On August 6,1945, Japan’s Hiroshima was bombed by US atomic bomb, nicknamed “Fat Man,” exploded with a force equivalent to 21 kilotons of TNT fired an area that covered three square miles, killing instantly 140000 civilians. On August 9, Nagasaki was bombed by the plutonium core atomic bomb the U.S. dropped that day from the B29 Bockscar, captained by Major Charles Sweeney, killing instantly around 70000 civilians. Despite the Nagasaki bomb was more powerful than that of Hiroshima, material and human damage was limited by the fact that the bomb missed its target and that the mountains surrounding Nagasaki, which is located in a valley, contained the blast. However, in Urakami Valley, where the bomb landed, nearly 70 percent of the population perished.
In the aftermath of the WWII, politicians, military and historians have challenged the official narrative of Truman’s administration that the launch of atomic bomb was aimed at “saving American lives” Admiral William D. Leahy, Truman’s personal Chief of Staff, was critical of using the atomic bombs saying the U.S. “adopted an ethical standard common to the barbarians of the dark ages.” Even the National Museum of the U.S. Navy in Washington, DC acknowledges that the vast death and destruction wreaked by atomic bombings “made little impact on the Japanese military.
Truman even knew very well, through the intelligence reports, Japanese leadership were looking for honorable conditions to surrender. Truman was aware of civilians that were becoming increasingly demoralized for lack of food and energy supplies. To this must be added the huge destruction as the U.S. had firebombed and largely destroyed more than 100 Japanese cities, leaving millions homeless.
The question is not whether the atomic bombs were militarily or morally justifiable—they clearly were not. The question is why Truman chose to use them when he knew the end of the war was imminent and said so repeatedly and knew they were putting humanity on a glide path to annihilation.
Some studies point out that the U.S. wanted to test the uranium and plutonium-type bombs to show off their military muscle and take the advantage in the post-World War II diplomacy. As historians have increasingly come to realize, Truman had been obsessed with the Soviet Union since April 13, 1945—his first full day in office. Truman’s confrontation with Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Molotov on April 23, in which he erroneously accused the Soviets of having broken their Yalta promises, marked how dramatically the wartime alliance between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. had deteriorated in the 11 days since Roosevelt’s death.
James Byrnes, who became Truman’s Secretary of State in early July but had been his most trusted advisor since his first day in office, and Gen. Leslie Groves, the driving force behind the Manhattan Project, both asserted that the Soviet Union loomed as the real target behind the bomb project. Groves stated on another occasion, “There was never from about two weeks from the time I took charge of the Project any illusion on my part that Russia was our enemy, and the Project was conducted on that basis.”
Byrnes told three visiting scientists in late May that the bomb was needed to reverse Soviet gains in Eastern Europe. The future Nobel laureate physicist Joseph Rotblat who quit the project a few months later, when he said in March 1944, “You realize of course that the main purpose of this project is to subdue the Russians.” Some studies point out that the U.S. wanted to test the uranium and plutonium-type bombs to show off their military muscle and take the advantage in the post-World War II diplomacy.
THE SO CALLED “COUP” IN VENEZUELA : A HOLLYWOOD SHOW
In Venezuela, on Tuesday, April 30, a military coup attempt in Venezuela led by imprisoned right wing leader Leopoldo Lopez, freed from house arrest early Tuesday by Venezuela’s Sebin intelligence service and self-proclaimed “Interim President” Juan Guaido, and some members of the armed forces who blocked a highway in Caracas close to La Carleta airbase and called on the army to rise up
Planned longtime before by the secretary Pompeo former CIA director, John Bolton, Trump’s national adviser and the CIA’s psychological warfare department created in 1947 to fight international communism according to the Truman Doctrine, In ordre to make believe that Venezuela witnessed a military uprising led by Guiado, a psychological warfare has been waged both inside the country and internationally through social and mass media. While blocking the Altamira highway in eastern Caracas, Lopez and Guaido published videos on social media calling on other elements of the armed forces to join the uprising and on their supporters to take to the streets, making believe that the moment of victory and the ‘final phase” was approaching in order to oust the Maduro government.
