It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

2001 Pentagon Plan to Attack Lebanon

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2006 @ 07:51 AM
link   
Found this after browsing my regular news site RINF


"[The] Five-year campaign plan [includes]... a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan" (Pentagon official quoted by General Wesley Clark)


According to General Wesley Clark--the Pentagon, by late 2001, was Planning to Attack Lebanon

"Winning Modern Wars" (page 130) General Clark states the following:

"As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan.

...He said it with reproach--with disbelief, almost--at the breadth of the vision. I moved the conversation away, for this was not something I wanted to hear. And it was not something I wanted to see moving forward, either. ...I left the Pentagon that afternoon deeply concerned."

Of course, this is fully consistent with the US Neocons' master plan, "Rebuilding America's Defenses," published in August 2000 by the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)

And, as PNAC's website ( www.newamericancentury.org... ) notes, that the lead author of that plan, Thomas Donnelly, was a top official of Lockheed Martin--a company well acquainted with war and its profit potential.

It's no surprise that Republicans are starting to talk about withdrawing troops from Iraq; the troops will be needed in Lebanon. And maybe Sudan and Syria?


Original source

It would suggest to me Operation Northwoods was more then just an idea and part of much larger picture.

Personal Opinion :

Surely with all this evidence proving USA and allied forces have planned, set-up and prepeared for these conflicts with different nations for seperate agendas are warcrimes/human rights violations.

I am a parent from the UK, and I am not against our soldiers, but I am definatly against these wars, yes after 911 and 7/7 I was also in the same mindset as everyone else, but it is so blatantly apparent the real terrorists are in the mirror; myself included allowing this global abuse to continue.

How long will it be before other nations realise that it is the USA and alliance countries are the real world threat.

And how long until this war is brought home, and it is your mother, father, uncle, nephew, grandmother local school, nursery, water supply, power station because in reality these are the people who are dieing, on both sides of the fence.

It just feels like my head is nice and safe in this sand, but i fear for my rear

*cringes and hits Post New Topic*




posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 04:16 AM
link   
Don't cringe, you've done well and are expressing a view that a great many others hold all around this planet but until recent events were either afraid to express themselves or parking their gourds below grade ostrich-style.

Even with our collective heads out of the sand the point you make about an uncovered posterior is valid and pertinent. The nail-head that sticks up gets hammered down. I can't say that making war plans are a violation of any law (I wish that were the case) but do indicate conception of potential intent. Very, very scary.

I support the troops of my nation 100%... the current regime of policy makers? Not so much. For me the war started coming home to my neighbourhood last week, a Lebanese-Canadian families came home to Scarborough (there may be more and I'm just not acquainted with them).

The mother, daughter and grandmother made it out... the daughter an eight year old will never be the same - total withdrawl. The mom who's a friend of my missus is very happy to be home but worries about her hubby who stayed to look after his folks and she's losin' weight way, way too fast - she's strong but'll crash soon. I don't speak the language but the Grandma is very animated and pounds her fist into her hand while watching the news and doesn't stop crying except to curse Israel. The news? They can't stop watching it.

I had a good chat with the mom Rhana about the shelling and air strikes, I've never talked to someone other than my parents who'd experienced that sort of ordeal (the Blitz)... she spoke highly of these two teenagers (not Hezbollah - plain old Lebanese-Canadian teenagers from Mississauga she said) who dragged them out of their basement just as a 500 pounder hit... Rhana has some of the shrap in her arm and left shoulder.

Anyway these kids took them to the hospital in Beirut and guess what? The ER if you can call it that was - poof - all blowed up - blowed up real good. So the kids took them to a disco that was built to take a hit and they stayed there till the Canadian gov't got off it's George Bush bum-wiping-ass and sent some transport for evac.

The morning they left (after several days waiting on and off in a holding area and returning to the disco every night and sometimes under fire) she saw the teens for the last time. The young lady was packin' an AK-47 and the young man had a double barrel shotgun.

Both have cell phones and haven't been heard from since. I had reservations about kids raised in Canada taking up arms to defend against Israeli soldiers in Lebanon - in fact I thought it was just plain wrong but after Qana v2.0 I now endorse and support their defending Lebanese people inside Lebanon's borders 100% even if it means greasing Israeli regulars.

If these kids make it back to Mississauga they have a job for life with our company cuz I'm the guy who does the hiring and firing and signs the HR related cheques. The husband was heard from 2 days ago but the cell keeps going down. He and his folks are not OK. His mom is old and frail and won't survive, there is no food left and all three have intestinal infections and diarrhea... hypo-volemia related troubles await all three for which the are no drugs or even medical assistance of the most basic nature.

