US Rules of Engagement

US Rules of Engagement | us-military | Military Special Interests War Propaganda World News

ROE define how force may be used in combat – what’s acceptable, unacceptable, under what conditions.

Geneva breaches and other laws of war fall outside of ROE. Military operations are governed by laws of war and international humanitarian law.

All nations are required to observe them. International and domestic laws universally recognize the right of self-defense in response to an attack or an imminent one.

Military necessity permits use of force not prohibited by the Law of Armed Conflict (LOAC). Distinguishing between civilians and military targets v. civilians and non-military ones is required.

Proportionality prohibits disproportionate, indiscriminate force likely to cause damage or loss of civilian lives.

Precautions must be taken to avoid and minimize noncombatant casualties, as well as damage to non-military sites.

Under Fourth Geneva, civilians must be given “effective advance warning” and “neutralized zones” where they can be as protected as much as possible.

Fourth Geneva also prohibits collective punishment; destruction of private property; torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, and other protections for noncombatants.

In all US wars, ROE violate core rule of law principles. Washington rules alone apply. Civilians in harm’s way have no place to hide.

Mass slaughter and destruction go on in all US war theaters, creating chaos and enormous human suffering.

During the 2003 Iraq war, US ROE authorized field commanders to kill every military-aged Iraqi in sight. Cold-blooded murder was officially OK’d.

The same policy is followed in Afghanistan, earlier in Libya, Yemen, Syria and Iraq – notably in the battle for Mosul.

Civilians are being slaughtered in cold blood, US terror-bombing striking residential areas and other non-military sites. Since the battle began last October, perhaps thousands of noncombatants perished. Pentagon claims otherwise are false.

RT’s Ruptly TV interviewed residents able to flee the city. One man said ISIS fighters “go on rooftops of the houses and the families (inside) don’t know. Then the aircraft come and bomb it,” burying families under rubble.

“We are asking for bombing specific targets. There are still families inside the houses and the aircraft keep bombing. We are asking the coalition planes to be specific when they bomb. They were bombing randomly,” he said.

Another resident said “(t)he planes waited until one of the Daesh walked out into the street and then they struck. The fighter was only injured, but 11 members of one family in the house next door were instantly killed.”

“They dropped leaflets over the city telling us not to worry about the strikes, saying that they were extremely precise and would not hurt the civilians,” another man said, adding:

“(I)t feels like the coalition is killing more people than” ISIS fighters.

America created and supports ISIS, al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. Wars raging in multiple theaters aim to advance its imperium.

They’re not about humanitarian intervention or democracy building. Millions of casualties attest to what US belligerence is all about.

The post US Rules of Engagement appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

U.S. Army Creates World’s First 3D Printed Grenade Launcher

U.S. Army Creates World’s First 3D Printed Grenade Launcher | rambo-3d-printed-grenade-launcher | Military Military Weapons US News

By: Daniel Lang, The Daily Sheeple |

The last thing you would expect is for the US military to create a 3D printed gun. After all, you’d think that an organization as large and well-funded as our military wouldn’t need plastic guns. 3D printers are for people who don’t have massive factories at their disposal, but the Army has the military-industrial complex.

Nonetheless, the US Army recently revealed that they have created a 3D printed grenade launcher, which they have appropriately dubbed RAMBO or Rapid Additively Manufactured Ballistics Ordnance. It was designed by the Army Research, Development, and Engineering Command and the U.S. Army Manufacturing Technology Program.

RAMBO contains only 50 parts, and with the exception of a few springs and fasteners, is all 3D printed. However, not all of these pieces are plastic. The barrel and receiver are aluminum, and were printed by a metal sintering machine. The Army is also working on printing the 40mm ammunition that goes with the weapon. Early tests show that the weapon functions, and now the Army is testing its reliability under long-term use.

So why does the army want to build 3D printed weapons in the first place? They don’t explicitly say, but RAMBO and its ammo was designed and produced in 6 months, which is far shorter than what it would take to create a new weapon from scratch using traditional channels in the arms industry.

The Army probably doesn’t intend to actually deploy this prototype weapon. One could only guess, but it’s more likely that they are prototyping the concept of designing their own weapons. The research and development phase of any weapon is notoriously long and expensive, so by doing that part themselves they could skirt around the arms industry and save a ton of money.

The only question is, will the military-industrial complex abide this money saving measure?


Daniel Lang is a researcher and staff writer for The Daily Sheeple – Wake The Flock Up!

The post U.S. Army Creates World’s First 3D Printed Grenade Launcher appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Global Leaders Rattle Their Sabers As The World Marches Toward War

Global Leaders Rattle Their Sabers As The World Marches Toward War | The-World-Marches-Toward-War-Public-Domain | Government Military Sleuth Journal Trump War Propaganda World News

Iran just conducted another provocative missile test, more U.S. troops are being sent to the Middle East, it was just announced that the U.S. military will be sending B-1 and B-52 bombers to South Korea in response to North Korea firing four missiles into the seas near Japan, and China is absolutely livid that a U.S. carrier group just sailed through contested waters in the South China Sea.  We have entered a season where leaders all over the globe feel a need to rattle their sabers, and many fear that this could be leading us to war.  In particular, Donald Trump is going to be under the microscope in the days ahead as other world leaders test his resolve.  Will Trump be able to show that he is tough without going over the edge and starting an actual conflict?

