WAR. Not the war to oust Saddam, but the REAL objectives of Gulf War II (or WW Dubya), have already been achieved: THE OIL FIELDS HAVE BEEN SECURED. The major cities of Iraq will be treated much like Leningrad. The real war is won, done, over. The oil fields are under US/UK control. The US will keep up the show for a while, at least until UN and grassroots pressure can successfully stop it (or appear to stop it).

How could such an obvious goal be so well buried? Certainly the in-bedded media are being led around by the nose, touting the goal of eliminating WMD, and censoring enything else. Foreign press, to their credit, diligently reports on civilian casualties. All this leaves the war's real goal obscured: THE OIL FIELDS HAVE BEEN SECURED.

One needs to look back to Gulf War I to see the gap between spin and truth. Prior to ground forces invading Kuwait and Iraq in Gulf War I, the US staged a marine invasion from the Gulf, as practice for the inevitable invasion of Iraq. Of course, this was all for show, as the real invasion took place by armored columns that circled around from the south into Iraq. The Iraqis fell for the psyop by redeploying their forces to defend the coast, making an easy "victory" for the U.S. Gulf War I's goals were complete: KUWAIT'S OIL FIELDS WERE SECURED.

Jump ahead to WW Dubya. Six months of propaganda told the whole world this was about "regime change," "freeing" the cities, and eliminating WMD. Saddam's forces were deployed to defend the cities, the oil fields left relatively unprotected. A big show was made of the rush to Basra and Baghdad; this show is still on. Yet the real goal is quietly being played out in the desert oil fields, as they are secured by special forces. The US and UK can sit back for years if they like, and wait out the surrender of the cities. (But THE OIL FIELDS HAVE BEEN SECURED!)

The southern oil fields are now occupied by U.S. troops and armor; protected by helicopters. The past two days revealed the push to secure the oil fields near Kirkuk. Once Kirkuk's oil fields are safely in Bush's hands, the Axis-of-Oil's victory will be complete.

Endgame? A diminished Iraq, the no-fly zones essentially becoming 2 new 'states,' and Saddam (if he survivies) left with no source of oil revenue (and thus no power). Even if Bush is impeached, tried as a war criminal, or loses the next election, he has won. THE OIL FIELDS HAVE BEEN SECURED. The bankers, Bilderbergers, and elite will be satisfied. And the American public, satisfied with another 10-15 years of cheap fuel (subsidized by war), will soon slip back into its historical amnesia as the television repeats its comfortable lies ad nauseum.


Postscript: Admittedly absent from the analysis is Irael's influence in pushing for this war, though should the war drag on, it is clearly for Israel's benefit, and not necessarily in the interest of the US.