|US-NATO Ground War on Syria: Prelude to a World War III Scenario? Prof. Michel Chossudovsky|
|By Prof Michel Chossudovsky|
Global Research, April 26, 2016
Press TV 8 September 2013
|Url of this article:|
The following interview with Professor Chossudovsky was published in September 2013
Michel Chossudovsky, renowned Canadian professor and award-winning author, argues  that a US plan for military intervention in Syria could result in escalation and the integration of “four distinct war theaters”– Afghanistan-Pakistan, Iraq, Palestine and Libya– setting the stage for “a World War III scenario.”
“An attack on Syria would lead to the integration of these separate war theaters, eventually leading towards a broader Middle East-Central Asian war,” the professor writes in an opinion piece for Global Research.
Chossudovsky says that the United States is fueling “civil wars” in multiple countries namely Yemen, Somalia, Egypt, Mali and Niger through sponsoring al-Qaeda affiliated groups, essentially preparing the ground for US military intervention often in the form of counter-terrorism operations.
“Public opinion is largely unaware of the grave implications of these war plans which could potentially lead humanity into a World War III scenario,” he warns.
The Obama administration has claimed the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad was behind a recent deadly chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of Damascus, even though there is no evidence linking the attack to the government forces. The White House is gearing up for military strikes on Syrian targets.
Click image to order Chossudovsky’s book directly from Global Research
Citing an August 2012 Los Angeles Times report, Chossudovsky says preparations for “a false flag chemical weapons attack” in Syria began more than a year ago when the Pentagon dispatched “small teams of special operations troops” to the Arab country to destroy its alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
US, NATO and Israeli military planners have laid the groundwork for a “humanitarian” military involvement in Syria for years, Chossudovsky says [in 2013].
He asserts that the US and its regional allies, namely Israel, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, have been sponsoring and arming the militant groups in Syria, some of which have been responsible for gruesome terrorist attacks against the civilian population, as “mass civilian casualty events” play a central role in US military doctrine.
“MI6, CIA and Mossad operatives as well as Western Special Forces had integrated rebel forces from the very outset. The high profile terrorist attacks were coordinated by highly trained military contractors and intelligence operatives,” the professor adds.
Another “integral” component of US military agenda, according to Chossudovsky, is “escalation.”
Israel and Turkey would also cooperate with the US in both the air campaign and the deployment of ground forces, Chossudovsky argues.
A US-led military attack against Syria, the professor warns [in 2013], will have serious repercussions in other parts of the world especially South East Asia and the Far East where the US is countering China and Russia as part of its “pivot to Asia” strategy.
Order Chossudovsky’s book directly from Global Research
Michel Chossudovsky $10.25
|Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article.|
|Copyright © Prof Michel Chossudovsky, Global Research, 2016|
Ik kwam zojuist mijn oude vriend, de bestseller-auteur en mainstream-opiniemaker Geert Mak in de regen op straat tegen. Na elkaar te hebben begroet, vertelde Geert mij dat hij van oordeel is dat Europa zo snel mogelijk met Rusland om de tafel moet gaan zitten, om de opgelopen spanningen te deëscaleren. De VS heeft heel andere belangen dan 'wij,' aldus Mak, die benadrukte dat de macht van 'onze' Atlantische bondgenoot ingrijpend aan het afnemen is. Kortom, ik hoorde wat ikzelf al enige jaren op mijn weblog schrijf. Opvallend hoe een Nederlandse opiniemaker binnen zo'n betrekkelijk korte tijd zo wezenlijk van oordeel kan veranderen. Immers, Mak’s gevaarlijke anti-Rusland hetze was een treffend voorbeeld van zijn opportunisme. Mei 2014 beweerde op de Hilversumse televisie de zogeheten ‘chroniqueur van Amsterdam, Nederland, Europa en de VS,’ dat er sprake was van een 'Russische gevaar,’ aangezien ‘meneer Poetin’ aan ‘landjepik’ deed en dat de Russische president d…