The Iranians made global headlines on Thursday when they conducted yet another ballistic missile test despite being warned by Trump on numerous occasions…

As tensions between the U.S. and Iran continue to mount, the semi-official news agency Tasnim is reporting that Iran’s Revolutionary Guard has successfully conducted yet another ballistic missile test, this time from a navy vessel.  Called the Hormuz 2, these latest missiles are designed to destroy moving targets at sea at ranges up to 300 km (180 miles).

Reports on the latest test quotes Amir Ali Hajizadeh, commander of the IRGC’s Aerospace Force, who confirmed that “the naval ballistic missile called Hormuz 2 successfully destroyed a target which was 250 km away.”

The missile test is the latest event in a long-running rivalry between Iran and the United States in and around the Strait of Hormuz, which guards the entrance to the Gulf. About 20% of the world’s oil passes through the waterway, which is less than 40 km wide at its narrowest point.

So how will Trump respond to this provocation?

Will he escalate the situation?  If he does nothing he will look weak, but if he goes too far he could risk open conflict.

Elsewhere in the Middle East, things are already escalating.  It is being reported that “several hundred Marines” are on the ground in Syria to support an assault on the city of Raqqa, and another 1,000 troops could be sent to Kuwait to join the fight against ISIS any day now.  The following comes from Zero Hedge

While the Trump administration waits to decide if it will send 1,000 troops to Kuwait to fight ISIS, overnight the Washington Post reported that the US has sent several hundred Marines to Syria to support an allied local force aiming to capture the Islamic State stronghold of Raqqa. Defence officials said they would establish an outpost from which they could fire artillery at IS positions some 32km (20 miles) away. US special forces are already on the ground, “advising” the Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) alliance according to the BBC.

The defence officials told the Washington Post that the Marines were from the San Diego-based 11th Marine Expeditionary Unit, and that they had flown to northern Syria via Djibouti and Kuwait. They are to set up an artillery battery that could fire powerful 155mm shells from M777 howitzers, the officials said. Another marine expeditionary unit carried out a similar mission at the start of the Iraqi government’s operation to recapture the city of Mosul from IS last year.

Meanwhile, China is spitting mad for several reasons.  For one, the Chinese are absolutely furious that South Korea has allowed the U.S. to deploy the THAAD missile defense system on their soil…

China is lashing out at South Korea and Washington for the deployment of a powerful missile defense system known as the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD, deposited at the Osan Air Base in South Korea on Monday evening.

The deployment of THAAD follows several ballistic missile tests by North Korea in recent months, including the launch of four missiles on Monday, three of which landed in the sea off the coast of Japan. Though THAAD would help South Korea protect itself from a North Korean missile attack, China is vocally protesting the deployment of the system, claiming it upsets the “strategic equilibrium” in the region because its radar will allow the United States to detect and track missiles launched from China.

Of course the U.S. needed to do something, because the North Koreans keep rattling their sabers by firing off more ballistic missiles toward Japan.

But it is one thing to deploy a missile defense system, and it is another thing entirely to fly strategic nuclear bombers into the region.

So if the Chinese were upset when THAAD was deployed, how will they feel when B-1 and B-52 bombers start showing up in South Korea?

Earlier this week, trigger-happy Kim pushed his luck once more when he fired off four ballistic missiles into the seas near Japan.

Now US military chiefs are reportedly planning to fly in B-1 and B-52 bombers – built to carry nuclear bombs – to show America has had enough.

South Korea and the US have also started their annual Foal Eagle military exercise sending a strong warning to North Korea over its actions.

A military official said 300,000 South Korean troops and 15,000 US personnel are taking part in the operation.

The Trump administration has openly stated that all options “are on the table” when it comes to North Korea, and that includes a military strike.

It has been more than 60 years since the Korean War ended, but many are concerned that we may be closer to a new Korean War than we have been at any point since that time.

And of course our relationship with China is tumbling precariously downhill as well.  Another reason why the Chinese are extremely upset with the Trump administration is because a U.S. Navy carrier battle group led by the USS Carl Vinson sailed past islands that China claims in the South China Sea just a few weeks ago.

In China, the media openly talks about the possibility of war with the United States over the South China Sea.  Most Americans are not even aware that the South China Sea is a very serious international issue, but over in China this is a major focus.

And the U.S. military has recently made several other moves in the region that have angered the Chinese

Also in February, the U.S. sent a dozen F-22 Raptor stealth fighters to Tindal AB in northern Australia, the closest Australian military airbase to China, for coalition training and exercises. It’s the first deployment of that many F-22s in the Pacific.

And if that didn’t get the attention of the Chinese government, the U.S. just tested four Trident II submarine-launched ballistic missiles during a nuclear war exercise, sending the simulated weapons 4,200 miles from the coast of California into the mid-Pacific. It’s the first time in three years the U.S. has conducted tests in the Pacific, and the first four-missile salvo since the end of the Cold War.

I can understand the need to look tough, but eventually somebody is going to go too far.

