[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

16 Things That Everyone Needs To Know About Violent Far-Left Revolution In Los Angeles

Undercover video in Arizona alleges ongoing consumer fraud by Fairlife

Dozens arrested after San Francisco protest turns violent Sunday

Looking for the toughest badasses in the city (Los Angeles)

Democrat Civil War Explodes: DNC Chair Threatens to Quit Over David Hogg

Invaders waving Mexican flags, pour onto the 101 Freeway in Los Angeles

Australian Fake News Journo Hit By Rubber Bullet In L.A. Riot

22-year-old dies after being unable to afford asthma inhaler

North Korean Bulsae-4 Long-Range ATGM Spotted Again In Russian Operation Zone

Alexander Dugin: A real Maidan has begun in Los Angeles

State Department Weighing $500 Million Grant to Controversial Gaza Aid Group: Report

LA Mayor Karen Bass ordered LAPD to stand down, blocked aid to federal officers during riots.

Russia Has a Titanium Submarine That Can ‘Deep Dive’ 19,700 Feet

Shocking scene as DC preps for Tr*mp's military birthday parade.

Earth is being Pulled Apart by Crazy Space Weather! Volcanoes go NUTS as Plasma RUNS OUT

Gavin, feel free to use this as a campaign ad in 2028.

US To Formalize Military Presence in Syria in Deal With al-Qaeda-Linked Govt

GOP Rep Introduces Resolution Labeling Free Palestine Slogan as Anti-Semitism

Two-thirds of troops who left the military in 2023 were at risk for mental health conditions

UK and France abandon plans to recognise Palestinian state at conference

Kamala Backs LA Protests After Rioters Attack Federal Officers

Netanyahu's ultra-Orthodox partners move ahead with Knesset dissolution plan

Former Prime Minister of Ukraine: Zelensky will leave the country

Man protesting Paramount ICE raid added to FBI's Most Wanted

JUAN O SAVIN- The Plan to Capture America

US Manufacturing By State: Who Gains Most From 'Made In America'?

Rickards: The Truth About Fort Knox And Gold Leasing

Los Angeles Warzone: "Insurrectionist Mobs" Attack Cops, Set Fires, Block 101 Freeway

The Attack on the USS Liberty (June 8, 1967) - Speech by Survivor Phillip Tourney At the Revisionist History of War Conference (Video)

‘I Smell CIA/Deep State All Over This’ — RFK Jr. VP Nicole Shanahan Blasts Sanctuary Cities,


World News
See other World News Articles

Title: The March to War: USS Cole gives the war jitters to Lebanon - Three US Warships arrive off Lebanese coast
Source: Global Research from Middle East Times
URL Source: http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=8225
Published: Mar 1, 2008
Author: Middle East Times
Post Date: 2008-03-01 16:22:22 by robin
Keywords: None
Views: 298
Comments: 7

The March to War: USS Cole gives the war jitters to Lebanon
Three US Warships arrive off Lebanese coast


Global Research, March 1, 2008

Middle East Times - 2008-02-29

A U.S. decision to dispatch three warships, including the USS Cole, to the coast of Lebanon to "show support for regional stability" is causing jitters within the country that such an overt show of foreign military strength is likely to exacerbate its political crisis.

Pentagon officials announced that the guided-missile destroyer USS Cole left Malta for Lebanon on Tuesday, because of "concern about the situation in Lebanon," which is suffering the worst political crisis since the end of its 1975-1990 civil war.

The politically-divided Lebanese see the move as a show of force intended to threaten Syria and Iran, the backers of the Hezbollah-led opposition that Washington accuses of obstructing the election of a president, a post that has been vacant since pro-Syrian Emile Lahoud's term expired in November.

While Hezbollah slammed the U.S. deployment as "military intervention" to support the anti-Syrian ruling majority and the government, Prime Minister Fouad Siniora on Friday indicated he had not sought American help, and particularly not through a show of military force.

Speaking to Arab ambassadors in Beirut, Siniora said in televised remarks that no warships were currently in Lebanese territorial waters, and that his government did "not ask anyone to send warships."

Earlier, Siniora summoned U.S. charge d'affaires Michele Sison to clarify the presence of the USS Cole, a government source told AFP news agency. "Mrs. Sison assured him that the warship was in international waters and had been dispatched to guarantee regional stability," the unidentified source said.

In an attempt to dispel opposition fears that the U.S.-backed ruling camp would welcome U.S. military support, Siniora implied that U.S. destroyers near Lebanon constituted a violation of the country's sovereignty.

"We reiterate our commitment to defend the independence and sovereignty of Lebanon, which will not become a field for settling regional conflicts," he said.

Independent Lebanese analysts in Beirut told the Middle East Times the government had no choice but to denounce the presence of U.S. destroyers, which the Pentagon said would "not be visible" from Lebanon's coast.

The U.S. show of force might be intended to back up the ruling majority by flexing its muscles at Syria and Iran, the analysts said, but warned it could do more harm than good; and probably would only verify opposition accusations that their political adversaries were "America's dogs," as one analyst put it.

