Wars And Rumors Of Wars

[Soldier4Christ]

"Naval Blockade" or All Out War Against Iran?

Shortly after this article was released on August 13, US military sources as well as Stratfor (a Strategic Studies Think Tank) stated that the various press reports (UPI, Middle East Times, Kuwait Times, Debka) regarding the naval deployment to the Middle East were incorrect.

According to the press reports (see UPI, August 11, 2008), the war ships involved in the "Operation Brimstone" war games off the US North Atlantic coast, had set sail for the Middle East. This information is apparently incorrect, according to the US Navy and Stratfor.

It is worth noting that the Kuwaiti government had activated emergency procedures based on the information pertaining to a major naval deployment in the Persian Gulf.

Based on the movement and location of USS carrier and expeditionary strike forces, the Bush administration has not decided to carry out a naval surge directed against Iran immediately following the conduct of the North Atlantic War Games,

The eventuality of a naval blockade directed against Iran is nonetheless being considered by the Pentagon. In fact, the naval blockade initiative is supported by a bill which was launched in the US Congress in late May. (See below for details).

We have checked the most recent information regarding the movements and location of the various USS Carrier and Expeditionary Strike Groups.

The text first released on August 13 has been revised. Corrections, and updates to the text are indicated.

We will provide further updates and analysis as more information becomes available.




The Bush administration is envisaging the possibility of launching a naval blockade directed against Iran.

Extensive war games were held off the US Atlantic Coastline under "Operation Brimstone" in late July.

These war games were activated shortly after the submission in the US House of Representatives (May 22), of a bill (H CON 362) which called upon the Bush administration to carry out an economic blockade directed against Iran.

"Operation Brimstone": North Atlantic Ocean War Games

Joint Task Force Exercise (JTFEX) 08-4 'Operation Brimstone' commenced on July 21 in North Carolina and off the Eastern US Atlantic coast from Virginia to Florida. Of significance was the participation of British, French, Brazilian and Italian naval forces as part of a multinational US naval exercise directed against Iran.

More than a dozen ships participated in the naval exercise including the USS Theodore Roosevelt and its Carrier Strike Group Two, the expeditionary Strike Group Iwo Jima, the French submarine Amethyste, Britain's HMS Illustrious Carrier Strike Group, Brazil's navy frigate Greenhalgh and Italy's ITS Salvatore Todaro (S 526) submarine. (See Middle East Times, August 11, 2008 , Dailypress.com, July 28, 2008 , www.mt-milcom.blogspot.com)

Stating the purpose of a war game and identifying the real "foreign enemy" by name is not the normal practice, unless there is a decision to send an unequivocal message to the enemy.

Invariably in war games, the foreign enemy is given a fictitious country name: Irmingham, Nemazee, Rubeck and Churia stand for Iran, North Korea, Russia and China (codes used in the Vigilant Shield 07 War Games' Scenario opposing the US to four fictitious enemies. (See William Arkin, The Vigilant Shield 07 War Games: Scenario opposing the US to Russia, China, Iran and North Korea, Washington Post, February 10, 2007)

In the case of "Operation Brimstone", the stated military purpose of the naval exercise is crystal clear: the North Atlantic war games are carried out with a view "to practice enforcing an eventual blockade on Iran". These naval exercises are intended to display US and allied "combat capabilities as a warning to Iran." They are tantamount to a declaration of war:

    "The drill is aimed at training for operation in shallow coastal waters such as the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz."

The USS Theodore Roosevelt equipped with 80-plus combat planes, was carrying an additional load of French Naval Rafale fighter jets from the French carrier Charles de Gaulle. (Ibid). France's E2C Hawkeye early warning aircraft, which was "assigned to the 4th Squadron began flight operations with Carrier Air Wing (CVW) 8 aboard Roosevelt, marking the first integrated U.S. and French carrier qualifications aboard a U.S. aircraft carrier. French Rafale fighter aircraft assigned to the 12th Squadron also joined." Navy.mil, July 24, 2008

Anglo-US war games are a routine practice. What is significant in these large scale naval manoeuvres is the active participation of France, Brazil and Italy in war games which are explicitly directed against Iran.

The participation of these countries in extensive war games points to broad consensus. It also suggests that the participating nations have accepted (in political and military terms) to participate in a US-led military operation directed against Iran. The active participation of France and to a lesser extent Italy also suggests that the European Union is firmly behind the US initiative:

    "Operations with our friends and allies are the cornerstone of the U.S. Navy's current maritime strategy," said Capt. Ladd Wheeler, Roosevelt's commanding officer. "These combined operations will certainly pay dividends into the future as our navies continue to work together to increase global security."Navy.mil, July 24, 2008

Another important precedent has been set. Brazil's President Luis Ignacio da Silva has ordered the dispatch of the Greenhalgh Frigate, marking the first time that a Brazilian warship (under a government which claims to be "socialist") has operated as part of a US. strike group in war games directed against a foreign country.