Psychological warfare plan inside Venezuela
In his psychological warfare, Guiado posted a series of tweets around 6:00 am local time Juan Guaidó @jguaido –
“People of Venezuela began the end of usurpation. At this moment I meet the main military units of our armed force initiating the final phase of Operation Freedom”.
“Venezuelan people we go to the street, national armed force to continue the deployment until we consolidate the end of the encroachment that is already irreversible”.
“The national armed forces have made the right decision, they have the support of the Venezuelan people, with the endorsement of our Constitution, with the guarantee of being on the right side of the story. To deploy the forces to achieve the cessation of usurpation”
People of Venezuela, we need to go out on the streets together, to support the democratic forces and to regain our freedom. Organized and together with the main military units. People of Caracas, all to La Carlota.
Guaido also posted a short video which shows talking into the camera with some 30 soldiers standing behind him. Guaidó and López went to the La Carlota airforce base near Caracas. Lopez tweeted
Leopoldo López @leopoldolopez
“Venezuela: The final phase has begun for the cessation of usurpation, Operation Freedom. I have been released by the military to the order of the Constitution and of President Guaidó. I’m at the La Carlota Base. All to mobilize. It’s time to conquer freedom. Strength and Faith”
In Venezuela, on Tuesday, April 30, a military coup attempt in Venezuela led by imprisoned right wing leader Leopoldo Lopez, freed from house arrest early Tuesday by Venezuela’s Sebin intelligence service and self-proclaimed “Interim President” Juan Guaido, and some members of the armed forces who blocked a highway in Caracas close to La Carleta airbase and called on the army to rise up
Planned longtime before by the secretary Pompeo former CIA director, John Bolton, Trump’s national adviser and the CIA’s psychological warfare department created in 1947 to fight international communism according to the Truman Doctrine, In ordre to make believe that Venezuela witnessed a military uprising led by Guiado, a psychological warfare has been waged both inside the country and internationally through social and mass media. While blocking the Altamira highway in eastern Caracas, Lopez and Guaido published videos on social media calling on other elements of the armed forces to join the uprising and on their supporters to take to the streets, making believe that the moment of victory and the ‘final phase” was approaching in order to oust the Maduro government.
Psychological warfare plan inside Venezuela
In his psychological warfare, Guiado posted a series of tweets around 6:00 am local time Juan Guaidó @jguaido – 9:58 utc – 30 Apr 2019
“People of Venezuela began the end of usurpation. At this moment I meet the main military units of our armed force initiating the final phase of Operation Freedom”.
“Venezuelan people we go to the street, national armed force to continue the deployment until we consolidate the end of the encroachment that is already irreversible”.
“The national armed forces have made the right decision, they have the support of the Venezuelan people, with the endorsement of our Constitution, with the guarantee of being on the right side of the story. To deploy the forces to achieve the cessation of usurpation”
People of Venezuela, we need to go out on the streets together, to support the democratic forces and to regain our freedom. Organized and together with the main military units. People of Caracas, all to La Carlota.
Guaido also posted a short video which shows talking into the camera with some 30 soldiers standing behind him. Guaidó and López went to the La Carlota airforce base near Caracas. Lopez tweeted
“Venezuela: The final phase has begun for the cessation of usurpation, Operation Freedom. I have been released by the military to the order of the Constitution and of President Guaidó. I’m at the La Carlota Base. All to mobilize. It’s time to conquer freedom. Strength and Faith”
Rumors were spreading, surely according to the CIA’s psychological warfare plan, that Guiado and Lopez were inside La Cralotta airbase but t has been confirmed that Guadió and Lopez did not enter the La Carlota air base which remained under control of government forces.
A short video and a photo show a few low rank soldiers on a highway bridge with a carton of bananas and a basket of machine gun ammunition. Besides one machine guns they are armed with normal rifles and pistols. They are marked with a blue armlet or masks as Guaidó supporters.