If you are familiar with my work, then you know that I believe that war is coming.  Things in the Middle East continue to escalate, and it is only a matter of time before a great war erupts between Israel and her neighbors.  Meanwhile, U.S. relations with both Russia and China continue to deteriorate, and this is something that I have been warning about for a very long time.

We should hope for peace, but we should also not be blind to the signs of war that are starting to emerge all over the planet.  Relatively few people anticipated the outbreak of World War I and World War II in advance, and I have a feeling that the same thing will be true for World War III.

The post Global Leaders Rattle Their Sabers As The World Marches Toward War appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

US Mission Creep in Syria and Iraq

US Mission Creep in Syria and Iraq | mission-creep-syria-iraq-war | Military War Propaganda World News

(image: Youtube)

According to reports, around 5,000 US troops operate in Iraq-with so-called permission from the puppet regime it installed.

Hundreds of US special forces are in Syria, now joined by unknown numbers of combat marines, America’s total military presence not officially announced, the Pentagon citing operational security.

US forces invaded Syria illegally, without permission from Damascus, on the phony pretext of combating ISIS America created and supports.

On March 9, the Army Times reported an additional 2,500 US combat troops are being sent to Kuwait – likely in preparation for America’s greater intervention in Syria and Iraq.

They “include elements of the 82nd Airborne Division’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team.” According to General Joseph Anderson, they’ll be “postured…to do all things Mosul, Raqqa, and in between.”

The Army Times said “about 6,000 American troops (are) spread between Iraq and Syria.” Many it’s many more than believed.

CENTCOM chief General Joseph Votel said conventional US combat troops are needed in Syria – perhaps to establish a permanent American presence, aiding terrorists combat government forces.

Likely greater numbers of US combat troops are heading for Iraq, escalating conflict in both countries. According to Votel, they’ll be a larger and longer military presence in both theaters – on the phony pretext of combating ISIS.

Mission creep followed Trump’s ascension to power. His campaign opposition to US regional wars was deceptive political bluster.

His first 50 days in office indicate continued US aggression in multiple theaters – perhaps new adventurism planned ahead.

Reckless US imperial wars on his watch perhaps head him for Nobel Peace Prize recognition like his predecessor.

The post US Mission Creep in Syria and Iraq appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Greater US Aggression Under Trump Coming?

Greater US Aggression Under Trump Coming? | donald-trump4 | Military Trump US News War Propaganda

Nearly straightaway in office, Trump proved he’s the latest in a long line of US warrior presidents.

He’s continuing naked aggression in multiple theaters, upping the stakes in Syria and Yemen, increasing numbers of US combat troops in both countries, perhaps more headed for Iraq.

At the urging of CENTCOM chief General Joseph Votel, he may increase America’s military presence in Afghanistan.

Earlier this week, a joint statement by US, UK and French ambassadors to Libya expressed concern about escalated violence in and around the country’s oil installations – urging a “unified military force” to protect them.

Will US-led NATO combat troop deployments follow? Candidate Trump criticized wasting trillions of dollars on warmaking, creating a mess in all theaters, depriving the country of vitally needed revenue for homeland needs.

President Trump is like the Clintons, Bush/Cheney and Obama, continuing imperial wars, escalating them, perhaps planning new aggression, shunning peace and stability – along with breaking his promise to cooperate with Russia in combating terrorism.

He’s aiding, not combating it, terror-bombing infrastructure in Syria and Iraq, massacring civilians, perhaps intending larger US combat troop deployments to both countries than already there.

In Thursday testimony before Senate Armed Services Committee members, General Votel said Russia’s involvement in Syria (legally at the behest of its government) “negatively impacted the regional balance of power,” adding:

“Iran has expanded cooperation with Russia in Syria in ways that threaten US interests in the region…aspir(ing) to be a regional hegemon and its forces and proxies oppose US interests in Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, Gaza and Syria, and seek to hinder achievement of US objectives in Afghanistan and some Central Asian States.”

Will the Islamic Republic be Washington’s next imperial target? Longstanding plans call for regime change. An earlier color revolution failed.

War plans were prepared years ago, updated to stay current to the times. Anti-Russia comments are worrisome. Pentagon, Capitol Hill and administration hawks may yearn for confrontation.

America’s military footprint abroad has nothing to do with combating terrorism as claimed – everything to do with advancing its imperium, along with waging endless wars to feed the ravenous appetite of its military/industrial/media complex on the phony pretext of humanitarian intervention and democracy building.

Post-WW II, nations America attacked threatened no one. They were targeted for their sovereign independence. Others not subservient to US interests are on its hit list.

Hostility toward Russia, China and Iran should scare everyone. Hillary’s defeat didn’t end the risk of nuclear war.

Neocons infesting Washington make the unthinkable possible by design or accident. Will America’s rage for unchallenged global dominance doom us all?

The post Greater US Aggression Under Trump Coming? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

US Combat Troops to Syria?

US Combat Troops to Syria? | u.s.-military-soldier | Military War Propaganda World News

Unknown numbers of US special forces operate in northern Syria illegally, aiding anti-government terrorists.

