US and Pakistan Near Open War

http://www.infowars.com/us-and-pakistan-near-open-war/

Webster Tarpley
Infowars.com
May 23, 2011

China has officially put the United States on notice that Washington’s planned attack on Pakistan will be interpreted as an act of aggression against Beijing. This blunt warning represents the first known strategic ultimatum received by the United States in half a century, going back to Soviet warnings during the Berlin crisis of 1958-1961, and indicates the grave danger of general war growing out of the US-Pakistan confrontation.

“Any Attack on Pakistan Would be Construed as an Attack on China”

Responding to reports that China has asked the US to respect Pakistan’s sovereignty in the aftermath of the Bin Laden operation, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Jiang Yu used a May 19 press briefing to state Beijing’s categorical demand that the “sovereignty and territorial integrity of Pakistan must be respected.” According to Pakistani diplomatic sources cited by the Times of India, China has “warned in unequivocal terms that any attack on Pakistan would be construed as an attack on China.” This ultimatum was reportedly delivered at the May 9 China-US strategic dialogue and economic talks in Washington, where the Chinese delegation was led by Vice Prime Minister Wang Qishan and State Councilor Dai Bingguo.1 Chinese warnings are implicitly backed up by that nation’s nuclear missiles, including an estimated 66 ICBMs, some capable of striking the United States, plus 118 intermediate-range missiles, 36 submarine-launched missiles, and numerous shorter-range systems.

Support from China is seen by regional observers as critically important for Pakistan, which is otherwise caught in a pincers between the US and India: “If US and Indian pressure continues, Pakistan can say ‘China is behind us. Don’t think we are isolated, we have a potential superpower with us,’” Talat Masood, a political analyst and retired Pakistani general, told AFP.2

The Chinese ultimatum came during the visit of Pakistani Prime Minister Gilani in Beijing, during which the host government announced the transfer of 50 state-of-the-art JF-17 fighter jets to Pakistan, immediately and without cost.3 Before his departure, Gilani had stressed the importance of the Pakistan-China alliance, proclaiming: “We are proud to have China as our best and most trusted friend. And China will always find Pakistan standing beside it at all times….When we speak of this friendship as being taller than the Himalayas and deeper than the oceans it truly captures the essence of our relationship.”4 These remarks were greeted by whining from US spokesmen, including Idaho Republican Senator Risch.

The simmering strategic crisis between the United States and Pakistan exploded with full force on May 1, with the unilateral and unauthorized US commando raid alleged to have killed the phantomatic Osama bin Laden in a compound at Abottabad, a flagrant violation of Pakistan’s national sovereignty. The timing of this military stunt designed to inflame tensions between the two countries had nothing to do with any alleged Global War on Terror, and everything to do with the late March visit to Pakistan of Prince Bandar, the Saudi Arabian National Security Council chief. This visit had resulted in a de facto alliance between Islamabad and Riyadh, with Pakistan promising troops to put down any US-backed color revolution in the kingdom, while extending nuclear protection to the Saudis, thus making them less vulnerable to US extortion threats to abandon the oil-rich monarchy to the tender mercies of Tehran. A joint move by Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to break out of the US empire, whatever one may think of these regimes, would represent a fatal blow for the fading US empire in South Asia.

As for the US claims concerning the supposed Bin Laden raid of May 1, they are a mass of hopeless contradictions which changes from day to day. An analysis of this story is best left to literary critics and writers of theatrical reviews. The only solid and uncontestable fact which emerges is that Pakistan is the leading US target — thus intensifying the anti-Pakistan US policy which has been in place since Obama’s infamous December 2009 West Point speech.

Gilani: Full Force Retaliation to Defend Pakistan’s Strategic Assets

The Chinese warning to Washington came on the heels of Gilani’s statement to the Pakistan Parliament declaring: “Let no one draw any wrong conclusions. Any attack against Pakistan’s strategic assets, whether overt or covert, will find a matching response…. Pakistan reserves the right to retaliate with full force. No one should underestimate the resolve and capability of our nation and armed forces to defend our sacred homeland.”5 A warning of full force retaliation from a nuclear power such as Pakistan needs to be taken seriously, even by the hardened aggressors of the Obama regime.