Psychological warfare Plan outside Venezuela
Parallel to the psychological warfare plan inside Venezuela, the United States et its vassals in Latin America and Europe, waged a psychological warfare over the world reminding us the then psychological warfare waged by the CIA and its main propaganda devices, Voice of America and Radio Free Europe during Budapest, Prague and Walesa’s Solidarnosc in 1980-81.
Among the devices used in the psychological warfare waged against the Maduro government was news published by Reuters that the Blackwater founder Erik Prince is looking for money to set up a mercenary army to attack Venezuela and to create what he called the “dynamic event that break the stalemate that has existed since January” For this purpose, in private meetings in the United States and Europe, Prince sketched out a plan to field up to 5,000 soldiers-for-hire on behalf of Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido.
In the United States, Marco Rubio claimed that Guaidó supporters have taken the La Carlota Base. (La Carlota’s official name is Generalissimo Francisco de Miranda Air Base.) These reports are false. The small gang of Guaidó soldiers and some Guaidó supporters are on a highway bridge near the entrance of the air base. The base is in the hand of government forces. The opposition never entered it.
In France, the media of propaganda was spreading fake news of so called “uprising of the army against Maduro’s government” Reliable reports pointed out that Guaido’s “military uprising” were the 30 or so men on the bridge switched to Guaidó, carrying M4 Colt assault rifles delivered to the opposition through a number of flights coming from Florida. While the official assault rifle of the Venezuelan military is the Kalashnikov AK-103.
It is becoming clear that the so called “military uprising” is no more than a psychological warfare planned and waged internationally by the CIA and its propaganda’s outlets all over the world. Here is a map of the whole ‘military uprising”’ scene which plays in a small area of the wealthy Altamira district of Caracas.
At the bottom of the map is the La Calota air base, also known as Generalissimo Francisco de Miranda Base, which Guaido supporters tried to enter. They threw rocks against the guards until tear gas drove them away. Directly north of it runs a highway east to west. The two highway bridges on which Guaidó’s soldiers stand are crossing the highway right next to the base. Some 500 meters north of the highway bridges is Plaza Altamira (the upper blue point) where Guaidó spoke to some supporters.
The highway bridges can be seen in this video taken from north of the highway looking south across the bridges towards the airport. In the video some fireworks go off to which nervous Guaidó supporting soldiers on a bridge respond by firing a few shots into the air.
The whole “military uprising” was run within a 500 x 200 meter corridor with nothing of significance happening outside of it. A psychological warfare stunt but so far nothing more than that.
Rumors were spreading, surely according to the CIA’s psychological warfare plan, that Guiado and Lopez were inside La Cralotta airbase but t has been confirmed that Guadió and Lopez did not enter the La Carlota air base which remained under control of government forces.
A short video and a photo show a few low rank soldiers on a highway bridge with a carton of bananas and a basket of machine gun ammunition. Besides one machine guns they are armed with normal rifles and pistols. They are marked with a blue armlet or masks as Guaidó supporters.
Psychological warfare Plan outside Venezuela
Parallel to the psychological warfare plan inside Venezuela, the United States et its vassals in Latin America and Europe, waged a psychological warfare over the world reminding us the then psychological warfare waged by the CIA and its main propaganda devices, Voice of America and Radio Free Europe during Budapest, Prague and Walesa’s Solidarnosc in 1980-81.
Among the devices used in the psychological warfare waged against the Maduro government was news published by Reuters that the Blackwater founder Erik Prince is looking for money to set up a mercenary army to attack Venezuela and to create what he called the “dynamic event that break the stalemate that has existed since January” For this purpose, in private meetings in the United States and Europe, Prince sketched out a plan to field up to 5,000 soldiers-for-hire on behalf of Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido.