According to the Greenhalgh's Commander Claudio Mello, "It allows us to be one more asset in an international operation." (Pilot Online.com, July 28, 2008)

Congressional Initiative

The naval blockade against Iran, which is tantamount to a declaration of war, is a bipartisan project, which has tacitly been endorsed by the Democrats. In May 2008, a bill was introduced in the House of Representatives (H.CON. RES 362) that called for the enforcement of an all out economic blockade, including the encroachment of trade and the freeze of monetary transactions with the Islamic Republic:

"The President [shall] initiate an international effort to immediately and dramatically increase the economic, political, and diplomatic pressure on Iran .... prohibiting the export to Iran of all refined petroleum products; imposing stringent inspection requirements on all persons, vehicles, ships, planes, trains, and cargo entering or departing Iran; and prohibiting the international movement of all Iranian officials not involved in negotiating the suspension of Iran's nuclear program."

    "[H. CON. RES. 362] urges the President, in the strongest of terms, to immediately use his existing authority to impose sanctions on the Central Bank of Iran, ... international banks which continue to conduct financial transactions with proscribed Iranian banks; ... energy companies that have invested $20,000,000 or more in the Iranian petroleum or natural gas sector in any given year since the enactment of the Iran Sanctions Act of 1996; and all companies which continue to do business with Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps." (See full text of H.CON RES 362) (emphasis added)

Meanwhile, H CON RES 362 has been referred to the House Foreign Affairs Committee. A similar procedure has taken place in the Senate.

Concurrent Military Operations: War in the Caucasus

The planning of a naval blockade by the Bush administration (Operation Brimstone, H Con 362) occurs at the very outset of an unfolding crisis in the Caucasus, marked by the Georgian air and ground attacks on South Ossetia and Russia's counterattack. The timing and chronology of these related and concurrent military operations is crucial.

We are not dealing with separate and unrelated military events. The war in Georgia is an integral part of US-NATO-Israeli war preparations in relation to Iran.

Georgia does not act militarily without the assent of Washington. The Georgian head of State is a US proxy and Georgia is a de facto US protectorate.

The attack on South Ossetia was launched by Georgia on the orders of the US and NATO. US military advisers and trainers were actively involved in the planning of Georgia's attacks on the South Ossetia capital. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, War in the Caucasus, Towards a Broader Russia-US Military Confrontation, Global Research, August 10, 2008)

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Russia is an ally of Iran.

Russia is currently caught up in a military confrontation with Georgia. The Georgian attack on South Ossetia constitutes an act of provocation directed against Russia. It creates an aura of instability in the Caucasus, marked by heavy civilian casualties. It serves to distract Russia from playing a meaningful diplomatic and military role, which might undermine or obstruct the US-led war plans directed against Iran.

Both Russia and China have bilateral military cooperation agreements with Iran. Russia supplies the Islamic Republic with military hardware and technical expertise in relation to Iran's air defense system and missile program.

Since 2005, Iran has an observer member status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). In turn, the SCO has ties to the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), an overlapping military cooperation agreement between Russia, Armenia, Belarus, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan.

The structure and strength of military alliances is crucial. In the context of US war plans directed against Iran, the US is intent upon weakening Iran's allies, namely Russia and China. In the case of China, Washington is seeking to disrupt Beijing's bilateral ties with Tehran as well as Iran's rapprochement with the SCO, which has its headquarters in Beijing.

The Georgian attack on South Ossetia seeks to undermine Russia, which constitutes a significant countervailing military power and ally of Iran.

The ultimate objective is to isolate Iran, cut it off from its powerful allies: China and Russia.

In Washington's mindset, the events in Georgia coupled with media propaganda, can be usefully applied to discredit and weaken Russia prior to the enforcement of a naval blockade on Iran in the Persian Gulf, which could lead into an all out war on Iran.

This somewhat crude line of reasoning tends, however, to overlook America's own military setbacks and weaknesses as well as the enormous risks to America and the World which could result from a continued and sustained confrontation with Russia, let alone an attack on Iran.

In view of the evolving situation in Georgia and Moscow's military commitments in the Caucasus, military analysts believe that Russia will not protect Iran and encroach upon a US led operation directed against Iran, which would be preceded by a naval blockade.

In other words, Washington believes that Moscow is unlikely to get actively involved in a showdown with US and allied forces in the Persian Gulf.

Naval Deployment

According to press reports, upon completing the North Atlantic war games on July 31st, the participating warships in "Operation Brimstone" headed for the Middle East, to join up with other carrier strike groups and a constellation of US, British and French war ships.

Which Carrier Strike groups and Expeditionary Forces sailed for the Middle East upon the completion of "Operation Brimstone" remains to be ascertained.

Below we provide the most recent information pertaining to the movement of Carrier Strike Groups and Expeditionary Strike Groups

According to Stratfor and military sources:

-the USS Iwo Jima and the USS Theodore Roosevelt, according to Stratfor, returned to their home port in Norfolk after concluding participation in JTFEX Operation Brimstone on July 31

-the nuclear powered USS Ronald Reagan Carrier and its Strike Group Seven; according to Stratfor USS Reagan is currently under way in the South China Sea on a routine deployment in the 7th fleet area of responsibility (AOR) (Indian Ocean and Western Pacific)

-the USS Abraham Lincoln is in the Arabian Sea (confirmed by Strafor, "operations in the 5th fleet AOR, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan", namely Ariabian Sea,

- the USS Peleliu which was in the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. (latest news from Stratfor USS Peleliu is in the Arabian Sea, "operations in the 5th fleet AOR, which includes Iraq and Afghanistan")

In other words, there are at present (August 14, 2008) two Strike Groups in the region: USS Abraham Lincoln, northern Arabian Sea, USS Peleliu Strike Group, northern Arabian sea. There is no confirmation as to whether the USS Ronald Reagan is moving towards the Arabian Sea.

