Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NATO. Show all posts

Friday, September 13, 2013

OBAMA-SPEAK A COVER FOR IMPERIAL AMBITION:


OBAMA-SPEAK A COVER
FOR IMPERIAL AMBITION:


"We must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the Military–Industrial Complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists, and will persist.

We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals so that security and liberty may prosper together".
U.S. President, Dwight D. Eisenhower on leaving office in January, 1960 to be succeeded by John F. Kennedy whose assassination in November, 1963, is still highly controversial with a large section of the American public believing that the murder of their President was part of a conspiracy by the same Military-Industrial Complex that President Eisenhower warned about.

There are three techniques used by the U.S.,UK and the other warmongers to sell the idea of yet more bombing of other countries.


1. Create the impression that the aggressor is actually acting in self defence, or in the defence of the helpless people of another nation.


2. Build up a crusade mythology, one that presents the aggressors as fighting for a higher ideal or for the good of all humanity.


3. De-humanise the enemy by presenting them as evil, barbaric or subhuman.


These three methods are applied every time, in every case, of Western aggression. They are being used today by  "leaders" to tell us that Assad must be attacked. They did precisely the same with Saddam and Gaddafi. They will do the same with Iran when its time comes.


 
The most notorious exponent of these techniques in the previous century was Nazi propaganda minister Dr. Joseph Goebbels.


                                                         Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda minister.

 
President Obama’s September 10 speech on Syria  is being presented as a defence of his policies and his latest diplomatic moves. But, underneath all that, the basis on which everyone is supposed to think and act is as outrageous a collection of lies as has ever been assembled in one speech, starting with Mr. Obama’s assertion that “the world’s a better place” because for “nearly seven decades the United States has been the anchor of global security.”

As is Mr. Obama’s claim that the U.S. mission in Syria is driven by opposition to “the terrible nature of chemical weapons.”
As is his assertion that the motive of the U.S. is to “stop children from being gassed to death and thereby make our own children safer over the long run.”

Libraries full of books, decades of documentaries, and the testimony of hundreds of millions of victims of what the U.S. has brought to the world would hardly begin to reveal the extent to which these are all LIES:

Obama: “The world’s a better place” because for “nearly seven decades the United States has been the anchor of global security.”

The detail of U.S. history from the beginning of the American colonization contradicts Mr. Obama’s false version of history. The genocide of Native Americans and the theft of their land, including the “Trail of Tears” where tens of thousands were driven off their lands in the southeastern U.S. and forced to march to Oklahoma—of 15,000 relocated Cherokees, 4,000 died on the march; including many children.  Slavery, where hundreds of thousands of people, kidnapped from Africa, were worked from “can’t see” in the morning to “can’t see” at night. And the legacy of children ripped from their parents, sold to other slave masters. All to build the foundation for much of what made America into the global empire it is today. A savage irony considering Mr. Obama’s own background.

What actually happened in the “nearly seven decades” Mr.Obama claims that the U.S. was making the world “a better place.”

Those decades were launched with, and in important ways defined—militarily, politically, and morally—by the most concentrated mass murder of civilians in human history. The U.S. atomic bomb attacks on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the firebombing of Tokyo in 1945 killed 200,000 civilians, some burned to death on the spot, others dying torturous deaths from radiation poisoning, with survivors and humanity as a whole traumatised”

Eight years later, the U.S. was “making the world a better place” through the Korean War. Of the U.S. invasion of Korea in 1950, U.S. Air Force General Curtis LeMay boasted that U.S. planes “burned down every town in North Korea.” The U.S. used more bombs and artillery shells in Korea than in all of World War 2, and used napalm—a chemical weapon more terrifying and “effective” against military and civilian targets than the older sarin gas the U.S. accuses Syria’s Bashar al-Assad of using. An estimated five million people were killed in the Korean War, three million of them civilians.

In the U.S. war of aggression against Vietnam, from 1965-1975, the U.S. continued to make the world “a better place” and along the way demonstrated how much it cares about children by dropping more than seven million tons of bombs on Vietnam and the neighboring countries of Cambodia and Laos before being driven out in 1975, killing an estimated three million Vietnamese—again, many of them children. Typical of the logic and morality of the U.S. military was the infamous statement by one U.S. military commander who directed the burning down of a whole peasant village and then said, “We had to destroy the village in order to save it.” In massacres as at the village of My Lai, and in the “cluster bombs” they dropped, the U.S. specifically aimed to kill civilians—including children—at random.

