De
regelmatige lezer van dit blog weet dat ik al een paar jaar een
aantal van 2,5 doden aanhoudt die deze eeuw zijn gevallen in de illegale
oorlogen van de VS (of zwaar gesteund door de VS met een vitale rol
in coördinatie van bombardementen enz.) in Afghanistan (en daarmee
deels in Pakistan), Irak, Libië, Syrië, Somalië en Jemen. Men
hield mij wel eens voor dat het aantal van 2,5 miljoen overdreven
was, echter nu blijkt (of eigenlijk al in 2018) dat het aantal doden
die in deze oorlogen zijn gevallen minstens 5 miljoen moet zijn, dit
gebaseerd op een artikel in Consortium News van 25 april
2018, geschreven door Nicolas JS
Davies, een artikel dat bestaat uit 3 delen en waarvan ik deel 3 voor
een deel heb overgenomen. (Davies gaat uit van minstens 5 miljoen
doden, maar stelt dat dit er ook 7 miljoen kunnen zijn......)
In
de eerste twee delen komt Davies tot de slotsom dat de (illegale)
oorlog van de VS tegen Irak minstens 2,4 miljoen mensen het leven
moet hebben gekost (let wel met hulp van andere NAVO-partners,
waaronder Nederland...)..... Terwijl de (illegale) oorlog van de VS
en haar NAVO-partners tegen Afghanistan en de meer geheime oorlog
tegen o.a. de Taliban in Pakistan 1,2 miljoen mensen het leven moet
hebben gekost, waar Davies aan toevoegt dat ook de CIA hier een grote
rol in heeft gespeeld (zoals de geheime acties tegen de Taliban in
Pakistan.......)
In
het laatste deel, dat hieronder gedeeltelijk is opgenomen, gaat
Davies diep in op de VS oorlogen tegen Libië, Syrië, Somalië en
Jemen. Daarin ook weer aandacht voor de geheime militaire acties
veelal geleid door de CIA. Verder wijst Davies op het feit dat alleen
wat betreft de (illegale) oorlog van de VS tegen Irak diepere studies
zijn gedaan naar het aantal doden, onderzoeken die veel verder gaan
dan die waarop de officiële cijfers zijn gebaseerd (aangeleverd door
media en andere bronnen) middels 'actief onderzoek' naar het aantal
doden, aangegeven door huishoudens. Onafhankelijke onderzoeken op
universitair niveau en niet zoals de andere (niet onafhankelijke)
onderzoeken onder toezicht van overheden. (braaf overgenomen door de afhankelijke reguliere westerse media)
Andere
onafhankelijke onderzoeken naar vergelijkbare oorlogen zoals die in
Angola, Bosnië en Congo (ook wel Democratische Republiek Congo
genoemd of kortweg DRC), Kosovo, Rwanda, Soedan, Oeganda en Irak
(waarvan we inderdaad door studies weten dat het aantal doden veel
hoger is dan het officieel aangehouden getal), tonen aan dat het
werkelijke aantal doden 5 tot 20 keer hoger liggen.......
Door
de afwezigheid van zulke uitgebreide studies in Afghanistan,
Pakistan, Libië, Syrië en Jemen, heeft Davies 'passieve
rapportages' (n.a.v. niet-onafhankelijk onderzoek) over oorlogsdoden
geëvalueerd en beoordeeld wat het werkelijke aantal doden moet zijn,
gezien eerdere (wel onafhankelijke) studies naar andere
oorlogsgebieden waarbij de officiële cijfers zijn vergeleken met het
werkelijke aantal doden die daar later werden geteld middels
(onafhankelijke) studies (zo dat is er ook weer uit). Het voorgaande
is een versimpelde weergave van de woorden die Davies gebruikt (wat
mij betreft behoorlijk ingewikkeld, maar ja ik ben dan ook weer een
dag ouder).