"Maritime Security" to Enforce a Naval Blockade

US Central Command (CENTCOM) under the helm of General Petraeus, coordinates out of Bahrain so-called Maritime Security Operations (MSO) in Middle East waters ( Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Arabian Sea, Red Sea and Indian Ocean).

This MSO initiative is conducted by the Combined Maritime Force (CMF) with a powerful armada of 36 warships.

Established at the outset of the Iraq war, CMF involves the participation of the US, Canada, Australia, UK, Germany, Australia, Italy, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Portugal, Spain, Turkey and Pakistan.

There are several combined task forces responsible for maritime security (including CTF 150, CTF 152 and the CTF 158 North Arabian Gulf (NAG))

The mandate of the Combined Task Forces "aims to establish security and stability by countering terrorism in the Middle Eastern maritime environment and allowing legitimate mariners to operate safely in the area..." (see Canadian Navy, News),

In the present context, this multinational naval alliance, will be used to encroach upon maritime trade with Iran as well as play an active role in implementing the proposed economic blockade of Iran.

Canada has recently deployed three war ships to the Arabian sea, including HMC Iroquois along with HMC Calgary and HMC Protecteur which will be operating under CTF 150, which is responsible for MSO in the Gulf of Aden, the Gulf of Oman, the Arabian Sea, the Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

Among the 36 war vessels involved in so-called Maritime Security Operations, are:

    RBNS Sabha (FFG 90) – The Bahraini flagship of CTF 152 conducting Maritime Security Operations (MSO) in the Central and Southern Arabian Gulf.

    USS Harry S. Truman (CVN 75) – The U.S. flagship of CTF 50, conducting MSO in the Central and Southern Arabian Gulf , as well as support Operations Enduring Freedom and Iraqi Freedom. (currently in the Atlantic Ocean according to Stratfor).

    FS Guepratte (F 714) – French Navy ship operating as part of CTF 150 in the North Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, Gulf of Oman, Red Sea and the Indian Ocean.

    USCGC Wrangell (WPB 1332) – One of several USCG 110’ patrol boats conducting MSO in the North Arabian Gulf.

    HMAS Arunta (F 151) – Australian Navy ship conducting MSO as part of CTF 158 .

    PNS Tippu Sultan (D 186) – Pakistan Navy ship conducting MSO as part of CTF 150.

    RFA Cardigan Bay (L 3009) – British Royal Navy auxiliary ship operating with CTF 158.

    USS Port Royal (CG 73) – US Navy guided-missile cruiser deployed with USS Tarawa Expeditionary Strike Group.

    Source: US Naval forces, Central Command, Fifth fleet, Combined Maritime Forces

Naval Blockade

The first stage of a naval blockade directed against Iran would in all likelihood be initiated by Maritime Security Operations (MSO) under USCENTCOM.

For Iran, a naval blockade, were it to be implemented, is tantamount to a declaration of war. The blockade constitutes a blatant violation of international law. According to Francis Boyle, a renowned specialist in international law:

"A blockade is an act of war under international and domestic law. A "Blockade" is a term used under international law to specifically refer to belligerent measures taken by a nation for the purposes of preventing the passage of vessels or aircraft to and from another country. Customary international law recognizes blockades as an act of war because of the belligerent use of force even against third party nations in enforcing the blockade. Blockades as acts of war have been recognized as such in the Declaration of Paris of 1856 and the Declaration of London of 1909 that delineate the international rules of warfare."

Meanwhile, war preparations are also being undertaken by Israel and NATO in the Eastern Mediterranean. German war ships are stationed off the Syrian coastline. Turkey which constitutes a major military actor within NATO is a major partner of the US led coalition. It has an extended bilateral military cooperation agreement with Israel. Turkey has borders with both Iran and Syria. (For further details see Michel Chossudovsky, "Triple Alliance": The US, Turkey, Israel and the War on Lebanon, Global Research, August 6, 2006)

Pre-emptive Nuclear War

A diabolical and related consensus is emerging at the political level, pointing to the pre-emptive first strike use of nuclear weapons in the Middle East war theater, more concretely against Iran:

    "In January 2005, at the outset of the military build-up directed against Iran, USSTRATCOM was identified as "the lead Combatant Command for integration and synchronization of DoD-wide efforts in combating weapons of mass destruction."

    To implement this mandate, a brand new command unit entitled Joint Functional Component Command Space and Global Strike, or JFCCSGS was created.

    JFCCSGS has the mandate to oversee the launching of a nuclear attack in accordance with the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review, approved by the US Congress in 2002. The NPR underscores the pre-emptive use of nuclear warheads not only against "rogue states" but also against China and Russia."Michel Chossudovsky, Nuclear War against Iran, Global Research, January 2006)

More recently, a December 2007 NATO sponsored report entitled “Towards a Grand Strategy for an Uncertain World: Renewing Transatlantic Partnership". calls for a first strike pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons. The NATO doctrine in this report is a virtual copy and paste version of America's post 9/11 nuclear weapons doctrine as initially outlined in the 2002 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR).

