Middle East: The Obliteration of Innocent Civilian Arabs by the Pentagon
The saying “Your lies insult my intelligence” by the main character of the popular American film “The Godfather” can also be addressed to the Pentagon for its gruesome bombing of the Iraqi city of Mosul. These targeted bombing attacks have led to a large number of civilian casualties, a fact that has already provoked a sharp international outcry, even amongst Western media outlets. For example, in the wake of only one air strike on March 17, at least two hundred civilians were killed when two buildings in the western part of Mosul were bombed. Thus, the way Washington tries to get those who commit such barbaric acts “off the hook” has aroused angry and justified comments from international media and several heads of states across the planet. Meanwhile, US military authorities, after somewhat accepting the narrative, have reportedly said that they will only consider these actions. And what are they going to consider here? For, in just March of this year, about three hundred Iraqi civilians fell victim to the “actions” of the US-led coalition.
US generals have tried giving their own versions of the story, with some saying that this was possibly a direct provocation from Daesh, with the explosion having been triggered from the ground instead of being an all-out air raid. At the same time, the generals promise to carry out the necessary checks of their target directing. At a time the American generals are still engrossed in doubt, the international organization Amnesty International has drawn its own conclusions. According to Senior Crisis Response Advisor at Amnesty International Donatella Rovera, “Evidence gathered on the ground in Eastern Mosul disturbingly points to the air strikes having been orchestrated by the US coalition. Whole houses with their families were destroyed by bombing. Many local residents report that the coalition forces failed to take measures to prevent the death of civilians, which itself is a blatant violation of international humanitarian law.”
The AirWar Organization, which monitored the situation during the assault on Aleppo, has also published its data, having now switched to monitoring the situation in Mosul. AirWar claims that during March alone, three cases of the mass deaths of city residents directly because of the air strikes of the coalition were recorded. In his turn, the president of Iraq has sharply stated that he expects the US to conduct a fair investigation into the mistakes of the air strikes. In response, the Pentagon has made away with a vague promise to try to revise its actions.
On March 30, at the initiative of the Russian Federation, the issue of the Mosul situation was presented at a UN Security Council meeting. It being a closed-door meeting, there has been no official statement from the UN headquarters on the resolutions that were adopted, if any were arrived at. So far, the case of the destruction of the city of Mosul and the killing of its inhabitants has been limited to only appeals to all parties to the conflict to do everything possible to protect innocent civilians.
Could this be why Senior Adviser to US President D. Trump, who also happens to be the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, has urgently embarked on a visit to Iraq? Chairperson of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US Armed Forces, Joseph Dunford, has also accompanied him on the Baghdad mission. As Al Jazeera reports, although Trump’s 36-year-old senior adviser possesses virtually no experience in conducting public affairs, this did not stop him from becoming one of the most influential figures in the current White House team, and it was to him that the current president charged the rather delicate task of settling the dispute with the Iraqis regarding American provocations and miscalculations in Mosul and other American military operations currently underway in Iraq.
Meanwhile, independent international media outlets have indicated that the protracted fighting in the Iraqi city of Mosul quite suits the US military and the Trump administration. Presently, these bigwigs are more concentrated on eliminating the top leadership of Daesh, including leader of the Islamic Caliphate Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. But even a short-time delay of the Iraq Army in Mosul presents two important advantages to the United States.
First, it has been clearly demonstrated that without US military assistance on the ground and from the air (up to 70% of all air strikes of the coalition forces against Daesh in Iraq are carried out by the US military grouping in the region), neither the government in Baghdad nor the Iraqi Kurds or the local pro-Iranian Shiite militia could be able to completely drive out the terrorist “tumor” from Iraq. Second, the continued fighting provides a perfect alibi for the protracted US military presence in Iraq and the Middle East region as a whole. Trump’s current administration is obviously interested in maintaining US military bases near the border with Iran. US strategic initiative aimed at Tehran’s containment perfectly coincides with a boom in the military industrial complex. Its Middle Eastern order portfolio is simultaneously steadily being supplemented with new multibillion-dollar contracts. This will significantly help the US budget while the war with Daesh, which scared the living daylights out of Arabian sheikhs and princes for several years ahead, is going on.
There is a third, but not so important, reason. The Russian General Staff representatives have reported that despite extensive bomb attacks on Mosul, 800 Daesh militants managed to escape from the city unhindered, and headed for Syria. In other words, the US military is allowing militants, terrorists and bandits from Mosul to freely “flow” onto Syrian territory, which is another “gift” for the Syrian troops of President Assad and the Russian Armed Forces. Perhaps, it is for this reason that the terrorists have recently begun protecting the Syrian city of Raqqah, where Daesh’ headquarters are located, quite fiercely.
By the way, there is another bright and vivid example of the Pentagon’s “fair fight” against terrorists. Syrian soldiers recently discovered three Daesh militants’ hideouts in the province of Aleppo. A large number of weapons and ammunition discovered there had originated from the United States. Both the Syrian press and the independent world media are asking the quite reasonable question of how the most modern American weapons could fall into the hands of the very terrorists that the American troops are doing their best to keep “fighting against”?
Someone noticing the “double standards” being applied could be outraged. But now, the situation is much worse. No longer about double standards, the situation is now about the overall loss of any remaining human dignity and common human morality. The US has launched a massive disinformation campaign and public opinion distortion against those who prefer fighting terrorism with real actions instead of big, empty words. The “Go!” command has already been given to start a campaign against Russia and Syria, with Western media outlets, the diplomatic community and lawyers having been paid well to do an excellent job. It has been said that these are no longer human or defenders of the suffering civilians, women, old people and children. Rather, these are Pavlov’s dogs simply following an order just for food.
By the way, this was illustrated vividly in the immediate posting of several messages by the “Russian BBC” edition of April 4. Referring to a British-based Syrian human rights monitoring group, the BBC reported, “As a result of the gas attack in Idlib, at least 58 people were killed.” Further, “Khan-Sheikhun is being held by Syrian opposition forces. Earlier reports were received that either the Syrian Army or the Russian Airforce used chemical weapons during the attack.”
Sounds like some kind of apocalypse. Everyone understands that in due time, Damascus, under strict international supervision, got rid of all its chemical weapons. Coupled with this cold truth, the Russian Air Force also does not use chemical weapons. How did they arrive on Syrian territory? On the contrary, no one has ever bothered to check what kind of weapons are at the disposal of the terrorists. Or ask the all-too-important question of whether the Arab states of the Persian Gulf, which have always sympathized with the terrorists and helped them time and again, have been supplying the terrorists with the modern, state-of-the-art weapons. Why, unlike Damascus, were these states that help “their terrorists” never subjected to tests?
However, the Western media avoids all these awkward questions, preferring to criticize Syria and Russia. It is understandable that in such conditions, it will take long to extirpate all the terrorists, bandits and criminals that have long been actively supported and paid for by the West and Arab countries of the Persian Gulf. Such are the prosaic details of the western-type, so-called democratic lifestyle.
By Victor Mikhin
Source: New Eastern Outlook