In the United States, Marco Rubio claimed that Guaidó supporters have taken the La Carlota Base. (La Carlota’s official name is Generalissimo Francisco de Miranda Air Base.) These reports are false. The small gang of Guaidó soldiers and some Guaidó supporters are on a highway bridge near the entrance of the air base. The base is in the hand of government forces. The opposition never entered it.
In France, the media of propaganda was spreading fake news of so called “uprising of the army against Maduro’s government” Reliable reports pointed out that Guaido’s “military uprising” were the 30 or so men on the bridge switched to Guaidó, carrying M4 Colt assault rifles delivered to the opposition through a number of flights coming from Florida. While the official assault rifle of the Venezuelan military is the Kalashnikov AK-103.
It is becoming clear that the so called “military uprising” is no more than a psychological warfare planned and waged internationally by the CIA and its propaganda’s outlets all over the world. Here is a map of the whole ‘military uprising”’ scene which plays in a small area of the wealthy Altamira district of Caracas.
Venezuela4s Hollowod show
At the bottom of the map is the La Calota air base, also known as Generalissimo Francisco de Miranda Base, which Guaido supporters tried to enter. They threw rocks against the guards until tear gas drove them away. Directly north of it runs a highway east to west. The two highway bridges on which Guaidó’s soldiers stand are crossing the highway right next to the base. Some 500 meters north of the highway bridges is Plaza Altamira (the upper blue point) where Guaidó spoke to some supporters.
The highway bridges can be seen in this video taken from north of the highway looking south across the bridges towards the airport. In the video some fireworks go off to which nervous Guaidó supporting soldiers on a bridge respond by firing a few shots into the air.
The whole “military uprising” was run within a 500 x 200 meter corridor with nothing of significance happening outside of it. A psychological warfare stunt but so far nothing more than that.
the Cold War is often misinterpreted as a global rivalry between the United States and the Soviet Union, According to dominant and wide-spread mythology in the West, the so-called Cold War began in the wake of the Second World War when “pacific” western democracies and generally what we called the “Free world” led by the United States of America were assaulted and threatened by totalitarian system and by the thrust of “ remorseless Soviet expansion”. The binary and Manichean picture surrounding the Cold War reduced the post-war period to a mere rivalry and to a simplistic scheme between the “good and evil ”, a struggle between two rival superpowers and two antagonizing ideologies competing both for the domination of international affairs and looking each and other for world hegemony. Basically, the Cold War was about the Free World versus Communist slavery and its outbreak was to be attributed to the Soviet Union accused to be the full responsible for the onset of the conflict while the United States was tally innocent. In the face of Soviet aggressiveness and territorial and ideological expansionism the United States had no choice only to protect both its own legitimate security interests and democracy in the various European nations and to cope with a real danger, the spread and the contagion of international communism sponsored by the government of the Soviet Union. At the end of his account Potsdam Conference Mr Truman accused the Soviet Union for “planning world conquest”
These assumptions by no means exhaust the various fallacies found in the literature on Cold War. When discussing the matter weal with abstractuions and try to isolate to mix and to generalize. As declasiified U.S. policy documents revealed, the primary threat posed by the soviet Union was not its aggressivessness or its expansionary policy but rather its emergence as alternative pattern and a model for the newly independent countries born from the “decolonization” and its willingness to supply military and economic support to third world regimes that were targets of U.S aggression and subversion. The Soviet Union thus served to deter and restrain U.S imperialism and to restrain its actions in the Third World.
In the mainstream media and the academic circles, admittedly, the foreign policy makers are the president giving the general orientation allegedly implemented by his foreign minister. The president and his foreign minister are nothing but a frontage and a public show hiding the real actors of the foreign policy. A closely look of the matter, we discover that this schemas is too simplistic to be true.