(for details, see Michel Chossudovsky, The US-NATO Preemptive Nuclear Doctrine: Trigger a Middle East Nuclear Holocaust to Defend "The Western Way of Life", Global Research, January 2008)

The preemptive use of nukes as formulated in the NATO Transatlantic Partnership document would be used to undermine an "increasingly brutal World" (e.g. Iran) as well as a means to prevent "rogue enemies" to use "weapons of mass destruction".

Under this NATO framework, which is explicitly envisaged in relation to Iran, US and allied forces including Israel would "resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the imminent spread of nuclear weapons, " (quoted in Paul Dibb, Sidney Morning Herald, 11 February 2008).

    "They [the authors of the report] consider that nuclear war might soon become possible in an increasingly brutal world. They propose the first use of nuclear weapons must remain "in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction". (Paul Dibb, op cit)

In terms of the ongoing threats directed against Iran, a pre-emptive nuclear attack using tactical nuclear weapons, which are according to the Pentagon is "harmless to the surrounding civilian population" could be carried out in relation to Iran, even if if Iran does not possess nuclear weapons capabilities, as confirmed by the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE).

According to a 2003 Senate decision, the new generation of tactical nuclear weapons or "low yield" "mini-nukes", with an explosive capacity of up to 6 times a Hiroshima bomb, are now considered "safe for civilians" because the explosion is underground.

Through a propaganda campaign which has enlisted the support of "authoritative" nuclear scientists, the mini-nukes are being presented as an instrument of peace rather than war. The low-yield nukes have now been cleared for "battlefield use", they are slated to be used in the next stage of the Middle East war (Iran) alongside conventional weapons:

    "Administration officials argue that low-yield nuclear weapons are needed as a credible deterrent against rogue states.[Iran, North Korea] Their logic is that existing nuclear weapons are too destructive to be used except in a full-scale nuclear war. Potential enemies realize this, thus they do not consider the threat of nuclear retaliation to be credible. However, low-yield nuclear weapons are less destructive, thus might conceivably be used. That would make them more effective as a deterrent."(Opponents Surprised By Elimination of Nuke Research Funds Defense News November 29, 2004)

In an utterly twisted logic, nuclear weapons are presented as a means to building peace and preventing "collateral damage".

cont'd

[Soldier4Christ]

The NATO sponsored report --which broadly reflects a growing consensus-- insists that the option of a nuclear first strike is indispensable, "since there is simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world." (Report, p. 97):

    "Nuclear weapons are the ultimate instrument of an asymmetric response – and at the same time the ultimate tool of escalation"

The US-NATO doctrine to use nukes on a pre-emptive basis against Iran, with a view to "saving the Western World's way of life", is not challenged in any meaningful way by the antiwar movement.

The mainstream media has a strong grip on the public's perception and understanding of the Middle East war. The dangers of nuclear war in the Post cold War era are barely mentioned and when they are, the use of nuclear weapons are justified as a preemptive military option to ensure the security of Western World.

The truth is twisted and turned upside down.

Media disinformation instills within the consciousness of Americans and Europeans that somehow the war on Iran is a necessity, that Iran is a threat to the Homeland and that the Islamic Republic is supporting Islamic terrorists, who are planning a Second 9/11. And that a pre-emptive nuclear attack is the answer.

In contrast, the powerful economic interests behind the war economy, the Anglo-American oil giants military, the defense contractors, Wall Street are rarely the object of media coverage. The real economic and strategic objectives behind this war are carefully obfuscated.

9/11 is used profusely both by the Bush administration and the media as a justification for waging war, despite the fact that there is mounting evidence of cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

Despite the evidence, Afghanistan, Iraq and now Iran have been portrayed as the "State sponsors of terrorism" and a threat to the Homeland, thereby justifying the various stages of the Middle East military roadmap. The Project for a New American Century, had already described in a 2000 document the nature of this road map or "long war". What is envisaged is a global war without borders:

    fight and decisively win multiple, simultaneous major theater wars (PNAC, September 2000)

At present US and coalition forces including NATO and Israel are in an advanced state of readiness to launch an attack on Iran. Leaders of the US led coalition including France, Germany and Italy, should understand that such an action could result in a World War III scenario.

Escalation scenarios have already been envisaged and analyzed by the Pentagon.

US sponsored war games have foreseen the possible intervention of Russia and China in the Middle East. World War III has been on the lips of NeoCon architects of US foreign policy from the outset of the Bush regime.

In response to "Operation Brimstone" and the Naval deployment, Iran's Foreign Ministry said that "Tehran will give a 'maximum response' to the slightest threat against the country's national security."

War propaganda, through media disinformation consists in galvanizing US citizens not only in favor of "the war on terrorism", but in support of a social order which repeals the Rule of Law, derogates fundamental civil liberties, upholds the use of torture and establishes a modern police state apparatus as a means to "preserving Western democracy".

There is a tacit public acceptance of a diabolical and criminal military agenda, which in a very sense threatens "the community of nations" and life on this planet.