Yeah this was planned - all of it, and Israel was just waiting for the right conditions (Shallit's abduction) to execute their war crimes against the innocent unsuspecting civilian population of Lebanon and Canadians - 8 Canuck civvies including a baby were murdered by the state of Israel so it can feel "secure" and comfortable.

But I have hope! Hope that folks like you and I and others will wake up and do what comes natural to normal folks - help to bring peace rather than the Israeli way of "peace" through the attrition caused by State sponsored terrorism and murder.

Victor K.

Qana v1.0, Qana v2.0... What's next?
Never forget.

[edit on 31-7-2006 by V Kaminski]



posted on Jul, 31 2006 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Well, since we haven't invaded Syria, I guess their grand master plan is off track, eh? And, it looks like Israel is the one taking on Hezbollah in Lebanon at the moment. Is Hezbollah in on the U.S.'s grand master plan to take out the Middle East or something? After all they provoked the current fighting did they not? It does not matter that the Israeli government cleared their citizens of the Gaza strip...at gunpoint I might add. None of it matters because there is always going to be a grand master conspiracy that is going to run through someone's head that everyone who is biased against the U.S. and Israel is going to bite on.



posted on Aug, 1 2006 @ 03:54 AM
link   
I would take this with a grain of salt for many reasons. First of all, naturally, is that Clark wasn't concerned enough in 2001 to say anything. He waited until he had time to put a book together. Not just any book either, but a book timed to coincide with his bid for the presidency.

The Secrets Clark Kept

Winning is a much slimmer book that reads like a campaign document. Clark knows people will perceive it that way and he denies any political motivation, saying in the introduction that he wrote it as a public duty,


Public duty can wait until the oportune moment obviously.

Also, lest we forget, this 5 year plan to take on 7 countries was hatched in 2001, started in 2003, and as of 2006 has only taken us to one nation. Bush has got two years now to take on 6 nations according to Clark.

Allow me to explain what I believe to be the simple reason why these charges seem so irrational.

Quite simply, Clark has sensationalized the truth. We have been after the nations mentioned, no doubt about it. But invasions? Former SACEUR Wesley Clark, unless he were a complete idiot, would know full well that in America could not possibly consolidate power over an almost 2000 mile long swath of the middle east plus two African nations all in 5 years with such success that the plan could weather the mid term elections, the 2004 election, and of course the still important 2008 election.

There is no way that Clark ever believed that Bush had any intention of invading all of these nations. I am sure that a man of Clark's position would remain abrest of military news and policy and he would be in a position to know that we are in fact gunning for the nations he named, and he would know that we were going to get most of them barely firing a shot ourselves.

As I have been saying and saying for over a year, we've got Sudan all lined up to go on its own with the Southern seccession in 2012 (or sooner if we can get the civil war there back into high gear) and I suspect we probably had a role in the unfortunate aircraft accident which befell Sudanese Vice President John Gurang, thus securing our plans for Sudan.

We backed the ARPCT militia against the ICU in Somalia and with the cooperation of Ethiopia and Kenya (and perhaps eventually Somaliland and Puntland) we will reign that nation into some acceptible level of predictable despotism. My guess is that we've already got their next president in training somewhere.

Iran we may in fact get at through this present situation, or we may go later, but in my humble opinion if we don't know it's coming by April of 2007 we can rest assured that it's not coming at all, at least as far as a serious war is concerned (as opposed to airstrikes).

Syria is a lower priority than Iran and frankly I don't think there's time. Maybe if things had been done better in Iraq we could have hit them in 2004 or 2005 but it's too late now. If they intervened in a war against Iran, we could smash their army and leave them for dead, but there is no way the US is going to maintain any useful presence in Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq, AND Syria. So all we can expect here is a hit and run IF they really give us a golden opportunity.

Lebanon we thought we had after the Cedar Revolution. Perfectly sound way to compromise an enemy if you ask me. My guess on that isn't that the present Israeli incursion was ordered by us pursuant to the plans Clark speaks of, but that the Syrians and Iranians have ordered Hezbollah to provoke it to restore their position in Lebanon. The US is all too happy to let it go down in hopes that it will present the opportunity to go after Iran and Syria for us.

Libya I sincerely doubt under just about any circumstances. All I can guess is that a plan for Libya was abandoned early on. As long as Libya doesn't attack anybody (doesn't get into Darfur, doesn't mess with Chad) there is almost no way that a very very busy US Military is going to spare so much as a tomahawk on them.

The US has time for one more serious ground war, but not another occupation ala Iraq. The best that can happen is killing three birds with one stone (Lebanon, Syria, Iran) not getting full control of those nations but destroying or badly weakening the hostile gov'ts. That leaves Clark's sensationalism at 3/6 on predictions (Iraq was already underway when he wrote), and I consider it fairly unlikely.




top topics
 
0

log in

join