In late 2015, Lebanon’s al-Akhbar reported Washington was constructing a 2,500 millimeter-long runway for its warplanes at Abu Hajar airport in the eastern countryside of Hasaka, controlled by Kurdish YPG fighters.

US forces operate in Syria without government permission, a flagrant violation of international law.

Last November, reports indicated the Pentagon was considering possible deployment of greater numbers of special forces to northern parts of the country.

On Wednesday, CNN issued a similar report, quoting an unnamed Pentagon official, saying “(i)t’s possible that you may see conventional forces hit the ground in Syria for some period of time.”

If approved, they could arrive next month. It would represent a significant escalation of Trump’s involvement in Obama’s war, depending on the numbers sent and how they’re used.

For six years, Washington’s goal was regime change. Trump’s policy is unknown. Assad distrusts America for good reason. In contrast, Russia is a valued ally.

Separately according to Putin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, Moscow expects Washington to pressure Kiev to observe its obligations under the Minsk accords, end its aggression, and work toward diplomatic conflict resolution.

It’s not “the subject of any deal” beyond Minsk, he said. Suggesting one “in no way corresponds to reality.” The rights of Donbass residents under attack by Ukraine’s military must be respected.

Kiev’s aggression must cease. Washington is responsible for constraining its puppet regime, operating without legitimacy, waging war on its own people.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


Save

The post US Combat Troops to Syria? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Coming Soon to a City Near You: The U.S. Military’s Plan to Take Over America

Coming Soon to a City Near You: The U.S. Military’s Plan to Take Over America | Martial-Law | Black Ops Government Government Control Government Corruption Losing Rights Martial Law Military New World Order Pentagon Sleuth Journal Society Tyranny & Police State

By: John W. Whitehead, Rutherford.org |

“Our current and past strategies can no longer hold. We are facing environments that the masters of war never foresaw. We are facing a threat that requires us to redefine doctrine and the force in radically new and different ways. The future army will confront a highly sophisticated urban-centric threat that will require that urban operations become the core requirement for the future land-force. The threat is clear. Our direction remains to be defined. The future is urban.”— “Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” a Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command

The U.S. military plans to take over America by 2030.

No, this is not another conspiracy theory. Although it easily could be.

Nor is it a Hollywood political thriller in the vein of John Frankenheimer’s 1964 political thriller Seven Days in May about a military coup d’etat.

Although it certainly has all the makings of a good thriller.

No, this is the real deal, coming at us straight from the horse’s mouth.

According to “Megacities: Urban Future, the Emerging Complexity,” a Pentagon training video created by the Army for U.S. Special Operations Command, the U.S. military plans to use armed forces to solve future domestic political and social problems.

What they’re really talking about is martial law, packaged as a well-meaning and overriding concern for the nation’s security.

The chilling five-minute training video, obtained by The Intercept through a FOIA request and made available online, paints an ominous picture of the future—a future the military is preparing for—bedeviled by “criminal networks,” “substandard infrastructure,” “religious and ethnic tensions,” “impoverishment, slums,” “open landfills, over-burdened sewers,” a “growing mass of unemployed,” and an urban landscape in which the prosperous economic elite must be protected from the impoverishment of the have nots.

And then comes the kicker.

Three-and-a-half minutes into the Pentagon’s dystopian vision of “a world of Robert Kaplan-esque urban hellscapes — brutal and anarchic supercities filled with gangs of youth-gone-wild, a restive underclass, criminal syndicates, and bands of malicious hackers,” the ominous voice of the narrator speaks of a need to “drain the swamps.”

Drain the swamps.

Surely, we’ve heard that phrase before?

Ah yes.

Emblazoned on t-shirts and signs, shouted at rallies, and used as a rallying cry among Trump supporters, “drain the swamp” became one of Donald Trump’s most-used campaign slogans, along with “build the wall” and “lock her up.”

Funny how quickly the tides can shift and the tables can turn.

Whereas Trump promised to drain the politically corrupt swamps of Washington DC of lobbyists and special interest groups, the U.S. military is plotting to drain the swamps of futuristic urban American cities of “noncombatants and engage the remaining adversaries in high intensity conflict within.”

And who are these noncombatants, a military term that refers to civilians who are not engaged in fighting?

They are, according to the Pentagon, “adversaries.”

They are “threats.”

They are the “enemy.”

They are people who don’t support the government, people who live in fast-growing urban communities, people who may be less well-off economically than the government and corporate elite, people who engage in protests, people who are unemployed, people who engage in crime (in keeping with the government’s fast-growing, overly broad definition of what constitutes a crime).

In other words, in the eyes of the U.S. military, noncombatants are American citizens a.k.a. domestic extremists a.k.a. enemy combatants who must be identified, targeted, detained, contained and, if necessary, eliminated.

Welcome to Battlefield America.

In the future imagined by the Pentagon, any walls and prisons that are built will be used to protect the societal elite—the haves—from the have-nots.

We are the have-nots.

Suddenly it all begins to make sense.

The events of recent years: the invasive surveillance, the extremism reports, the civil unrest, the protests, the shootings, the bombings, the military exercises and active shooter drills, the color-coded alerts and threat assessments, the fusion centers, the transformation of local police into extensions of the military, the distribution of military equipment and weapons to local police forces, the government databases containing the names of dissidents and potential troublemakers.