In the course of the last four years, Global Research has documented in detail the various war plans directed against Iran. Operation TIRANNT (Theater Iran Near Term) was initially formulated in July 2003, in the wake of the US led Iraq invasion.

We have done our utmost to reverse the tide of media disinformation, to inform our readers and the broader public on the impending dangers underlying the US military adventure.

This is the most serious crisis in modern history which in a very real sense threatens the future of humanity.

[Soldier4Christ]

Ukraine offers satellite defence co-operation with Europe and US
Ukraine inflamed mounting East-West tensions yesterday by offering up a Soviet-built satellite facility as part of the European missile defence system.


The proposal, made amid growing outrage among Russia's neighbours over its military campaign in Georgia, could see Ukraine added to Moscow's nuclear hitlist. A Russian general declared Poland a target for its arsenal after Warsaw signed a deal with Washington to host interceptor missiles for America's anti-nuclear shield.

Ukraine said it was ready to give both Europe and America access to its missile warning systems after Russia earlier annulled a 1992 cooperation agreement involving two satellite tracking stations. Previously, the stations were part of Russia's early-warning system for missiles coming from Europe.

"The fact that Ukraine is no longer a party to the 1992 agreement allows it to launch active cooperation with European countries to integrate its information," a statement from the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said.

It follows a declaration earlier this week from Ukraine's pro-Western president, Viktor Yushchenko, that the Russian naval lease of the Ukrainian Black Sea port of Sebastopol would be scrapped if any vessels joined the conflict in Georgia.

The crisis over Russia's display of military might in Georgia has alarmed ex-Soviet satellites states in a broad arc from the Baltics to Central Asia. Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania, all of which harbour bitter memories of Soviet occupation, have expressed solidarity with the Georgian position.

[HisDaughter]

Some more on recent developments from Bill Koenig:

Persian Gulf

The winds of war?...DEBKAfile's military sources note that the arrival of the three new American flotillas will raise to five the number of US strike forces in Middle East waters - an unprecedented build up since the crisis erupted over Iran's nuclear program.

The vast naval and air strength consists of more than 40 warships and submarines, some of the latter nuclear armed, opposite the Islamic republic, a concentration last seen just before the US invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Connecting the Dots - Russian Invasion of Georgia May Have Prophetic Implications

by Bill Wilson, KIN Senior Analyst

The Russian invasion of Georgia appears on the surface to be one of revenge and regional politics. In peeling off the layers of stated reasons for the harsh military action, however, enmity is found between Russia and Israel that could have prophetic significance.

Russia's flexing of it's military muscle for the first time this century by swiftly dispatching fire power in the sovereign nation of Georgia brings it ever closer to the Ezekiel 38 prophecy where Gog, modern day Russia, ascends on Israel like "a cloud to cover the land."

What many do not know is that Israel will be a key player in the Russian invasion as a result of incurring the wrath of Russia.

Russia says it invaded south Ossetia to stop 'ethnic cleansing' by the Georgia government. Not much is written about it, but most of the population there is Orthodox Christian with a growing Muslim minority. There seems to be no documentation that Christians are ridding the land of Muslims.

Likewise, there doesn't seem to be a situation yet where the rising Muslim minority is cleansing the area of Christians. And Russia has no history of invading countries to stop the persecution of Christians. Russia does have a history of invading countries over their valuable natural resources, such as oil.

The Repuplic of Georgia is a strategic crossroads that controls the gas and oil pipelines bringing product from the Caspian Sea region. Israel owns a vital interest in these pipelines and has been negotiating with Georgia on a project to bring the pipelines through Turkey to Israel's Red Sea port of Eilat. And Russia rejected an Israeli offer to participate in the project.

According to security analyst DEBKAfile, Georgia last year commissioned about 1,000 private Israeli military advisors to train Georgian armed forces. Russia has repeatedly demanded that Israel halt this military assistance to Georgia. And DEBKAfile reports that these advisors were 'deeply involved' in the recent Georgia military efforts against Russia.

Russia has shown by this ruthless invasion that it will protect its own oil interests irrespective of whether there are other sovereign nations involved. The foray into Georgia where Israel is heavily involved could be yet another prophetic step toward the Ezekiel end-time battle as it escalates growing ill will between Russia and Israel.

Russia has shown that it will spare no firepower to attack a sovereign nation over a minute oil issue involving Israel. What will Russia do over something incrementally greater?

Ezekiel 39:9 says the weapons from such an attack will burn "with fire seven years." But Ezekiel 38:23 also says that "God will be known in the eyes of many nations, and they shall know that I AM the LORD."

This was very interesting.  Thanks Sister Barbara.

[HisDaughter]

9/11 is used profusely both by the Bush administration and the media as a justification for waging war, despite the fact that there is mounting evidence of cover-up and complicity of key members of the Bush Administration.

At this point I really don't believe this......HOWEVER, I am convinced that America is going to fall.  And I believe that it will/could happen in a number of different ways.  I am almost convinced that it won't be at the hands of another nation until after we have collapsed on ourselves at the hands of, or something caused by our own government, be that rebellion because of their betrayal of the people, whether that be a truth about 9/11 coming to light or something else.   Or because they have given our country away to foreigners and their religions.  Whatever it is will be because of their greed for money and power.  Or because of giving into immorality, ACLU propagated issues, etc. etc. ad nauseum.