The strategic assets Gilani is talking about are the Pakistani nuclear forces, the key to the country’s deterrent strategy against possible aggression by India, egged on by Washington in the framework of the US-India nuclear cooperation accord. The US forces in Afghanistan have not been able to conceal their extensive planning for attempts to seize or destroy Pakistan’s nuclear bombs and warheads. According to a 2009 Fox News report, “The United States has a detailed plan for infiltrating Pakistan and securing its mobile arsenal of nuclear warheads if it appears the country is about to fall under the control of the Taliban, Al Qaeda or other Islamic extremists.” This plan was developed by General Stanley McChrystal when he headed the US Joint Special Operations Command at Fort Bragg, North Carolina. JSOC, the force reportedly involved in the Bin Laden operation. is composed of Army Delta Force, Navy SEALs and “a high-tech special intelligence unit known as Task Force Orange.” “Small units could seize [Pakistan’s nukes], disable them, and then centralize them in a secure location,” claimed a source quoted by Fox.6

Obama Has Already Approved Sneak Attack on Pakistan’s Nukes

According to the London Sunday Express, Obama has already approved an aggressive move along these lines: “US troops will be deployed in Pakistan if the nation’s nuclear installations come under threat from terrorists out to avenge the killing of Osama Bin Laden… The plan, which would be activated without President Zardari’s consent, provoked an angry reaction from Pakistan officials… Barack Obama would order troops to parachute in to protect key nuclear missile sites. These include the air force’s central Sargodha HQ, home base for nuclear-capable F-16 combat aircraft and at least 80 ballistic missiles.” According to a US official, “The plan is green lit and the President has already shown he is willing to deploy troops in Pakistan if he feels it is important for national security.”7

Extreme tension over this issue highlights the brinksmanship and incalculable folly of Obama’s May 1 unilateral raid, which might easily have been interpreted by the Pakistanis as the long-awaited attack on their nuclear forces. According to the New York Times, Obama knew very well he was courting immediate shooting war with Pakistan, and “insisted that the assault force hunting down Osama bin Laden last week be large enough to fight its way out of Pakistan if confronted by hostile local police officers and troops.”

The Shooting Has Already Started

The shooting between US and Pakistani forces escalated on Tuesday May 17, when a US NATO helicopter violated Pakistani airspace in Waziristan. Pakistani forces showed heightened alert status, and opened fire immediately, with the US helicopter shooting back. Two soldiers at a Pakistani check post on the border in the Datta Khel area were wounded.8

Possible Pakistani retaliation for this border incursion came in Peshawar on Friday, May 20, when a car bomb apparently targeted a 2-car US consulate convoy, but caused no American deaths or injuries. One Pakistani bystander was killed, and several wounded. In other intelligence warfare, Ary One television reported the name of the CIA station chief in Islamabad, the second top US resident spook there to have his cover blown in six months.

US Envoy Grossman Rejects Pakistani Calls To Stop Border Violations

US Special Representative to Afghanistan and Pakistan Marc Grossman, the replacement for the late Richard Holbrooke, on May 19 arrogantly rejected Pakistani calls for guarantees that no more Abottabad-style unilateral operations would be mounted in Pakistan.9 In refusing to offer such assurances, Grossman claimed that Pakistani officials had never demanded respect for their border in recent years.10

In the midst of this strategic crisis, India has gone ahead with inherently provocative scheduled military maneuvers targeting Pakistan. This is the “Vijayee Bhava” (Be Victorious) drill, held in the Thar desert of north Rajastan,. This atomic-biological-chemical Blitzkrieg drill involves the Second Armored Corps, “considered to be the most crucial of the Indian Army’s three principal strike formations tasked with virtually cutting Pakistan in two during a full-fledged war.”11

The Nation: A CIA-RAW-Mossad Pseudo-Taliban Countergang

One way to provide the provocation needed to justify a US-Indian attack on Pakistan would be through an increase in terrorist actions attributable to the so-called Taliban. According to the mainstream Pakistani media, the CIA, the Israeli Mossad, and the Indian RAW (Research and Analysis Wing) have created their own version of the Taliban in the form of a terrorist countergang which they control and direct. According to one account, “Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives have infiltrated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) force in order to destabilize Pakistan.” The former Punjab Regional Commander of the Pakistani Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI), retired Brigadier General Aslam Ghuman, commented: “During my visit to the US, I learned that the Israeli spy agency Mossad, in connivance with Indian agency RAW, under the direct supervision of CIA, planned to destabilize Pakistan at any cost.”12 Was this countergang responsible for last week’s double bombing in Waziristan, which killed 80 paramilitary police?