This is how you prepare a populace to accept a police state willingly, even gratefully.

You don’t scare them by making dramatic changes. Rather, you acclimate them slowly to their prison walls. Persuade the citizenry that their prison walls are merely intended to keep them safe and danger out.

Desensitize them to violence, acclimate them to a military presence in their communities and persuade them that there is nothing they can do to alter the seemingly hopeless trajectory of the nation.

Before long, no one will even notice the floundering economy, the blowback arising from military occupations abroad, the police shootings, the nation’s deteriorating infrastructure and all of the other mounting concerns.

It’s happening already.

The sight of police clad in body armor and gas masks, wielding semiautomatic rifles and escorting an armored vehicle through a crowded street, a scene likened to “a military patrol through a hostile city,” no longer causes alarm among the general populace.

Few seem to care about the government’s endless wars abroad that leave communities shattered, families devastated and our national security at greater risk of blowback. Indeed, there were no protests in the streets after U.S. military forces raided a compound in Yemen, killing “at least eight women and seven children, ages 3 to 13.”

Their tactics are working.

We’ve allowed ourselves to be acclimated to the occasional lockdown of government buildings, Jade Helm military drills in small towns so that special operations forces can get “realistic military training” in “hostile” territory, and  Live Active Shooter Drill training exercises, carried out at schools, in shopping malls, and on public transit, which can and do fool law enforcement officials, students, teachers and bystanders into thinking it’s a real crisis.

Still, you can’t say we weren’t warned.


Back in 2008, an Army War College report revealed that “widespread civil violence inside the United States would force the defense establishment to reorient priorities in extremis to defend basic domestic order and human security.” The 44-page report went on to warn that potential causes for such civil unrest could include another terrorist attack, “unforeseen economic collapse, loss of functioning political and legal order, purposeful domestic resistance or insurgency, pervasive public health emergencies, and catastrophic natural and human disasters.”

In 2009, reports by the Department of Homeland Security surfaced that labelled right-wing and left-wing activists and military veterans as extremists (a.k.a. terrorists) and called on the government to subject such targeted individuals to full-fledged pre-crime surveillance. Almost a decade later, after spending billions to fight terrorism, the DHS concluded that the greater threat is not ISIS but domestic right-wing extremism.

Meanwhile, the government has been amassing an arsenal of military weapons for use domestically and equipping and training their “troops” for war. Even government agencies with largely administrative functions such as the Food and Drug Administration, Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Smithsonian have been acquiring body armor, riot helmets and shields, cannon launchers and police firearms and ammunition. In fact, there are now at least 120,000 armed federal agents carrying such weapons who possess the power to arrest.

Rounding out this profit-driven campaign to turn American citizens into enemy combatants (and America into a battlefield) is a technology sector that has been colluding with the government to create a Big Brother that is all-knowing, all-seeing and inescapable. It’s not just the drones, fusion centers, license plate readers, stingray devices and the NSA that you have to worry about. You’re also being tracked by the black boxes in your cars, your cell phone, smart devices in your home, grocery loyalty cards, social media accounts, credit cards, streaming services such as Netflix, Amazon, and e-book reader accounts.

All of this has taken place right under our noses, funded with our taxpayer dollars and carried out in broad daylight without so much as a general outcry from the citizenry.

It’s astounding how convenient we’ve made it for the government to lock down the nation.

So what exactly is the government preparing for?

Mind you, by “government,” I’m not referring to the highly partisan, two-party bureaucracy of the Republicans and Democrats.

I’m referring to “government” with a capital “G,” the entrenched Deep State that is unaffected by elections, unaltered by populist movements, and has set itself beyond the reach of the law.

I’m referring to the corporatized, militarized, entrenched bureaucracy that is fully operational and staffed by unelected officials who are, in essence, running the country and calling the shots in Washington DC, no matter who sits in the White House.

This is the hidden face of a government that has no respect for the freedom of its citizenry.

What is the government preparing for? You tell me.

Better yet, take a look at the Pentagon’s training video.

It’s only five minutes long, but it says a lot about the government’s mindset, the way its views the citizenry, and the so-called “problems” that the military must be prepared to address in the near future. Even more troubling, however, is what this military video doesn’t say about the Constitution, about the rights of the citizenry, and about the dangers of using the military to address political and social problems.

The future is here.

We’re already witnessing a breakdown of society on virtually every front.

By waging endless wars abroad, by bringing the instruments of war home, by transforming police into extensions of the military, by turning a free society into a suspect society, by treating American citizens like enemy combatants, by discouraging and criminalizing a free exchange of ideas, by making violence its calling card through SWAT team raids and militarized police, by fomenting division and strife among the citizenry, by acclimating the citizenry to the sights and sounds of war, and by generally making peaceful revolution all but impossible, the government has engineered an environment in which domestic violence has become almost inevitable.

Be warned: in the future envisioned by the military, we will not be viewed as Republicans or Democrats. Rather, “we the people” will be enemies of the state.

As I make clear in my book, Battlefield America: The War on the American People, we’re already enemies of the state.

