Mother of all wars

Diplomats used to be people trained to play with words. They knew how to play with words like, murder, assassination, liquidation and extermination. They knew when to use which word. But lately the military industrial complex has probably started employing diplomats and copywriters, because now the military industrial complex plays with words.

When I hear things like “moderate rebels”, I can understand how good the military industrial complex has become over the years in softening facts, so that they become more digestible.

This evolution of the military industrial complex started way back in the 1940s, but I will start from late 70s and tell you how terrorists were redressed verbally as “good people”.

It was in Afghanistan that the war took a major media dimension in cahoots with the war on the ground. In the proxy war fought in Afghanistan between the United States and the Soviet Union the Americans and their allies dubbed people like Gulbadin  Hikmatyar and Burhan-ud-din Rabbani as freedom fighters, thereby covering their religious extremist goals under the cover of good rebellion. I can tell you that the only real freedom fighter in that Afghan war was Ahmed Shah Masood, who fought against the Soviet soldiers for the cause of Afghanistan and not for enforcing outside agendas in Afghanistan and the region.

All other groups were American backed and were terrorist groups in their essence. If you don’t want to accept the reality that the U.S. government has been funding terrorism in this region since mid-seventies, let me just sugar coat it by telling you that terrorists like Gulbadin Hikmatyar and Osama Bin Laden were Wahhabis and were funded and supported by the Saudi Arabian Wahhabi monarchy. So for the sake of your mental peace, the US didn’t know that their biggest Muslim ally was planning on using the Afghan situation to implement its own Wahhabi agenda.

But, a rose by any other name would smell as sweet. So it was state supported terrorism in Afghanistan in late 70s. Then it was the same story in Chechnya, where all the well trained terrorists from Afghanistan were dislocated to fight another proxy war. I will not waste my time naming names, but please do search for people involved in the Chechen conflict from the anti-Russia side and you will find many interesting names, who used to be “freedom fighters” in Afghanistan.

Then we move on down the line and we come to the “Arab Spring”. The sole purpose of that exercise in Northern Africa was to attack Libya and displace Gaddafi. Look at the map and then you can understand my point of view in a better light. On the western Libyan border Tunisia got destabilized, allowing the military industrial complex to pump in some “freedom fighters” of non-Tunisian origin under the guise of revolutionaries.

Then on the eastern Libyan border the “freedom fighters” entered Egypt for the cause of the “mass protests”. And then one fine day, the “freedom fighters” unwittingly slipped out of Tunisia and Egypt into Libya and the “spring” burned down the Libyan garden. No, I am not romanticising the state of affairs in Libya. I am telling you the facts. People lived under a dictatorship, but they were safe in their streets. They had jobs. They had education. They had food on their tables and most importantly Libya had no Al-Qaida affiliation. There was no Ansar al-Sharia in Libya.

Let us look at all of this from another angle. Egypt was ruled by the military, which kept Hosni Mubarak as their frontman since 1981. What happened as a result of the “Arab spring”? Hosni Mubarak was ousted. He was replaced by an Islamic fundamentalist. Then within a year that Islamic fundamentalist was replaced by a military general, Abdel Fateh el-Sisi. So where is the “Spring” for the Egyptian people?

Another interesting fact that I would like to note here is that a military General overthrew an elected government in Pakistan in 1977. The general who implemented dictatorship in the country had attended a US military school. And during his reign hundreds of thousands of Pakistanis were persecuted. Similarly Sisi had also attended a US military school. So, will I be wrong in assuming that the Americans recruit foreign high-ranking military personnel and then assist them in staging coups against elected governments? Now that is what I call “bringing democracy” to oppressed people!

Anyway, the tide of the Wahhabi planned, and Western supported “spring” then turned towards Syria. And once again we witnessed how cleverly the military industrial complex used terminology like “moderate rebels” to disguise their terrorists. Don’t you find it strange that people, who represented Al-Qaida yesterday, have become leaders of ISIS today?

Syria had always been a moderate country. It has always been a rose among the thorns of Islamic fundamentalist regimes of the Middle-East. There was no Jabhat al-Nusra in Syria, before the “liberators” of the military industrial complex set foot in that country.

Even if you look at Iraq, you will see that during Saddam Hussein’s dictatorship, Iraq had no terrorist groups present on its soil. But after the “liberation” of Iraq, thanks to the military industrial complex, all that you find in Iraq now are terrorist groups.

I have repeatedly pointed to the automobiles used by the terrorists and how they magically acquire heavy weaponry overnight. But, some might still think that I am wrong.

If you think that I am wrong please tell me, why did the NATO forces need to bomb Libya in support of the “Arab spring”, when they did not bomb Tunisia or Egypt for the same cause? Why the Basque separatist movement is an internal Spanish affair, but Kosovo was not an internal Yugoslavian affair? Why the Chechen conflict was an anti-Muslim campaign, but bombing of Gaza is disguised as the right to self-defence for the state of Israel?

In Syria the Saudis and the Americans are supporting the terrorists, who challenge the legitimate government of Bashar al Assad, but in Yemen the Saudis and Qataris, supported by US and Israeli air-forces are bombing real freedom fighters?

Why were Americans so eager to support the right of self-determination for the rebel Baluchis in Pakistan, but the right of self-determination for the people of Kashmir is dubbed as anti-state terrorism?

All this word-game is leading us into another great war. I am not calling it the third world war, because the military industrial complex will definitely find some catchy tag for the event, to differentiate their most recent accomplishment.

May I suggest tagging the inevitable global war as “The mother of all wars”? And if you do like my suggestion, please do not forget to pay me the royalty.