Davies
heeft alleen de gewelddadige doden (vermoorden) geteld en niet de
doden die indirect door die oorlogen zijn gevallen, zoals de doden
die vielen door het bombarderen van ziekenhuizen en andere medische
faciliteiten, de doden die in andere situaties te voorkomen waren
geweest zoals door besmettelijke ziekten, ondervoeding en zware
milieuvervuiling, ook al is het aantal doden dat daardoor is gevallen
behoorlijk groot (kan je nagaan.....)..... Zelf tel ik die doden wel
op bij het totale aantal doden dat door een oorlog is gevallen, zo
zijn er in Jemen minstens 500.000 doden gevallen (waaronder meer dan
100.000 kinderen), dit door honger, cholera en difterie, die zonder
oorlog niet zouden zijn overleden..... Deze mensen zijn dan ook
allemaal vermoord door de smerige oorlog die de Saoedische
terreurcoalitie voert tegen de sjiitische bevolking van Jemen, met
directe en indirecte steun van de VS en Groot-Brittannië, vandaar
ook dat ik al jaren spreek over een (immer voortgaande) genocide die
deze terreurcoalitie uitvoert in Jemen..... (terwijl Nederland wapenonderdelen levert aan S-A.....)
Wat
betreft Irak houdt Davies het aantal vermoorde mensen op 2,4 miljoen,
o.a. gebaseerd op de schattingen naar aanleiding van een studie door
de Lancet in 2006 en 2007 die in overeenstemming waren met elkaar,
waar hij een som heeft losgelaten op het aantal doden genoemd in
passieve rapportages en het aantal doden gevonden in actieve studies
als tussen die van de Lancet en Iraq Body Count (IBC) in 2006
vergeleken met het aantal doden in het IBC onderzoek vanaf 2007.
Davies
gaat ook in op de manier waarop de oorlogen worden verslagen door de
media, waarbij al vanaf Obama zo min mogelijk of helemaal geen
oorlogscorrespondenten werden toegelaten tot gebieden waar de VS als
een beest tekeerging, neem ook de VS bombardementen op een groot
aantal steden in Irak en Syrië zoals respectievelijk Mosul en Raqqa.....
De
mensen in Mosul, Raqqa, Kobane, Fallujah, Ramadi, Tawergha en Deir ez-Zor stierven met bosjes als er geen westerse
verslaggevers en tv ploegen aanwezig waren om de bloedbaden te
verslaan..... Harold Pinter vroeg toen hem in 2005 de Nobelprijs voor
de Literatuur werd toegekend of deze bloedbaden plaatsvonden en of ze
in alle gevallen te danken waren aan het buitenlandbeleid van de VS.
Het antwoord was: ja, deze bloedbaden hebben plaatsgevonden en waren
in alle gevallen te danken aan het buitenlandbeleid van de VS.....
Maar jij zou het niet weten. Het gebeurde nooit. Er gebeurde nooit
iets. Zelfs toen het plaatsvond gebeurde het niet. Het deed er niet
toe. Het was van geen belang. (…......)
Voor
de rest van de informatie verwijs ik je naar het originele artikel,
waarin Davies o.a. tot de conclusie komt dat het totale aantal
gewelddadige doden (i.t.t. Het aantal passieve doden of indirecte
doden) wat betreft Libië op 250.000 doden ligt (minimaal 150.000 en
maximaal 360.000 doden). Als het gaat om de illegale oorlog tegen Somalië en dan vanaf 2006 (de VS voerde al veel eerder oorlog tegen
dat land) schat Davies het aantal door oorlogsgeweld gevallen doden op
650.000 (minimaal 500.000 en maximaal op 850.000 doden. Tot slot
Jemen: hier schat hij het aantal door oorlogsgeweld gevallen doden
op 175.000 doden (minimaal 120.000 en maximaal 240.000).
Nogmaals:
de manier van rekenen dus doden gevallen door oorlogsgeweld en het
aantal doden dat indirect door oorlogen valt, vind ik nogal vreemd,
immers ook de indirecte doden moet je meetellen, daar zonder oorlog
deze mensen niet waren omgekomen.....