For years, the government has been warning against the dangers of domestic terrorism, erecting surveillance systems to monitor its own citizens, creating classification systems to label any viewpoints that challenge the status quo as extremist, and training law enforcement agencies to equate anyone possessing anti-government views as a domestic terrorist. What the government failed to explain was that the domestic terrorists would be of the government’s own making, whether intentional or not.

“We the people” have become enemy #1.

WC: 1786


ABOUT JOHN W. WHITEHEAD

Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. His new book Battlefield America: The War on the American People (SelectBooks, 2015) is available online at www.amazon.com. Whitehead can be contacted at johnw@rutherford.org.

 


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Coming Soon to a City Near You: The U.S. Military’s Plan to Take Over America appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

US Admits Using Toxic Depleted Uranium Against ISIS in Syria

US Admits Using Toxic Depleted Uranium Against ISIS in Syria | usaf | Military Sleuth Journal Special Interests War Propaganda World News

A-10 Thunderbolt II. (image: © SRA Greg L. Davis, USAF / Wikipedia)

More than 5,000 rounds of depleted uranium (DU) ammunition were used in two attacks on Islamic State oil tankers in eastern Syria, the US military has confirmed. The US-led coalition previously pledged it would not use the controversial ordnance.

A spokesman for the US Central Command (CENTCOM) told Foreign Policy that 5,265 armor-piercing DU rounds were used in November 2015, during two air raids against Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) oil tanker convoys in the Deir ez-Zor and Hasakah provinces in eastern Syria.

A-10 ground attack aircraft fired the projectiles from their 30mm rotating cannons, destroying about 350 tanker trucks, according to CENTCOM spokesman Major Josh Jacques.

In March 2015, spokesman for the US-led coalition John Moore had explicitly ruled out the use of the controversial ammunition, saying that “US and coalition aircraft have not been and will not be using depleted uranium munitions in Iraq or Syria during Operation Inherent Resolve.” The Pentagon explained that armor-piercing DU rounds were not necessary because IS did not have the tanks it was designed to penetrate.

Investigative reporter Samuel Oakford first brought up the use of DU ammunition by the coalition in October 2016, when a US Air Force congressional liaison told Representative Martha McSally (R-Arizona) that A-10s flying missions over Syria had fired 6,479 rounds of “combat mix” on two occasions. The officer explained that a fifth of the “combat mix” consisted of high-explosive incendiary (HEI) rounds, while the rest were DU armor-piercers.

The first attack took place on November 16, near Al-Bukamal in the Deir ez-Zor province, with four US planes destroying 46 vehicles. The strike took place entirely in Syrian territory. According to CENTCOM, 1,790 rounds of “combat mix” were used during the strike, including 1,490 rounds of DU.

The second attack, on November 22, destroyed 293 oil tankers in the desert between Deir ez-Zor and Hasakah. On this occasion, the four A-10s fired 4,530 rounds – of which 3,775 were DU armor-piercers.

“The combination of Armored Piercing Incendiary (DU) rounds mixed with HEI rounds was used to ensure a higher probability of destruction of the truck fleet ISIS was using to transport its illicit oil,” Major Jacques told RT.

Depleted uranium is prized by the US military for exceptional toughness, which enables it to pierce heavy tank armor. However, airborne DU particles can contaminate nearby ground and water and pose a significant risk of toxicity, birth defects and cancer when inhaled or ingested by humans or animals.

The coalition’s promise not to use DU munitions in Iraq was made after an estimated one million rounds were used during the 1991 Gulf War and the 2003 invasion. Between Iraq and the Balkans, where they were also used in the 1990s, DU rounds have been blamed on a massive increase in cancer and birth defects.

DU is also the prime suspect in the medical condition dubbed the “Gulf War Syndrome” afflicting US veterans of the 1991 conflict and some peacekeepers deployed in the Balkans.

Source: RT

 


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post US Admits Using Toxic Depleted Uranium Against ISIS in Syria appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

What Is the U.S. Military Doing in Yemen? Is It Worth the Cost?

What Is the U.S. Military Doing in Yemen? Is It Worth the Cost? | us-yemen-war | Military Special Interests US News War Propaganda

By: Warren Mass, The New American |

The commando raid by U.S. Navy SEALs in Yemen on January 29 reportedly killed 14 al-Qaeda operatives. But at least 15 civilians including an eight-year-old girl were also killed, as was one Navy Seal.

Initial reports of the raid and the civilian deaths stated that the government of Yemen had withdrawn permission for the United States to launch any more Special Operations ground missions inside the country. However, those reports were not accurate. Yemeni Foreign Minister Abdul-Malik al-Mekhlafi told the Associated Press it was “not true” that his government had asked U.S. forces to cease ground operations in Yemen. “Yemen continues to cooperate with the United States and continues to abide by all the agreements,” he said.

Another unnamed senior Yemeni official told Reuters: “We have not withdrawn our permission for the United States to carry out special operations ground missions. However, we made clear our reservations about the last operation.”

“We said that in the future there needs to be more coordination with Yemeni authorities before any operation and that there needs to be consideration for our sovereignty,” the official added.

The young girl killed in the raid was Nawar al-Awlaki, the daughter of cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, an American citizen who was assassinated by the U.S. military in 2011.