Contrary to received ideas and popular stereotypes and clichés, the strategic and geopolitical agendas in foreign policy in particular, are not taken by politicians either the president or his foreign minister. The real foreign policy makers, those having the onus of elaborating doctrine and strategic and geopolitical plans, the topics and the issue of the future agenda are recruiting generally in corporate funded thinks tanks and the academic circles, economic and industry leaders and powerful lobbyists of especial interest. The backstairs influence that these hidden policymakers are exerting in the shadow within and inside the foreign ministry explains and illustrates perfectly the continuity and policy prevalent in the western politics in spite of political alternative, either between Democrats or republicans in US, or between Right and leftwing parties in Europe explains the permanence of foreign policy in the USA when a democratic US president is forced to continue and implement the foreign policy and the geopolitical and strategic agenda of his predecessor republican without any possibilty to direct it otherwise.
The US foreign policy since the Reagan administration, is dominated by the neocons which at the time pushed Israel friendly policies toward Iran seeing her as a counterweight to Iraq and this strategy led eventually to the Iran-Contra Affair. In the 1990s the neocons gained political momentum and took a real power in the US foreign policy thanks to their well-funded web of think tanks and medi outlets benefiting both from the largesse of military contractors and government-funded operations like the National Endowment for democracy headed by neocon Carl Gershman.
The US foreign policy in the Middle East has been bluntly deciding as Mersheimer and very recently Kirk Beattie had shown the role of Zionist lobby in the US foreign policy especially the role played by AIPAC the most powerful and influential and money-wise seeking support of Israel policy in Palestine and in the Middle East among the congressmen. We can observe the same phenomenon In current French policy which is under the thumb of a powerful and influential Zionist lobby lead either on governmental level by the Zionist Valls and Fabius and by the mainstream media and by a myriad pro-Zionist think tanks. On can remember the role played by the Zionist Bernard Henry Levy who convinced the French former president, the pro-OTAN and the pro Isreal, Nicolas Sarkozy to wage a bloody war against Libya and his longtime leader the late Muamamr Kaddafi who had been overthrown before he had atrociously tortured and murdered on 20 of October 2011.
The last and powerful factor in the foreign policy in the West concern the warmongers mainstream Media which are controlled as in USA and in France by arms manufacturers (One can cite in the case of France the two notorious media owners and arms manufactures in France are Dassault and Lagardere)
Western propaganda and its mainstream and corporate media try to depict the current war waged in Syria as a mere domestic civil war opposing the very” democratic forces”, the “kindly” and “moderate rebels” fighting for the “right cause” viewed through the western lens, that is, democracy, human rights, rule of law and multipartism against a horrific, thirsty blood dictatorship, that of Bachar Al Assad.
In order to better understand the nature of the ongoing Syrian war, we must beforehand reject all these false narratives and ideas and bias extensively spreading and disseminating through the mainstream media, academic circles and the so-called military and civil experts. We have to concentrate first and before all on the origin of all these political, ethnic, religious, sectarian and ideological convulsions that took place in the Middle East over the last 50 years. We have to go back to the history of this region more precisely to the First World War and to its aftermath and treaties of Versailles of 1919 when the two major imperialist powers at the time, France and Great Britain decided, according to Sykes-Picot Accords and Balfour Declaration, to divide among them the area into two spheres of influence and to redraw the map of the Middle East following the collapse of the Ottoman Empire. When, at the end of the Second World War, the two old imperialist powers have been collapsed, they had been, at their turn, evinced and replaced in the area by a young and newcomer the United States of America. So, a century later, one can witness the same permanence of imperialism continuing to rule the region and contributing to exacerbate ethnic and religious conflicts in order to feed and fuel endless and bloody wars according to its own agenda. Once keeping this truth in mind, needless to say that, behind each conflict waged in the Middle East, over the past 50 years, there is this constant and perpetual hidden hand of western imperialism supported by proxy regimes in the Middle East. Nothing being new under the Sun, The ongoing Syrian must not be an exception to the rule in comparison with all wars that had been taking place in the Middle east over the past 50 years and more recently, those of Iraq and Libya.