Lees
het (hele) artikel van Davies en zegt het voort, de wereld moet zo
snel mogelijk de VS oorlogsmachine stoppen, of het nu om 2,5
miljoen doden of 5 dan wel 7 miljoen doden gaat, elke dode is er één
teveel, de terreur van de VS en de NAVO moet eindelijk gestopt
worden, hoe kunnen we ons wel druk maken om Coronadoden en het veel
grotere aantal vermoorde mensen in de illegale VS oorlogen maar links
laten liggen (beter: rechts laten liggen......)..... Dit artikel vond ik door een link in een bericht van Caitlin Johnstone, dat ik op een later tijdstip zal plaatsen.
International,
Middle
East, U.S.
How
Many Millions Have Been Killed in America’s Post-9/11 Wars? Part 3:
Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen
April
25, 2018
In the third
and final part of his series, Nicolas JS Davies investigates the
death toll of U.S. covert and proxy wars in Libya, Syria, Somalia and
Yemen and underscores the importance of comprehensive war mortality
studies.
By
Nicolas J S Davies Special
to Consortium News
U.S. Army forces operating in southern Iraq during Operation Iraqi Freedom, Apr. 2, 2003 (U.S. Navy photo)
In the first
two parts of this report, I have estimated that about 2.4
million people have been killed as a result of the U.S. invasion
of Iraq, while about 1.2
million have been killed in Afghanistan and Pakistan as a result
of the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan. In the third and final part
of this report, I will estimate how many people have been killed as a
result of U.S. military and CIA interventions in Libya, Syria,
Somalia and Yemen.
Of the
countries that the U.S. has attacked and destabilized since 2001,
only Iraq has been the subject of comprehensive “active”
mortality studies that can reveal otherwise unreported deaths. An
“active” mortality study is one that “actively” surveys
households to find deaths that have not previously been reported by
news reports or other published sources.
These studies
are often carried out by people who work in the field of public
health, like Les Roberts at Columbia University, Gilbert Burnham at
Johns Hopkins and Riyadh Lafta at Mustansiriya University in Baghdad,
who co-authored the
2006 Lancet
study
of Iraq war mortality. In defending their studies in Iraq and
their results, they emphasized that their Iraqi survey teams were
independent of the occupation government and that that was an
important factor in the objectivity of their studies and the
willingness of people in Iraq to talk honestly with them.
Comprehensive
mortality studies in other war-torn countries (like Angola, Bosnia,
the Democratic Republic of Congo, Guatemala, Iraq, Kosovo, Rwanda,
Sudan and Uganda) have revealed total numbers of deaths that are 5
to 20 times those previously revealed by “passive” reporting
based on news reports, hospital records and/or human rights
investigations.
In the
absence of such comprehensive studies in Afghanistan, Pakistan,
Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen, I have evaluated passive reports of
war deaths and tried to assess what proportion of actual deaths these
passive reports are likely to have counted by the methods they have
used, based on ratios of actual deaths to passively reported deaths
found in other war-zones.
I have only
estimated violent deaths. None of my estimates include deaths
from the indirect effects of these wars, such as the destruction of
hospitals and health systems, the spread of otherwise preventable
diseases and the effects of malnutrition and environmental pollution,
which have also been substantial in all these countries.
For Iraq, my
final estimate of about
2.4 million people killed was based on accepting the estimates of
the 2006
Lancet
study
and the 2007 Opinion
Research Business (ORB) survey, which were consistent with each
other, and then applying the same ratio of actual deaths to passively
reported deaths (11.5:1) as between the Lancet
study and Iraq Body Count
(IBC) in 2006 to IBC’s count for the years since 2007.
For
Afghanistan, I estimated that about 875,000
Afghans have been killed. I explained that the annual
reports on civilian casualties by the UN
Assistance Mission to Afghanistan (UNAMA) are based only on
investigations completed by the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights
Commission (AIHRC), and that they knowingly exclude large numbers of
reports of civilian deaths that the AIHRC has not yet investigated or
for which it has not completed its investigations. UNAMA’s
reports also lack any reporting at all from many areas of the country
where the Taliban and other Afghan resistance forces are active, and
where many or most U.S. air strikes and night raids therefore take
place.
