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
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.
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.
=====================================
'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!!'
Tracing ISIS’ Weapons Supply Chain—Back to the US
'Tulsi Gabbard (VS congres Hawaï): Trump is de beschermende Big Brother van Al Qaida'
©
REUTERS / PETER NICHOLLS