According to the same account, Russian intelligence “disclosed that CIA contractor Raymond Davis and his network had provided Al-Qaeda operatives with chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, so that US installations may be targeted and Pakistan be blamed….” Davis, a JSOC veteran himself, was arrested for the murder of two ISI agents, but then released by the Pakistani government after a suspicious hue and cry by the State Department.

CIA Claims The New Al Qaeda Boss Lives in Waziristan

If the US needs a further pretext for additional raids, it will also be easy to cite the alleged presence in Waziristan of Saif al-Adel, now touted by the CIA as bin Laden’s likely successor as boss of al Qaeda.13 It is doubtless convenient for Obama’s aggressive intentions that Saif al-Adel can be claimed to reside so close to what is now the hottest border in the world, and not in Finsbury or Flatbush.

In the wake of the unauthorized May 1 US raid, the Pakistani military chief General Kayani had issued his own warning that similar “misadventures” could not be repeated, while announcing that US personnel inside Pakistan would be sharply reduced. In the estimate of one ISI source, there are currently about 7,000 CIA operatives in country, many of them unknown to the Pakistani government. US-Pakistan intelligence sharing has reportedly been downgraded. In response to Kayani’s moves, the CIA limited hangout operation known as Wikileaks once again showed its real nature by attempting to discredit the Pakistan commander with dubious US cable reports that he had demanded more Predator drone attacks, not fewer, in recent years.

Especially since Obama’s West Point speech, the CIA has used Predator drone attacks to slaughter civilians with the goal of fomenting civil war inside Pakistan, leading to a breakup of the country along the ethnic lines of Punjab, Sind, Baluchistan, and Pushtunistan. The geopolitical goal is to destroy Pakistan’s potential to be the energy corridor between Iran and China. Selig Harrison has emerged as a top US advocate for Baluchistan succession.

Since May 1, six reported US Predator drones attacks have slain some 42 Pakistani civilians, goading public opinion into a frenzy of anti-US hatred. In response, a joint session of the Pakistani parliament voted unanimously on May 14 to demand an end to American missile strikes, calling on the government to cut NATO’s supply line to Afghanistan if the attacks should continue.14 Since the Karachi to Khyber Pass supply line carries as much as two thirds of the supplies needed by the Afghanistan invaders, such a cutoff would cause chaos among the NATO forces. All of this points to the inherent insanity of provoking war with the country your supply line runs through.

US Wants to Use Taliban Boss Mullah Omar Against Pakistan

The State Department dropped all preconditions for negotiating with the Taliban back in February, and the US is now reported by the Washington Post to be talking with envoys of Mullah Omar, the legendary one-eyed leader of the Quetta Shura or Taliban ruling council. It is apparent that the US is offering the Taliban an alliance against Pakistan. US regional envoy Grossman is hostile to the Pakistanis, but when it comes to the Taliban he has been nicknamed “Mr. Reconciliation.”15 By contrast, the US is said to be determined to assassinate the head of the Haqqani network using a Bin Laden-type raid. The Pakistanis are equally determined to keep the Haqqani as an ally.

Stock up with Fresh Food that lasts with eFoodsDirect (Ad)

If China stands behind Pakistan, then Russia might be said to stand behind China. Looking forward to the upcoming June 15 meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, Chinese President Hu praised Sino-Russian relations as being “at an unprecedented high point,” with an “obvious strategic ingredient.” In a press conference this week, Russian President Medvedev was obliged indirectly to acknowledge that the much-hyped Obama “reset” with Russia had amounted to very little, since the US ABM missile program in Romania and the rest of eastern Europe, so obviously directed against Russia, means that the START treaty is of dubious value, thus raising the specter of a “new Cold War.” Given the NATO assault on Libya, there would be no UN resolution against Syria, said Medvedev. Putin has been right all along, and Medvedev is trying to imitate Putin to salvage some chance of remaining in power.