The American soldier killed in the raid was Chief Petty Officer Ryan Owens.

The conflict in Yemen that has prompted U.S. intervention has been years in the making, so it is difficult to provide all of its background concisely, but as we noted in an article in 2015, our intervention in the beleaguered nation has only aggravated the situation. We observed in that article:

Much of this counterproductive intervention came under the leadership of exiled President [Abed Rabbo Mansour] Hadi when he was still in power. An article posted by The New American in 2012 noted that since 2002, 358 people had died in Yemen in U.S. drone strikes. In a statement made to the Washington Post in an interview published September 29, 2012, President Hadi said he “personally approves every U.S. drone strike in his country.” The Post noted that it was likely this support of President Obama’s drone war that had influenced U.S. officials to consider Hadi “one of the United States’ staunchest counterterrorism allies.”

This may explain why Saudi Arabia has given Hadi refuge and is bombing Hadi’s opponents in Yemen — with U.S. support.

In September 2015, Hadi returned to the Yemen port city of Aden as Saudi-backed government forces recaptured the city.

In that article, we noted that the Houthi rebels, who are fighting against forces loyal to Hadi, are allied with forces loyal to President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who was president of Yemen from 1990 to 2012. Furthermore, Saleh’s loyalists are al-Qaeda’s most powerful opponents, but the Saudi-led bombing threatens to weaken them. Therefore, the Saudi bombing of the rebels, which is supported by the United States, will have the effect of helping al-Qaeda!

We also observed in the same article that U.S. interventionism in Yemen “has not been any more productive than was our nation’s long history of intervention in Iran — the country that we are now posturing to keep away from Yemen.”

Interventionism — especially in the Middle East — is truly a bipartisan foreign policy. Barack Obama continued that policy started by George W. Bush and even kept Bush’s Secretary of Defense Robert Gates in place for two and a half years after taking office. While Obama reduced the number of U.S. troops in Iraq, he left a few thousand in place and also launched airstrikes against militant targets in the country. Obama also authorized airstrikes and drone attacks in Yemen. Under Obama, the United States also joined NATO partners in a 2011 bombing campaign to support an uprising against longtime dictator Moammar Gadhafi, who was toppled and killed.

While conservatives are optimistic that Donald Trump will reverse many of the harmful policies of Obama (particularly on domestic issues), the January 31 raid, which was the first commando operation approved by Trump, indicates that on foreign policy the Trump administration is more likely than not to follow the neoconservative, interventionist policies of George W. Bush. A noninterventionist leader such as former Rep. Ron Paul or his son, Sen. Rand Paul, had either of them been elected president, would have been unlikely to have approved such a raid.

The tragic death of U.S. Navy SEAL Ryan Owens in Yemen raises important questions:

• Should the U.S. military have boots on the ground there?

• Should we be engaged in a war in Yemen without the constitutionally required declaration of war — and without even a congressional debate?

• Should a single person decide when to plunge the nation into the crucible of war, regardless if he is President Obama or President Trump?

• Does our military interventionism in Yemen (and elsewhere in the Middle East) reduce the terrorist threat and make America safer, or does it have the opposite effects?

• And is the interventionism worth the sacrifice — including the ultimate sacrifice — of our soldiers?


As we have stressed in many articles in this magazine, the Constitution (in Section 8) gives power to declare war to Congress alone. The last time that Congress issued a declaration of war was on June 5, 1942 (against Bulgaria, Hungary, and Romania, which were allied with Germany). The fact that the United States has gone to war many times since then without a declaration of war (as in Korea, Vietnam, Afghanistan, and Iraq) under both Democratic and Republican presidents sets a bad precedent — but does not change the unconstitutionality of such actions. That should answer two of the questions posed above.

An article posted by the Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity on February 3 by the institute’s Executive Director Daniel McAdams concentrated on disputing the claim, broadcast by the media, that the mission was a success, because of a great “treasure trove” of intelligence seized at the compound in Yemen raided by U.S. forces, along with the claimed killing of a senior al-Qaeda official.

The article pointed out several areas where the attack was a failure, which precluded labeling it as a successful mission: “An American was killed, millions of dollars in US military equipment destroyed, at least a dozen innocent women and children were killed, U.S. military cover had been blown before the attack, the mission was poorly planned, the mission had been turned down twice by President Obama only to be dusted off by President Trump, and so on.”

A good point for conservatives elated by the succession of Donald Trump to the presidency to keep in mind is that interventionism is interventionism, whether pursued by George W. Bush, Barack Obama, or Donald Trump.

There is a lesson to be found in an article that former Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas)  wrote for Townhall.com almost exactly two years ago, entitled: “The Failed ‘Yemen Model.’ ” In that article, Paul noted that during the previous September, President Obama had cited his drone program in Yemen as a successful model of U.S. anti-terrorism strategy. Obama said that he would employ the Yemen model in his effort to “degrade and ultimately destroy” ISIS in Iraq and Syria.

Paul wasted no time in calling out the former president, writing: “If Yemen is any kind of model, it is a model of how badly U.S. interventionism has failed.”