Political analyst George Alam told the Middle East Times that the destroyers were sent to pressure the opposition into electing a president in the parliamentary vote set for March 11. But, he predicted the opposition would not submit to this kind of pressure and that the vote was fated to be postponed for the 16th time.

Lebanon's Shiite Hezbollah organization retorted that it was not afraid of U.S. military threats, whatever the reason - to frighten the opposition into retracting their demand for veto power in a new government or to weaken their resistance against Israel.

Alam said the presence of the destroyers off the coast of Lebanon in the East Mediterranean Sea – particularly the USS Cole, which suffered an al-Qaida attack in the Yemeni port of Aden that killed 17 American sailors in 2000 – could easily ignite internal Lebanese fighting, which could potentially escalate into a confrontation with Syria and Iran.

The U.S. chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Michael Mullen, confirmed that the decision was to show American "engagement" in the region, but he said it was not "absolutely tied" to the Lebanese presidential vote.

"To say it is absolutely tied would be incorrect, although certainly we are aware elections are due there at some point in time," Mullen said, adding that a presence in the region was important, but that the United States was not sending signals to any one country.

"That's a very important part of the world and stability there [in the region] is an important outcome for us," he said.

But many in this part of the world insist that an engaged U.S. military presence in a highly-volatile part of the region divided into armed pro- and anti-American forces would have a destabilizing effect, citing Iraq after the U.S.-led invasion and occupation in 2003.

Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah sees the U.S. show of force as "proof that the American administration has failed to impose its policies and hegemony on our region."

Lebanese retired general and military analyst, Elias Hanna, suggested to the Middle East Times that the U.S. move may be nothing more than "power projection in the larger regional struggle" between the Iran-Syria alliance and the United States, and not a preparation to strike at Hezbollah or Lebanon.

Other commentators concur that the United States would not target Hezbollah or other opposition targets, if only to avoid repeating its "past mistakes" of the 1980s when it deployed the "New Jersey" warship and U.S. Marines to Lebanon.

The result was that the United States in 1982 was compelled to pull out its troops after 241 Marines were killed in a suicide attack on their base near Beirut's international airport.

Hezbollah's Fadlallah recalled that blow saying that U.S. Marines and destroyer battleships failed back then to support one Lebanese party against another. And many Lebanese are hoping the Americans will have learned their lesson and will keep their warships well away so as not to push Lebanon over the brink.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

#1. To: robin (#0)

Well, we couldn't provoke the Iranians,so let's see what kind of shit we can stir up in Lebanon.

Critter  posted on  2008-03-01   16:41:43 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Critter (#1)

let's see what kind of shit we can stir up in Lebanon.

What Would Ronald Reagan Do? 8^)

PnbC  posted on  2008-03-01   16:54:03 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: PnbC, karelian, Critter, Robin (#2)

This fits the pattern of the prelude to World War III which I believe the Bush- Cheney administration and Israel have set.

Phase I will be war agsinst Lebanon and the Palestinians in Gaza and the West Bank. This will deplete the Palestinians of their rockets and allow Israel to push back the resistance from the borders of Israel.

Phase II will be a propaganda period during the occupation which is designed to convince the Israeli and American opinion that Iran and Syria are responsible for the horrors of the occupation.

Phase III is the Israeli air attack against the Iranian nuclear facilities using American supplied bunker buster bombs. The Iranians have said they will respond by firing 11,000 missiles and artillery shells in the first 60 seconds. The Iranians have Russian made Sunburn and Yakhonts anti-ship missiles. They also have Chinese designed rocket artillery with a range up to 150 kilometers.

Phase 4 is the justification of World War III to the American public. We have 17,500 sailors and marines on aircraft carrier task forces in the Persian Gulf. Their ships are well within range of the Sunburn and Yakhonts, 120 and 180 miles. If they wanted to protect the lives of those sailors and marines, they would put them in the Indian Ocean out of harms way when Israel attacks Iran. They are in the Gulf precisely so they can be sacrificed for the greater good of Israel. The goal of WW III is to exterminate the Muslims so Israel and the Bilderbergers can have all of the Mideat oil.

This is not a good plan as the U.S. Central Command has American troops stationed in 27 nations of which 25 are Muslim. One rogue Muslim artillery officer can fire on an American base and in one minute render the base and its jets unusable. Our soldiers would be cut off from all supplies and air cover. They would be lucky if they were not killed or captured.

The final phase or aftermath of WW III is the destruction of the United States so what remanins can be folded into the North American Union. The Iranian response to the Israeli air strike will include the cut off of all oil from the Persian Gulf that should raise the price of oil to $300 or $400 a barrel. That would bankrupt more than 50% of all American families as they would have no means of buying gas to get to work. The destruction of the dollar will make food unaffordable too.

Horse  posted on  2008-03-01   19:14:31 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


Replies to Comment # 6.

#7. To: Horse (#6)

Thanks Horse, as usual ;p - I hope you're wrong.

robin  posted on  2008-03-03 12:46:32 ET  Reply   Untrace   Trace   Private Reply  


End Trace Mode for Comment # 6.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]