Are We in July 1914?

The crisis leading to World War I began with the Sarajevo assassinations of June 28, 1914, but the first major declaration of war did not occur until August 1. In the interim month of July 1914, large parts of European public opinion retreated into a dreamlike trance, an idyllic la-la land of elegiac illusion, even as the deadly crisis gathered momentum. Something similar can be seen today. Many Americans fondly imagine that the alleged death of Bin Laden marks the end of the war on terror and the Afghan War. Instead, the Bin Laden operation has clearly ushered in a new strategic emergency. Forces which had opposed the Iraq war, from MSNBC to many left liberals of the peace movement, are variously supporting Obama’s bloody aggression in Libya, or even celebrating him as a more effective warmonger than Bush-Cheney because of his supposed success at the expense of Bin Laden. In reality, if there were ever a time to mobilize to stop a new and wider war, this is it.

—

This post first appeared on Webster Tarpley’s website.

References

1 http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics/nation/china-asks-us-to-respect-paks-sovereignty-independence/articleshow/8454577.cms

2 “China-Pakistan alliance strengthened post bin Laden,” AFP, May 15, 2011, http://www.sundaytimes.lk/index.php/analysis/7546-china-pakistan-alliance-strengthened-post-bin-laden

3 http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/20/world/asia/20pakistan.html?_r=3

4 http://www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2011/05/08/Gilani-China-best-most-trusted-friend/UPI-96101304911435/

5 http://www.nypost.com/p/news/international/pakistani_pm_regrets_unilateral_GAOWNTpBXGJaJtwzWaZu0K?CMP=OTC-rss&FEEDNAME=

6 Rowan Scarborough,”U.S. Has Plan to Secure Pakistan Nukes if Country Falls to Taliban, Fox News, May 14, 2009.

7 “US ‘To Protect Pakistan,” London Sunday Express, May 15, 2011, http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/246717/US-to-protect-Pakistan-

8 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/17/us-pakistan-nato-idUSTRE74G0PS20110517

9 “US refuses to assure it will not act unilaterally,” http://thenews.jang.com.pk/NewsDetail.aspx?ID=15758

10 “No US assurance on unilateral ops,” http://nation.com.pk/pakistan-news-newspaper-daily-english-online/Politics/20-May-2011/No-US-assurance-on-unilateral-ops

11 “Getting leaner and meaner? Army practices blitzkrieg to strike hard at enemy,” Times of India, May 10, 2011, http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-10/india/29527731_1_three-strike-corps-army-and-iaf-transformational

12 “CIA has created own Taliban to wreak terror havoc on Pakistan, claims Pak paper,” ANI, May 12, http://my.news.yahoo.com/cia-created-own-taliban-wreak-terror-havoc-pakistan-091621821.html

13 “New al-Qaeda chief in North Waziristan,” May 19, 2011

14 http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43033985/ns/world_news-south_and_central_asia/

15 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/8519535/US-steps-up-face-to-face-peace-talks-with-Taliban.html

‘Depleted uranium in Libya will kill, not protect’

NATO is now deeply entrenched in Libya in what looks like a civil war and there is no visible end to the illegal intervention, insists British anti-nuclear activist Kate Hudson from the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

CIA has created own Taliban to wreak terror havoc on Pakistan, claims Pak paper

http://my.news.yahoo.com/cia-created-own-taliban-wreak-terror-havoc-pakistan-091621821.html

Lahore, May 12(ANI): Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) operatives have infiltrated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) force in order to destabilise Pakistan, a Pakistani newspaper has claimed.

Much of the information-gathering network of Pakistan’s supreme security service was curtailed in the country’s tribal areas during former military ruler Pervez Musharraf’s era, consequently giving an edge to America’s CIA, The Nation reported.

The CIA was given direct access to the entire territory of North and South Waziristan, which has since developed its stronghold in the belt, it added.

According to sources, the CIA’s operations, which were suspended in Balochistan, Punjab, Islamabad and other areas of the country after the Raymond Allen Davis (RAD) incident, have also been restored.

Responding to a query, the sources said that the CIA operatives have infiltrated the Taliban and Al-Qaeda networks, and have created their own TTP force, the paper said.