Through their strategy of deception and manipulation, the western propaganda would like to make believe that the ongoing war in Syria is a civil war opposing domestic parties and local groups to the Syrian regime. One can remember that the term “moderate” rebels has been coined by the strategists of the Psy op waged nowadays against Assad and his regime. this strategy of deception aims to deceive and to make believe that there are “kind and very nice” rebels and “respectable” political forces struggling against a “nasty” and “evil” regime. By close and careful examination of the so called “moderate” rebels, we quickly arrive to another established fact that the Assad regime have to face not a civil war but a foreign infestation leading by a jihadist-led insurgency, unleashed in the Syrian territory since 2011 by Washington and its clients and satellites in Europe and in the Middle East with the main objective, overthrowing the legitimate regime and replacing it by an islamist regime pro-US.
These jihadist-led-insurgency, Washington call them “our guys” as it was the case with the Afghan mujahedeen branded by Ronald Reagan as “freedom fighters” and the French foreign minister vaunted them as guys “ making a good job”, in Syria. This appeal to jihadists groups is not a new strategy deployed by US imperialism to be in its military and gepopolical agendas since the creation in the late 1970 of the Afghan Mudjahedeen, a CIA offshoot–organized-armed Islamic jihadists when the US imperialism was leading a Crusade war against the communism and was fighting a secular pro-Soviet government in Afghanistan.
Now, in the ongoing Syrian war, like in Libya in 2011, we are witnessing the same strategy whose the main objective is to enlist jihadist groups being used as a military tools and geopolitical device to be in US led imperialism’s service. The Sunni jihadists deemed “moderate” by the West are in fact a patchwork of foreign mercenary jihadists, recruited from about one hundred countries around the world, such jihadists having been created from nothing by western governments and their Intelligence services committed to organize, fund, train and supply them by the last US and western manufactured and sophisticated weaponry, especially the TOW missiles supplied (anti-tank missile). Once recruited, armed and trained, these foreign mercenary groups are transiting by Turkish border to Syrian territory. According to a Munich based journalist interviewed by the BBC world on Wednesday 2 December, 70% of the fighters in Raqaa are foreign.
In Syria, Al Nusra Front, Syria’s Al Qaeda affiliate, is allied with other jihadists including Ahrar al-Sham(apparently separated from Al-Qaeda although its senior leaders were drawn from Al Qaeda) and Jaish al-islam. Both militias are composed of Salafists militants, seeking the establishment of Caliphate in Syria. Both militias collaborate closely with Al Nusra and they are fighting side by side in the Saudi-backed Army of Conquest. The Jihadists of Al Nusra and its allies are waging a sectarian war not only against the government but also against other components of the Syrian society, Shia, Alawites, Jews and Christians. Ahrar al-Sham, a jihadist group founded by Al Quaeda veteran and fighting alongside Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front.he “moderate” groups unleashed in Syria for regime change had been supplied with sophisticated weapons including TOW anti-tank missile.
For a mere political cosmetic purpose and in order to hide the infestation of Syrian soil by foreign jihadists and to confer a “syrian” veneer to their proxy mercenary, US imperialism and its satellites in Europe(France, Great Britain) and in the Middle east (Saudi Arabia, Qatar and turkey) are forced to enlist aging Syrian exiles among the Syrian Diaspora living in the West. Albeit this political cosmetic, the current rivalry and ongoing infighting between the “opponents” to Assad regime (groups backed by Washington fighting against groups backed by Turkey and Saudi Arabia) demonstrates once again that the so called civil war in Syria is a myth, that its background are neither ethnic nor religious but a foreign plot fomented by the western imperialism and its regional proxy regimes in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Turkey, all of them converging in the same geopolitical agendas and pointing to the same direction, albeit their interne rivalry and their proper agendas, the ouster of the democratically elected president Bachar Al Assad and imposition in Damascus of a slavish US puppet government as it was the case more than decade ago in Iraq and four years ago in Libya after the western powers, and their regional proxy regimes helped and supported by and their jihadists mercenary had been toppling and murdering the Libyan leader, Muammar al Kadaffi, and destroying a prosper and wealthy North African country