I concluded
that UNAMA’s reporting of civilian deaths in Afghanistan appears to
be as inadequate as the extreme under-reporting found at the end of
the Guatemalan Civil War, when the UN-sponsored Historical
Verification Commission revealed 20 times more deaths than previously
reported.
For Pakistan,
I estimated that about 325,000
people had been killed. That was based on published
estimates of combatant deaths, and on applying an average of the
ratios found in previous wars (12.5:1) to the number of civilian
deaths reported by the South
Asia Terrorism Portal (SATP) in India.
Estimating
Deaths in Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen
In the third
and final part of this report, I will estimate the death toll caused
by U.S. covert and proxy wars in Libya, Syria, Somalia and Yemen.
Senior U.S.
military officers have hailed the U.S.
doctrine of covert and proxy war that found its full flowering
under the Obama administration as a “disguised,
quiet, media-free” approach to war, and have traced the
development of this doctrine back to U.S. wars in Central America in
the 1980s. While the U.S. recruitment,
training, command and control of death squads in Iraq was dubbed
“the Salvador Option,” U.S. strategy in Libya, Syria, Somalia and
Yemen has in fact followed this model even more closely.
These wars
have been catastrophic for the people of all these countries, but the
U.S.’s “disguised, quiet, media-free” approach to them has been
so successful in propaganda terms that most Americans know very
little about the U.S. role in the intractable violence and chaos that
has engulfed them.
The very
public nature of the illegal but largely symbolic missile strikes on
Syria on April 14, 2018 stands in sharp contrast to the “disguised,
quiet, media-free” U.S.-led bombing campaign that has destroyed
Raqqa, Mosul and several other Syrian and Iraqi cities with more
than 100,000 bombs and missiles since 2014.
The people of
Mosul, Raqqa, Kobane, Sirte, Fallujah, Ramadi, Tawergha and Deir
Ez-Zor have died like trees falling in a forest where there were no
Western reporters or TV crews to record their massacres. As
Harold Pinter asked of earlier U.S. war crimes in his 2005
Nobel acceptance speech,
“Did they
take place? And are they in all cases attributable to U.S.
foreign policy? The answer is yes, they did take place, and
they are in all cases attributable to American foreign policy. But
you wouldn’t know it. It never happened. Nothing ever
happened. Even while it was happening, it wasn’t happening. It
didn’t matter. It was of no interest.”
For more
detailed background on the critical role the U.S. has played in each
of these wars, please read my article, “Giving
War Too Many Chances,” published in January 2018.
Libya
The only
legal justification for NATO and its Arab monarchist allies to have
dropped at
least 7,700 bombs and missiles on Libya and invaded
it with special operations forces beginning in February 2011 was
UN
Security Council resolution 1973, which authorized “all
necessary measures” for the narrowly defined purpose of protecting
civilians in Libya.
Smoke is seen after an NATO airstrikes hit Tripoli, Libya Photo: REX
But the war
instead killed far more civilians than any estimate of the number
killed in the initial rebellion in February and March 2011, which
ranged from 1,000 (a UN estimate) to 6,000 (according to the Libyan
Human Rights League). So the war clearly failed in its stated,
authorized purpose, to protect civilians, even as it succeeded in a
different and unauthorized one: the illegal overthrow of the Libyan
government.
SC resolution
1973 expressly prohibited “a foreign occupation force of any form
on any part of Libyan territory.” But NATO and its allies
launched a
covert invasion of Libya by thousands of Qatari and Western
special operations forces, who planned the rebels’ advance across
the country, called in air strikes against government forces and led
the final assault on the Bab al-Aziziya military headquarters in
Tripoli.
Qatari Chief
of Staff Major
General Hamad bin Ali al-Atiya, proudly told AFP,
“We were
among them and the numbers of Qataris on the ground were in the
hundreds in every region. Training and communications had been
in Qatari hands. Qatar… supervised the rebels’ plans because they
are civilians and did not have enough military experience. We acted
as the link between the rebels and NATO forces.”