This force has been recruited, trained and equipped by these CIA operatives to target the Pakistan Army personnel, armed forces’ installations, markets, hospitals, schools and public places to destabilise Pakistan, the paper added.

The paper quoted the sources, as claiming that the Soviet Intelligence Agency had already disclosed that CIA contractor Raymond Davis and his network had provided Al-Qaeda operatives with chemical, nuclear and biological weapons, so that US installations may be targeted and Pakistan be blamed, and pressed to do more in areas such as conducting operations in North Waziristan.

“After the civil government justified the CIA operation in Abbottabad all of them have again indulged in their original nefarious activities,” the sources added.

Former ISI Punjab Regional Commander, Brigadier (retired) Aslam Ghuman, was quoted as saying: “During my visit to the US, I learnt Israeli spy agency Mossad, in connivance with Indian agency RAW, under the direct supervision of CIA, planned to destabilise Pakistan at any cost”.

The paper also quoted former Punjab Military Intelligence (MI) chief, Brigadier (retired) Mohammad Yousuf, as saying that over 7,000 CIA operatives have been conducting warfare within Pakistan.

“Days after the mystery of 9/11, the CIA operatives landed in Pakistan in order to train Pakistani troops and authorities concerned for counter terrorism, but with the passage of time, their demands increased, and now the CIA network has a strong grip,” said another ex- ISI Punjab Regional Commander, Brigadier (retired) Ghazanfar. (ANI)

Boehner says small US military force should remain in Iraq beyond end of year

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/boehner-says-small-us-force-should-remain-in-iraq-beyond-end-of-year/2011/05/03/AFpQdgiF_story.html

Associated Press
May 4, 2011

House Speaker John Boehner said Tuesday a small, residual U.S. force should remain in Iraq beyond the end of this year, the final drawdown date for the Americans.

Boehner said it was imperative for the Obama administration to talk to the Iraqi government about extending the U.S. presence beyond Dec. 31.

Read entire article

Iran TV: Israel prepares attack at US air base

Iranian state television said on Monday that the Israeli military aircraft were amassing at a US air base in Iraq for a possile strike on Iran.

Israel denied any knowlegde of such a plan and the Pentagon dismissed it as ridiculous.

Meanwhile, Israel, a staunch US ally, accused Tehran of using its nuclear reactor program to conceal a plan to develop atomic bombs that would threaten the Jewish state.

Israeli leaders, haven’t ruled out military action against Iran. However, there’s been NO recent and increased tension and no other information on Monday, to corro-borate the Iranian claim.

War crime? U.S. Troops Fire on Iraqi Detainees (Video)

Shocking video has surfaced from 2005 of U.S. troops firing on captive Iraqi detainees at Camp Bucca following a riot. The soldiers seen in the video unload full force and even (what appears to be) a grenade round from behind barbed wire fences, while some laugh about direct hits.

Four detainees were killed and five others wounded. One soldier, seen in the video, comments that the prisoners are only throwing “dirt balls and a few rocks.” He was possibly trying to quell what appeared to be a near free-for-all shooting spree against captive targets. “Be decisive on what you f—— shoot,” he told the others.

According to Press TV, the “US military tried to cover up the bloodshed, saying the riot happened when the prisoners confronted a search for contraband in the prison.” Instead, the ACLU found that the riot was due to the “desecration of the Holy Qur’an by US troops.”

63 percent of people killed in Iraq war were civilians: report

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english2010/world/2011-04/10/c_13822309.htm

Iraqis participate in a demonstration marking the 8th anniversary of U.S. occupation in Baghdad April 9, 2011. Tens of thousands of supporters of anti-U.S. cleric Moqtada al-Sadr rallied on Saturday in eastern Baghdad to mark the eighth anniversary of the U.S. occupation, demanding its troops to leave Iraq. (Xinhua)

BEIJING, April 10 (Xinhua) — U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have been causing huge civilian casualties with 63 percent of some 109,000 people killed in the Iraq war being civilians, according to a report on the U.S. human rights record released on Sunday.

The figures were quoted from a WikiLeaks trove by the Human Rights Record of the United States in 2010, which was released by the Information Office of China’s State Council in response to the country reports on Human Rights Practices for 2010 issued by the U.S. Department of State.