Paul summarized the history of U.S. interventionism in Yemen as follows:

In 2011 the U.S. turned against Yemen’s long-time dictator, Saleh, and supported a coup that resulted in another, even more U.S.-friendly leader taking over in a “color revolution.” The new leader, Hadi, took over in 2012 and soon became a strong supporter of the U.S. drone program in his country against al-Qaeda in the Arab Peninsula.

The Paul described an incident that is eerily similar to what happened again last week:

And the drone strikes have continued. Last Monday, in the first US strike after the coup, a 12 year old boy was killed in what is sickeningly called “collateral damage.” Two alleged “al-Qaeda militants” were also killed. On Saturday yet another drone strike killed three more suspected militants.

The U.S. government has killed at least dozens of civilian non-combatants in Yemen, but even those it counts as “militants” may actually be civilians. That is because the Obama administration counts any military-aged male in the area around a drone attack as a combatant.

Paul concluded his article with this lesson: “The lesson from Yemen is not to stay the course that has failed so miserably. It is to end a failed foreign policy that is killing civilians, creating radicals, and making us less safe.”

If Americans had wanted a continuation of the interventionist Obama foreign policy, they would have elected Hillary Clinton as president, since during her time as Obama’s secretary of state she was a key architect of that policy.

Instead, Americans chose Donald Trump, in part because they perceived that he would steer America away from the interventionism of his predecessors. An article posted by Infowars.com a year ago was typical of how his supporters viewed Trump:

Candidate Trump’s take on interventionism is a departure from the rest of the field committed to the establishment and the military-industrial complex. Although many of his proposed solutions to a number of issues appear to be reactionary and often authoritarian, his take on the forever war agenda and the foreign policy of the establishment is encouraging.

Was that assessment wrong or did Trump only appear to be a noninterventionist to appeal to Republicans of the Ron Paul/Rand Paul stripe? We can only speculate. As Daniel McAdams wrote recently:

We can only hope that the young Trump Administration will learn from this black eye and very quickly retreat from its increasingly aggressive positioning in the Middle East. A president elected on the promise that he would start no new wars is swaggering us into something his panting advisors cannot, in their blind enthusiasm, even imagine.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post What Is the U.S. Military Doing in Yemen? Is It Worth the Cost? appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS

Forget Trump- Military Industrial Complex Takes Charge, Blasts Skies With Chemtrails (VIDEO)

Forget Trump- Military Industrial Complex Takes Charge, Blasts Skies With Chemtrails (VIDEO) | donald-trump-chemtrails | Chem-trails & Geo-Engineering Environment Government Corruption Military Multimedia Sleuth Journal Special Interests Trump Weather Modification

Almost exactly 2 weeks into the Trump administration, and after nearly 2 weeks of normal blue skies and fluffy clouds in Los Angeles the US Military Industrial Complex struck with a vengeance bombarding the skies with a massive blanket of white chemical trails every day this week until it rained. We’re talking 100% in-your-face visual evidence of weather modification shoved down our throats and this is a reminder that everyone who voted for Trump and those still hopeful for a better America and a better humanity (now that Obama the sorcerer is gone) needs to hold the President to his promises of making America great again and giving government back to the people.

Power and greatness must be founded on truth and ethics doesn’t it? And there is nothing ethical about spraying the species just because weather modification profits (and who knows what else) are on the table for the Military Industrial Complex.

Today, we the people are speaking loud and clear. We refuse to be sprayed like bugs and we acknowledge that all the geoengineering and weather modification patents owned by the Department of Defense and its contractors do not equate to permission to spray. All spraying of the skies is illegal because no one has given their consent. As it is with medicine and science, ALL experimentations require consent. This fundamental principle of consent ensures that the immoral thugs who have agreed to be involved in these illegal spraying programs are criminals committing crimes against humanity.

There is no debate here. And so the resuming of sky spraying is a reminder that Trump is in a tough position that pins him against the ever-present and globally imposing machinery of the US Military Industrial Complex and its Intelligence mechanism which creates agendas which only benefit themselves. This is the same US military mechanism that Trump has been worshiping since the very beginning of his campaign. The same US military that has thousands of military bases all over the world yet still needs to be “rebuilt” and the same US military which has been illegally … and mysteriously occupying Afghanistan for over 15 long years without any real tangible and reasonable explanation… especially to any normal and awakened truth seeker who knows that 9/11 had nothing to do with Afghanistan.

Since the beginning of 2017 I’ve posed two primary questions to the Trump administration- Who will be the next bogeyman? And, will the fakery and deception continue? And to this I want to add another question: Will the attack on humanity itself, like chemtrails spraying, continue? If Trump is willing to go after the vaccine industry then shouldn’t geoengineering be on the table as well? Questions like these are just another reminder of just how much the Soros funded Liberal Left is being used to distract and divide Americans with meaningless issues so that they don’t focus on issues like these that matter. Tough times are seemingly ahead for truth seekers.


Subscribe to The Sleuth Journal Newsletter for Daily Articles!


The post Forget Trump- Military Industrial Complex Takes Charge, Blasts Skies With Chemtrails (VIDEO) appeared first on The Sleuth Journal.


Source: Alternative news journal

Share and Enjoy

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Delicious
  • LinkedIn
  • StumbleUpon
  • Add to favorites
  • Email
  • RSS