There are
credible reports that a
French security officer may even have delivered the coup de grace
that killed Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi, after he was captured,
tortured and sodomized with a knife by the “NATO rebels.”
A
parliamentary Foreign
Affairs Committee inquiry (FAC) in the U.K. in 2016 concluded that a
“limited intervention to protect civilians drifted into an
opportunistic policy of regime change by military means,” resulting
in, “political and economic collapse, inter-militia and
inter-tribal warfare, humanitarian and migrant crises, widespread
human rights violations, the spread of Gaddafi regime weapons across
the region and the growth of Isil [Islamic State] in north Africa.”
Passive
Reports of Civilian Deaths in Libya
Once the
Libyan government was overthrown, journalists tried to inquire about
the sensitive subject of civilian deaths, which was so critical to
the legal and political justifications for the war. But the
National Transitional Council (NTC), the unstable new government
formed by Western-backed exiles and rebels, stopped issuing public
casualty estimates and ordered hospital staff not
to release information to reporters.
In any case,
as in Iraq and Afghanistan, morgues were overflowing during the war
and many people buried their loved ones in their backyards or
wherever they could, without taking them to hospitals.
A rebel
leader estimated in August 2011 that 50,000
Libyans had been killed. Then, on September 8th 2011, Naji
Barakat, the NTC’s new health minister, issued a statement that
30,000 people had been killed and another 4,000 were missing,
based on a survey of hospitals, local officials and rebel commanders
in the majority of the country that the NTC by then controlled. He
said it would take several more weeks to complete the survey, so he
expected the final figure to be higher.
Barakat’s
statement did not include separate counts of combatant and civilian
deaths. But he said that about half of the 30,000 reported dead
were troops loyal to the government, including 9,000 members of the
Khamis Brigade, led by Gaddafi’s son Khamis. Barakat asked
the public to report deaths in their families and details of missing
persons when they came to mosques for prayers that Friday. The NTC’s
estimate of 30,000 people killed appeared to consist mainly of
combatants on both sides.
The most
comprehensive survey of war deaths since the end of the 2011 war in
Libya was an “epidemiological community-based study” titled
“Libyan
Armed Conflict 2011: Mortality, Injury and Population Displacement.”
It was authored by three medical professors from Tripoli, and
published in the African
Journal of Emergency Medicine
in 2015.
The authors
took records of war deaths, injuries and displacement collected by
the Ministry of Housing and Planning, and sent teams to conduct
face-to-face interviews with a member of each family to verify how
many members of their household were killed, wounded or displaced.
They did not try to separate the killing of civilians from the
deaths of combatants.
Nor did they
try to statistically estimate previously unreported deaths through
the “cluster sample survey” method of the Lancet
study
in Iraq. But the Libyan Armed Conflict study is the most
complete record of confirmed deaths in the war in Libya up to
February 2012, and it confirmed the deaths of at least 21,490 people.
In 2014, the
ongoing chaos and factional fighting in Libya flared up into what
Wikipedia now calls a second
Libyan Civil War. A group called Libya
Body Count (LBC) began tabulating violent deaths in Libya, based
on media reports, on the model of Iraq
Body Count (IBC). But LBC only did so for three years, from
January 2014 until December 2016. It counted 2,825 deaths in
2014, 1,523 in 2015 and 1,523 in 2016. (The LBC website says it was
just a coincidence that the number was identical in 2015 and 2016.)
The
U.K.-based Armed Conflict
Location and Event Data (ACLED) project has also kept a count of
violent deaths in Libya. ACLED counted 4,062 deaths in 2014-6,
compared with 5,871 counted by Libya Body Count. For the
remaining periods between March 2012 and March 2018 that LBC did not
cover, ACLED has counted 1,874 deaths.
If LBC had
covered the whole period since March 2012, and found the same
proportionally higher number than ACLED as it did for 2014-6, it
would have counted 8,580 people killed.