[Soldier4Christ]

I agree totally. I don't think that Bush is the war monger that everyone makes him out to be. Although he may be wearing blinders and misses the point in some areas he still does have a little bit of eye sight unlike many others in DC.

[Shammu]

Russia's aggressive military action against Georgia is evidence that the pre-written history, written by the ancient Jewish prophet Ezekiel, is near to fulfillment.

Over the weekend the conflict between Russia and Georgia heated up with both sides accusing the other as being the blame for the conflict. Meanwhile, the world watches as the two nations discuss a ceasefire, even as the fighting continues.

The truth of the matter is that Russian's Prime Minister Putin, who took hands-on control of the military operation, is moving to assert the Russian dominance in the region and this particular conflict is a part of Putin's strategy to take over the entire region, as was the case during the time the old Soviet Union.

This scenario is a page out of Bible prophecy for the last days as reported in Ezekiel 38. In Ezekiel 38:2 the Magog in the passage is modern day Russia, and the Gog is the leader of this world power in the last days.

I cannot say that Putin is the Gog of Ezekiel 38:2, but I can say that he is a perfect prototype of the one who will lead Russia and a coalition of Arab and Islamic nations, against the Jewish state of Israel.

Ezekiel's prophecy is coming into better focus each and every day, and the conflict between Russia and Georgia is indeed evidence that Bible prophecy will be fulfilled.

[Barbara]

AMEN DreamWeaver, Pastor Roger and grammyluv!

Things seem to be proceeding at lightning speed as we watch God's plan unfolding!

As an aside, I just want to mention something my 13 year old brought to my husband's and my attention. Our son is very interested in history, especially as it pertains to WWII and Iran. His grandpa fought in WWII. Then we lived in NY on 9-11 (he was in first grade but still remembers some things) and his cousin, who is a Marine, was sent off to fight in Afghanistan and then in Iraq. Hence, my son's interest.

Anyway, he likes Wartime XBox games - so we allowed him to get a few, and only a few,  like 'The Great Escape' (he loves that movie). One he got in 2006 is called 'Tom Clancy's - Ghost Recon'. The gist of the story is, and I quote:

"The year is 2008, and the world teeters on the brink of war. Radical ultranationalists have seized power n Moscow-their goal, the reestablishment of the old Soviet empire. Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan- one by one the nearby independent republics will slip back into the Russian orbit. Russian tanks sit in the Caucausus mountains and the Baltic forests, poised to strike to the south and east."

The game begins in South Ossetia where you (the player) must fight off the Russians as they invade Georgia....

Thought this was a very interesting projection by Clancy!!

[Soldier4Christ]

That is quite interesting. The Ghost Recon series is just like the video game America's Army that was designed for and has been used by the U.S. Army as a recruiting tool which gives people more of an idea of what the U.S. Army is like. They have been designed to be as realistic as possible without going over the top on blood and gore.

Considering the long history of Georgia, South Ossetia and Russia it has not been difficult to see this scenario coming for a long time now. I do find it interesting that the game was staged for this situation to occur starting on April 16, 2008. They didn't get the part about civil unrest in Russia being the cause of the start of this but they were close with the rest of it.

[Soldier4Christ]

Snipers sparked Russian-Georgian war
Was response a calculated attempt to win Western help?

Sources in Georgia say the massive Russian onslaught into South Ossetia was prompted by Georgian snipers who apparently were picking off separatists in response to the killing of seven Georgian peacekeepers, then ran into a team of Russian peacekeepers and killed all but three, according to a report from Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin.

It happened in the days before Aug. 7, when Russian forces penetrated sovereign Georgian territory, the highly reliable sources said. South Ossetians, under fire from Georgian snipers, were not aware of where the shots were coming from and began shelling Georgian positions outside South Ossetia.

But the fleeing Georgians killed a number of Russian peacekeepers, triggering the conflict, according to the Georgian sources.

The exchange of artillery fire between the Georgians and Russians virtually leveled Tskhinvali, the capital of South Ossetia.

The Georgian response to the South Ossetian artillery fire came despite common knowledge that the Russians had troops massed on the Russian side of the border, in North Ossetia, just opposite Georgian-controlled South Ossetia.

Indeed, there were published reports as early as July 18 that Russia and Georgia were holding large-scale military exercises simultaneously. The reports referred to the presence of more than 8,000 Russian troops, including the elite Pskov Airborne Division, taking part in exercises dubbed Kavkaz-2008. The exercises were being held in almost a dozen Russian regions, including Chechnya, North Ossetia, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria and Karachayevo-Cherkessia.

Meantime, some 1,200 U.S. and 800 Georgian troops were involved in a joint exercise called Immediate Response 2008 held at the Vaziani military base near Georgia's capital, Tbilisi. After the Russians came into Georgia, however, Vaziani was destroyed.

Until the Russians responded to the Georgian attacks on Tskhinvali Aug. 8, North Caucasian rebels opposed to the Russians had been monitoring the movement of Russian forces in the conflict zones and putting the information on their website. In one case, the rebel website reported two Russian armored motorcades had moved from Chechnya to North Ossetia and to the Roksky pass in South Ossetia next to the Russian-Georgian border.