Figures from the WikiLeaks website also revealed up to 285,000 war casualties in Iraq from March 2003 through the end of 2009, according to the report.

“The U.S. military actions in Afghanistan and other regions have also brought tremendous casualties to local people,” said the report.

The report cited the notorious case on a “kill team” formed by five soldiers from the 5th Stryker Combat Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division of the U.S. forces in Afghanistan. The team had committed at least three murders, where they randomly targeted and killed Afghan civilians, and dismembered the corpses and hoarded the human bones.

In addition, the U.S.-led North Atlantic Treaty Organization troops had caused 535 Afghan civilian deaths and injuries in 2009. Among them 113 civilians were shot and killed, an increase of 43 percent over 2008, the report quoted McClatchy Newspapers as saying.

‘Libya no-fly zone an option’: Obama gives strongest indication yet U.S. forces may be deployed in Middle East rebellion

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 11:37 AM on 4th March 2011

 President Barack Obama said today the U.S. was considering enforcing a no-fly zone over Libya.

In his strongest remarks yet about the Libya crisis, the President indicated that he was keeping ‘all options open’ including enforcing a controversial no-fly zone with American military aircraft.

Speaking at a meeting with Mexican premier Felipe Calderon, he insisted that Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi leave office, declaring he had lost his authority to lead.

No-fly: In his strongest words to date on the Libya crisis, Obama said he was keeping the military option open

 

Talk: The comments came as the president met Mexican premier Filipe Calderon

Obama also announced that U.S. military aircraft would play a humanitarian role by flying Egyptians who had fled Libya home to Egypt from makeshift camps in Tunisia.

He suggested that if a situation existed where Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi was ‘hunkered down’ in his capital Tripoli, the United States might have to find a way to get food aid to Libyans. 

As the president spoke, it emerged that British Prime Minister David Cameron’s plans for a no-fly zone over Libya have been slapped down by the U.S. Secretary of Defence who warned of ‘loose talk’ over military action in the wartorn country.

Robert Gates suggested that the zone could only be established if there was an initial military attack on the country first.

His rebuke came as British Foreign Secretary William Hague met with members of the French government to devise a plan of action over the deepening crisis in North Africa.

The no-fly zone had previously gained traction in the UK after Mr Cameron suggested the option as a way to halt Colonel Gaddafi launching attacks on rebels trying to force his removal.

But in recent days, Mr Cameron has faced stiff opposition to his proposals, with both China and Russia governments dismissing his calls, while the U.S. have now added their disapproval.

‘There is a lot of, frankly, loose talk about some of these military options,’ Gates told a Congressional committee today. 

‘Let’s just call a spade a spade: a no-fly zone begins with an attack on Libya to destroy the air defences.’

Gates had previously made it clear he had little enthusiasm for direct military intervention but did admit that were the Pentagon ordered by the President to carry out the action, they would be able to get the job done – despite claiming that the operation would require a large number of planes.

‘It is a big operation in a big country,’ he added.

Warning: Robert Gates has said that any suggestion of a no-fly zone would require military action first

Mr Gates’ comments came as Mr Hague met with his French counterpart Alain Juppe in Paris ahead of an emergency European summit next week.

Mr Juppe had previously said that no action would taken without a clear UN mandate, but Mr Hague said the pair had a number of ‘bold and ambitious measures’ to put forward.

Mr Juppe also stressed following the talks that Arab and African governments should get involved in any measures aimed at stemming Gaddafi’s ability to use force against his own people.

The Foreign Secretaries’ comments came as  Barack Obama’s administration weighed its own military options to force Gaddafi to halt violence that has killed an unknown number of civilians in the country.

In Washington, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that the United States was ‘taking no options off the table so long as the Libyan government continues to turn its guns on its own people.’

She warned that the administration had grave concerns about the instability in the country, but somewhat tempered her tone on the possibility of a no-fly zone.

‘One of our biggest concerns is Libya descending into chaos and becoming a giant Somalia,’ Clinton said.

The administration’s concern was underlined on Wednesday in Libya’s capital, where Gaddafi lashed out against Europe and the United States for pressuring him to step down.

‘We will fight until the last man and woman,’ he vowed, warning that thousands of Libyans will die if U.S. and NATO forces intervened.