Estimating
How Many People Have Really Been Killed in Libya
Combining the
figures from the Libyan
Armed Conflict 2011 study and our combined, projected figure from
Libya Body Count
and ACLED gives a total of
30,070 passively reported deaths since February 2011.
The Libyan
Armed Conflict (LAC) study was based on official records in a country
that had not had a stable, unified government for about 4 years,
while Libya Body Count was a fledgling effort to emulate Iraq Body
Count that tried to cast a wider net by not relying only on
English-language news sources.
In Iraq, the
ratio between the 2006 Lancet
study and Iraq Body Count was higher because IBC was only counting
civilians, while the Lancet
study counted Iraqi combatants as well as civilians. Unlike
Iraq Body Count, both our main passive sources in Libya counted both
civilians and combatants. Based on the one-line descriptions of
each incident in the Libya
Body Count database, LBC’s total appears to include roughly
half combatants and half civilians.
Military
casualties are generally counted more accurately than civilian ones,
and military forces have an interest in accurately assessing enemy
casualties as well as identifying their own. The opposite is true of
civilian casualties, which are nearly always evidence of war crimes
that the forces who killed them have a strong interest in
suppressing.
So, in
Afghanistan and Pakistan, I treated combatants and civilians
separately, applying typical ratios between passive reporting and
mortality studies only to civilians, while accepting reported
combatant deaths as they were passively reported.
But the
forces fighting in Libya are not a national army with the strict
chain of command and organizational structure that results in
accurate reporting of military casualties in other countries and
conflicts, so both civilian and combatant deaths appear to be
significantly under-reported by my two main sources, the Libya
Armed Conflict study and
Libya Body Count. In fact, the National Transitional
Council’s (NTC) estimates from August and September 2011 of
30,000 deaths were already much higher than the numbers of war deaths
in the LAC study.
When the 2006
Lancet study of mortality in Iraq was published, it revealed
14 times the number of deaths counted in Iraq Body Count’s list of
civilian deaths. But IBC later discovered more deaths from that
period, reducing the ratio between the Lancet study’s
estimate and IBC’s revised count to 11.5:1.
The combined
totals from the Libya Armed Conflict 2011 study and Libya Body Count
appear to be a larger proportion of total violent deaths than Iraq
Body Count has counted in Iraq, mainly because LAC and LBC both
counted combatants as well as civilians, and because Libya Body Count
included deaths reported in Arabic news sources, while IBC relies
almost entirely on
English language news sources and generally requires “a minimum
of two independent data sources” before recording each death.
In other
conflicts, passive reporting has never succeeded in counting more
than a fifth of the deaths found by comprehensive, “active”
epidemiological studies. Taking all these factors into account,
the true number of people killed in Libya appears to be somewhere
between five and twelve times the numbers counted by the Libya Armed
Conflict 2011 study, Libya Body Count and ACLED.
So I estimate
that about 250,000 Libyans have been killed in the war, violence and
chaos that the U.S. and its allies unleashed in Libya in February
2011, and which continues to the present day. Taking 5:1 and
12:1 ratios to passively counted deaths as outer limits, the minimum
number of people that have been killed would be 150,000 and the
maximum would be 360,000.
Syria
The
“disguised,
quiet, media-free” U.S. role in Syria began in late 2011 with a
CIA operation to funnel foreign
fighters and weapons through Turkey and Jordan into Syria,
working with Qatar and Saudi Arabia to militarize unrest that began
with peaceful Arab Spring protests against Syria’s Baathist
government.
The
mostly leftist and democratic Syrian political groups
coordinating non-violent protests in Syria in 2011 strongly opposed
these foreign efforts to unleash a civil war, and issued strong
statements opposing violence, sectarianism and foreign intervention.
But even as a
December 2011 Qatari-sponsored opinion poll found that 55%
of Syrians supported their government, the U.S. and its allies
were committed to adapting their Libyan regime change model to Syria,
knowing full well from the outset that this war would be much
bloodier and more destructive.