The rebels, who are very active in the areas of the North Caucasus from the Caspian Sea to the Black Sea, further warned that Russia planned to attack Georgia in August.

Following the mid-July disclosures of Russian maneuvers to the north of South Ossetia, Russian President Dmitry Medvedev demanded that Georgia remove its troops from Abkhazia's Kordori Gorge. Medvedev warned that "the only way out of the current situation is to adopt joint documents obliging the sides to refrain from force and guaranteeing security, and the withdrawal of Georgian troops from the upper part of the Kordori Gorge."

The Russians frequently have made it known that they will protect Russian peacekeepers and any person who holds a Russian passport, which most of the habitants of South Ossetia and Abkhazia have.

For years, Russian peacekeepers have occupied the so-called conflict areas of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, both of which are are recognized by the international community as belonging to Georgia. Up until the latest flare-up, Georgian peacekeepers worked with Russian peacekeepers to police the conflict regions.

Knowing of the Russian troop buildup and the warnings issued the month before, the question arises as to why the Georgians responded to initial South Ossetian artillery fire with its own that hit the South Ossetian capital.

Some analysts suggest that the Georgian government did not think the Russians would go beyond South Ossetia, since there had been prior skirmishes between Georgian and South Ossetian forces.

Other analysts, however, suggest that it may have been a calculated effort to force Russia's hand and thereby draw attention from the West to Georgia's relations with Russia and desire to be part of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, or NATO.

[Soldier4Christ]

Embattled Musharraf says he's stepping down
Pakistani president had been facing likely impeachment charges

Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf announced his resignation Monday to avoid impeachment charges, nearly nine years after the key U.S. ally in its campaign against terrorism took power in a coup.

An emotional Musharraf said he wanted to spare the country from a perilous impeachment battle and that he was satisfied that all he had done "was for the people and for the country."

"I hope the nation and the people will forgive my mistakes," Musharraf said in a televised address, much of which was devoted to defending his record and refuting criticisms.

Musharraf said he will turn in his resignation to the National Assembly speaker on Monday but it was not immediately clear whether it would become effective the same day. The chairman of Pakistan's Senate, Mohammedmian Soomro, will take over as acting president when Musharraf steps down, Law Minister Farooq Naek said.

It also was not clear whether Musharraf would stay in Pakistan.

With Musharraf's utility fading, Western concerns appeared less interested with his ultimate fate than about how the clamor was affecting the halting efforts of the new civilian government against terrorism and the gathering economic woes.

President Bush stressed the importance of U.S.-Pakistan relationship in a statement by the White House after Musharraf announced his resignation.

"President Bush is committed to a strong Pakistan that continues its efforts to strengthen democracy and fight terror," White House spokesman Gordon Johndroe said.

The spokesman said Bush appreciates Musharraf's efforts "in the democratic transition of Pakistan as well as his commitment to fighting al-Qaida and extremist groups."

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice praised Musharraf as “a friend to the United States and one of the world’s most committed partners in the war against terrorism and extremism.”

In Pakistan, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi said leaders of the ruling coalition would discuss later Monday whether to prosecute Musharraf in court on charges that that were being planned for the impeachment process.

Victory of democratic forces'
Musharraf's political foes celebrated.

"It is a victory of democratic forces," Information Minister Sherry Rehman said. "Today the shadow of dictatorship, that has prevailed for long over this country, that chapter has been closed."

Musharraf dominated Pakistan for years after seizing power in a 1999 military coup, making the country a key strategic ally of the United States by supporting the war on terror. But his popularity at home sank over the years.

Many Pakistanis blame the rising militant violence in their country on Musharraf's alliance with the United States. His reputation suffered blows in 2007 when he ousted dozens of judges and imposed emergency rule. His rivals won February parliamentary elections and have since sought his ouster, announcing impeachment plans earlier this month.

Impeachment charges
Musharraf, who has been largely sidelined since his rivals came to power, had resisted the mounting calls to quit, even after the coalition finalized impeachment charges against him and threatened to send a motion to Parliament later this week.

The charges were expected to include violating the constitution and gross misconduct, likely in connection with the ouster of the judges and the declaration of emergency rule.

In announcing he would quit after all, Musharraf mentioned the many problems facing Pakistan, including its sinking economy. He said his opponents were wrong to blame him for the mounting difficulties. "I pray the government stops this down-sliding and take the country out of this crisis," he said.

Allies and rivals of the president said talks had been under way to get him to step down by possibly granting him legal immunity from future prosecution. The second biggest party in the government has said he should be tried for treason, which carries a maximum punishment of death.

Afghan reaction
In Kabul, the U.S.-backed Afghan government welcomed Musharraf's resignation, saying he "was not someone good for Afghanistan" and his departure will have a positive effect on the region.

Afghanistan has accused Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency of being behind an April assassination attempt on President Hamid Karzai and the July bombing of the Indian Embassy in Kabul, which killed more than 60 people.

Karzai's spokesman, Humayun Hamidzada, reiterated a standing Afghan government demand that Pakistan's military intelligence service cease its activities in Afghanistan.