Burnt out: A vehicle with a gun mounted on the rear lies at the side of the road that leads to Brega

 

Funeral march: Hundreds of rebels follow the coffin of a soldier killed during clashes with troops loyal to Gaddafi

Scavenging: Desperate refugees search for food in a rubbish heap at the Tunisia-Libya border post of Ras Jedir

His warning came as two U.S. warships, the USS Kearsarge and USS Ponce, passed through the Suez Canal yesterday on their way to the Mediterranean Sea, closer to Libyan shores, Egyptian officials said.

The officials, speaking on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to talk to media, said the Kearsarge is carrying 42 helicopters.

Gates had previously said on Tuesday that he ordered the two warships into the Mediterranean, along with an extra 400 Marines, in case they are needed to evacuate civilians or provide humanitarian relief.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1362694/Libya-fly-zone-option-Obamas-US-forces-deployed-Middle-East.html#ixzz1FfQ7zXyA

Chavez: U.S. distorting situation in Libya ‘to justify an invasion’

By Catherine E. Shoichet, CNN

March 1, 2011 9:52 a.m. EST

What are U.S. options for Libya?

(CNN) — Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez claims U.S. criticism of Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi has a clear aim: military invasion.

“Let’s not get carried away by the drums of war, because the United States, I am sure that they are exaggerating and distorting things to justify an invasion,” Chavez said Monday, according to Venezuelan state media.

At a Monday meeting of the U.N. Human Rights Council in Geneva, Switzerland, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States was exploring “all possible options,” and that “nothing is off the table so long as the Libyan government continues to threaten and kill Libyan citizens.”

Asked at a news conference Monday whether the United States planned an imminent military response in Libya, Clinton said, “No.”

Speaking Monday in the Venezuelan capital, Caracas, Chavez proposed sending an international committee to Libya to mediate and help develop a peaceful solution to unrest in the North African country.

“Instead of sending Marines and tanks and planes, why don’t we send a goodwill commission to try to help so that they do not continue killing in Libya? They are our brothers,” he said in a speech televised on the government-run network.

Chavez and Gadhafi have a close relationship, having bonded partly over shared opposition to U.S. global influence.

At a lavish Tripoli celebration commemorating 40 years of Gadhafi’s leadership in 2009, the two leaders sat side by side during a two-hour military parade. That same year, a new football stadium in Benghazi, Libya, was named after the Venezuelan leader.

As rumors swirled about Gadhafi and his whereabouts last week, some suggested that he may be en route to Venezuela. Those reports proved to be false; the Libyan leader later spoke publicly in Tripoli.

But the close ties between the two leaders remain strong. On Monday, Chavez said Gadhafi “has been my friend and our friend for a long time” in remarks broadcast on Venezuelan state television.

“We must be cautious. We know what our policy is: We do not support invasions or massacres or anything, no matter who does it. But there is no doubt that, regarding Libya, a campaign of lies is being woven — the same that has been woven about Venezuela for a long time,” he said.

The U.N. Security Council over the weekend voted for tough restrictions and possible war crimes charges against the Libyan regime.

The Security Council measures — which include an arms embargo, an asset freeze and travel bans for Gadhafi and members of his family and associates — also referred the situation unfolding in Libya to the International Criminal Court.

White House press secretary Jay Carney said Monday that the U.S. government was considering the possibility of imposing a no-fly zone over Libya.

“Col. Gadhafi and those around him must be held accountable for these acts, which violate international legal obligations and common decency. Through their actions, they have lost the legitimacy to govern,” Clinton said Monday.

“And the people of Libya have made themselves clear: It is time for Gadhafi to go, now, without further violence or delay.”

‘Psy-ops’ team accused of targeting US senators

David Usborne
The Independent
February 25, 2011

The top United States commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus, has ordered an investigation into allegations that members of a psychological-operations team – known as psy-ops – were ordered to target American Senators and other dignitaries visiting the country to help to persuade them to provide new troops and money.

Among politicians reportedly targeted by the team, whose ostensible mission is to manipulate the thought processes of the enemy, were former presidential candidate John McCain and fellow senators Al Franken, Carl Levin, Joe Lieberman and Jack Reed.

Read entire article