The CIA and
its Arab monarchist partners eventually funneled thousands
of tons of weapons and thousands of foreign Al-Qaeda-linked
jihadis into Syria. The weapons came first from Libya, then
from Croatia and the Balkans. They included howitzers, missile
launchers and other heavy weapons, sniper rifles, rocket propelled
grenades, mortars and small arms, and the U.S. eventually directly
supplied powerful anti-tank missiles.
Meanwhile,
instead of cooperating with Kofi Annan’s UN-backed efforts to bring
peace to Syria in 2012, the U.S. and its allies held three “Friends
of Syria” conferences, where they pursued their own “Plan B,”
pledging ever-growing support to the increasingly Al-Qaeda-dominated
rebels. Kofi
Annan quit his thankless role in disgust after Secretary of State
Clinton and her British, French and Saudi allies cynically undermined
his peace plan.
The rest, as
they say, is history, a history of ever-spreading violence and chaos
that has drawn the U.S., U.K., France, Russia, Iran and all of
Syria’s neighbors into its bloody vortex. As Phyllis Bennis
of the Institute for Policy Studies has observed, these external
powers have all been ready to fight over Syria “to
the last Syrian.”
The bombing
campaign that President Obama launched against Islamic State in 2014
is the heaviest bombing campaign since the U.S. War in Vietnam,
dropping more
than 100,000 bombs and missiles on Syria and Iraq. Patrick
Cockburn, the veteran Middle East correspondent of the U.K.’s
Independent
newspaper, recently visited Raqqa, formerly Syria’s 6th largest
city, and wrote that, “The
destruction is total.”
“In other
Syrian cities bombed or shelled to the point of oblivion there is at
least one district that has survived intact,” Cockburn wrote. “This
is the case even in Mosul in Iraq, though much of it was pounded into
rubble. But in Raqqa the damage and the demoralization are all
pervasive. When something does work, such as a single traffic
light, the only one to do so in the city, people express surprise.”
Voor het
vervolg zie het origineel.
=====================================
Zie ook: '10 jaar geleden werden de Irak oorlogs-logboeken van de VS vrijgegeven, voor de oorlogsmisdaden daarin vermeld moeten niet de daders Bush en Blair boeten, maar journalist Julian Assange'
'VS maakte 10 keer meer slachtoffers, dan de reguliere media rapporteerden........'
'Libië, het echte motief voor de illegale oorlog tegen dat land, met in de hoofdrol Hillary Clinton.....' (en zie de links in dat bericht)
'VS vermoordde in Afghanistan weer 15 burgers waaronder 3 vrouwen en 3 kinderen........' (en zie de links in dat bericht naar meer artikelen over Afghanistan, o.a. met een 'mooie rol' voor broodschrijver Grunberg....)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hier nog een paar voorbeelden van grootschalige VS terreur:
VS vermoordde meer dan 20 miljoen mensen sinds het einde van WOII........' (tot het jaar 2000)
'VS buitenlandbeleid sinds WOII: een lange lijst van staatsgrepen en oorlogen..........'
'List of wars involving the United States'
'VS: openlijke militaire oefening met terreurgroep in Syrië......'
'Bang voor Amerika'
'NAVO gaat VS helpen in Zuid-Amerika terreur uit te oefenen: Colombia lid van de NAVO.........'
'VS commando's vechten o.a. in Midden- en Zuid-Amerika, aldus het VS ministerie van oorlog.........'
'VS heeft Rusland al 3 keer met oorlog gedreigd, de laatste 2 keer in de afgelopen 1,5 week......' (bericht van 5 oktober 2018)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Zie wat betreft westerse wapenleveringen aan terreurgroepen als ISIS: 'Rutte en Koenders verantwoordelijk voor wapenleveranties aan IS!!'
'
Lt. General McInerney says Obama helped build ISIS with Weapons from Benghazi'
'
Tulsi Gabbard (VS congres Hawaï): Trump is de beschermende Big Brother van Al Qaida'