Afghan Interior Ministry spokesman Zemeri Bashary said that Musharraf was an ally of the United States in name only. He said Afghanistan wants a Pakistani president that pursues peace by his actions, and not only through words.

Musharraf "was not someone good for Afghanistan," said Bashary. "We hope that someone good will replace him."

Speculation over next leader
Who will ultimately succeed Musharraf is an open question. There has been speculation that both Nawaz Sharif and Asif Ali Zardari, the leaders of the two main parties are interested in the role.

But the ruling coalition has sought to strip the presidency of many of its powers. Sharif spokesman Saiqul Farooq recently dismissed the idea that his boss wants the job because the presidency would likely be reduced to a ceremonial position.

Qureshi would not say whether Musharraf might be granted a "safe exit" — speculation has focused on whether he might go into exile in Saudi Arabia or Turkey — or dragged through the courts.

"That is a decision that has to be taken by the democratic leadership," Qureshi, who is from the main ruling Pakistan People's Party, told Dawn News television. The leaders would assess the speech and the political situation, he said.

[Soldier4Christ]

NATO won't let Russia succeed in Georgia: Rice

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Monday that Russia is playing a "very dangerous game" with the U.S. and its allies and warned that NATO would not allow Moscow to win in Georgia, destabilize Europe or draw a new Iron Curtain through it.

On her way to an emergency NATO foreign ministers meeting on the crisis, Rice said the alliance would punish Russia for its invasion of the Georgia and deny its ambitions by rebuilding and fully backing Georgia and other Eastern European democracies.

"We have to deny Russian strategic objectives, which are clearly to undermine Georgia's democracy, to use its military capability to damage and in some cases destroy Georgian infrastructure and to try and weaken the Georgian state," she said.

"We are determined to deny them their strategic objective," Rice told reporters aboard her plane, adding that any attempt to recreate the Cold War by drawing a "new line" through Europe and intimidating former Soviet republics and ex-satellite states into submission would fail.

"We are not going to allow Russia to draw a new line at those states that are not yet integrated into the trans-Atlantic structures," she said, referring to Georgia and Ukraine, which have not yet joined NATO or the European Union but would like to.

Rice could not say what NATO would eventually decide to do to make its position clear but said the alliance would speak with one voice "to clearly indicate that we are not accepting a new line."

At the same time, she said that by flexing its military muscle in Georgia as well as elsewhere, including the resumption of Cold War-era strategic bomber patrols off the coast of Alaska, Russia was engaged in high-stakes brinksmanship that could backfire.

This "is a very dangerous game and perhaps one the Russians want to reconsider," Rice said of the flights that began again with frequency about six months ago. "This is not something that is just cost-free. Nobody needs Russian strategic aviation along America's coast."

At Tuesday's meeting, the NATO ministers will consider a range of upcoming activities planned with Russia—from military exercises to ministerial meetings—and decide case-by-case at the meeting Tuesday whether to go ahead or cancel each.

They will also discuss support for a planned international monitoring mission in the region and a package of support to help Georgia rebuild infrastructure damaged in its devastating defeat at the hands of the Russian armed forces.

And, she suggested that Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, who signed an E.U.-backed cease-fire brokered by the French, may be unable to exert power behind the scenes against his powerful predecessor, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, or the Russian military.

She said she thought the French would be seeking "an explanation from the Russians for why the Russian president either won't or can't keep his word."

"It didn't take that long for the Russian forces to get in and it really shouldn't take that long for them to get out," Rice said.

[Shammu]

Ukraine torments Russia with show of solidarity
Askold Krushelnycky
August 17, 2008

Ukraine yesterday offered to create a joint missile defence network with the West amid fears that its port city of Sebastopol, home of the Russian Black Sea fleet, could become the next flashpoint between Russia and its former satellites.

The Ukrainian offer, which means its early warning radar stations could become part of the West’s civil defence system, will further damage poor relations between Kiev and Moscow.

Ukraine, which to the fury of Russia is looking towards Europe and membership of Nato, announced last week that it would require the Russian fleet to seek permission whenever ships entered its territorial waters.

Viktor Yushchenko, Ukraine’s reformist president who visited the Georgian capital Tbilisi last week to support President Mikhail Saakashvili, said the use of Russian ships for a war violated Ukraine’s neutrality and risked drawing it into conflict.

He instructed his security council to draw up new rules forcing Russia to apply up to 10 days in advance for permission for its fleet to move in and out of Ukraine’s territorial waters.

This weekend Yushchenko said a threat to Georgia’s territorial integrity should be viewed as a potential threat to Ukraine’s: “We have lived through the most terrible 10 days of our recent history.”

The Russian response was immediate. Colonel-General Anatoly Nogovitsyn, deputy chief of the Russian general staff, who last week warned Poland that it could face a nuclear strike after signing a deal with the United States to place a missile shield on its soil, made a belligerent statement to Ukraine.

He said Russian ships would ignore the order to seek permission, which he claimed was “illegitimate”.

Vladimir Putin, the Russian prime minister, warned Yushchenko last February that Russia could point nuclear missiles at Ukraine if it cooperated with US missile defence plans.

Ukraine is insisting the Russian military must leave Sebastopol when the lease on the base expires in 2017. The Russian navy has made it clear it may refuse to do so.

Ukraine torments Russia with show of solidarity