And in response to the arguments of defenders of U.S. imperialism, including liberal “critics” who insist “that was then, this is now,” the U.S. still provides cluster bombs for use against civilians. In 2006, the U.S. Senate voted, 70-30, to defeat an amendment to a Pentagon budget bill which would have banned the use of cluster bombs near populated civilian areas. That enabled the U.S. to continue to supply cluster bombs to Israel to use in an invasion of Lebanon. In 2008-9 the U.S. delivered White Phosphorous to Israel, via Shannon Airport in Ireland, which was used on the civilian population of Gaza in Israel's latest attack on that imprisoned ghetto at the time. White Phosphorous is worse than poison gas, it burns human flesh right through to the bone with excruciating agony for the victims.
Mr.Obama rails against Assad as a “tyrant.” But over “nearly seven decades” the United States installed many of the most brutal tyrants who carried out some of the most massive crimes against their own people in history. In 1965, the U.S. orchestrated a reactionary coup in Indonesia and the slaughter of one million communists and others. The massacres were so wanton that in parts of the country, the rivers were choked with bodies and blood. The fascist gangs and Islamic fundamentalists enlisted along with regular military and police to carry out these massacres used and reveled in the most depraved and sadistic means of torturing and killing people to spread widespread terror, including among children. The deaths of communists were then reported to officials at the U.S. Embassy who crossed off the names of the dead from lists they had provided to the Indonesian butchers.

In 1953 the Iranians changed their Government and kicked out Pahlavi, the fake "Emperor" but the "democratic" U.S. and Britain conspired to change it back again to what became a ruthless dictatorship based on torture and secret police. In 1971 the Chileans changed their Government but were rewarded two years later with a brutal Washington organised military coup when brave President Salvador Allende was murdered in his Office  and  a U.S. sponsored Junta seized power which slaughtered thousands.

The US has conspired to change governments by coup or invasion in all 20 states of Latin America in the last 150 years.
The fact that this history is not taught in schools, or acknowledged in acceptable discourse, does not mean these things didn’t really happen. There is one bit of actual truth that nearly everyone does know: The Iraq war was based on LIES.

Mr.Obama claimed in his speech that he was determined not to repeat what happened in Iraq and Afghanistan. As if simply avoiding U.S. “boots on the ground” should be the measuring stick for whether or not the U.S. is again carrying out the same kinds of crimes it carried out in Iraq and Afghanistan. Justified with THE SAME BASIC SET OF LIES!

Set aside, for a moment, the fact that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was justified by TOTAL LIES about Saddam Hussein’s supposed “weapons of mass destruction.” Set aside, for a moment, the fact that the media, including the liberal New York Times, chanelled these lies and gave them credibility.

Consider instead the self-righteous claims by the likes of Dick Cheney and George W. Bush that the U.S. was motivated by and driven to attack Iraq because “Saddam Hussein is a man who is willing to gas his own people, willing to use weapons of mass destruction against Iraq citizens.” (President Bush, March 22, 2002)

Saddam Hussein did gas Kurdish people in Iraq in 1988—something the U.S. facilitated, by the way, including through encouraging the Kurds to rebel and then stabbing them in the back, and through making it possible—including through allies—for Hussein to obtain poison gas. But the U.S. invasion of Iraq, and, importantly, the “diplomatic” moves the U.S. carried out against Hussein—namely sanctions, made things horribly worse for the ordinary people of Iraq.

Operation Desert Storm, 1991, the first U.S. invasion of Iraq, killed or injured hundreds of thousands—over 25,000 civilians and fleeing soldiers were killed in 48 hours on the “Highway of Death.” Then, after the war, the U.S. continued “making the world a better place” and demonstrating care for children through sanctions that killed some 500,000 children in Iraqkilled because of those U.S. sanctions that prevented them from getting needed medicine, clean water, and nutrition. And this crime was justified by a future U.S. Secretary of State as “a very hard choice, but the price—we think the price is worth it.” (US Television 60 Minutes, May 12, 1996)

In 2003, the U.S. and its allies again invaded Iraq—once again making the world “a better place.” During and after the war, between 600,000 and one million Iraqis were killed, and over four million were driven from their homes. (See “Mortality after the 2003 invasion of Iraq: a cross-sectional cluster surveyThe Lancet, October 12, 2006 ). These deaths are almost never mentioned in the mainstream media.

And the U.S. turned Abu Ghraib prison into their hellish torture chamber, with U.S. military personnel bragging on social media and in emails of sadistic torture, murder, sexual abuse, water boarding, beatings, sleep deprivation, humiliation, and dog attacks. Today Iraq is wracked with terrible sectarian violence (different religious and ethnic factions killing each other). During the U.S. occupation much of that was directly orchestrated by the U.S. in the tradition of colonial “divide and conquer” strategies, but all of it greatly exacerbated in one way or another by the U.S. invasion and the legacy and present-day reality of imperialist domination.

The same can be said about Afghanistan. And one can literally spin a globe of the planet, point to a country, and find crimes carried out by the U.S.

All this misery is a product of how their imperialist system works. It is a system that, by its nature, is driven to exploit the people and resources of the world, to contend and compete with rivals big and small, global and regional, over their ability to do that, which is driven by its nature to enforce all this with the most brutal violence.

Think about what kind of a system is actually represented by a liar-in-chief who can look back on a record like this, look earnestly into the cameras, and talk about nearly seven decades of “enforcing” what he calls “international agreements” that he claims made the world “a better place.”

Far too many of those who Mr.Obama would refer to as “on the Left” are breathing a sigh of relief that Mr.Obama is turning to “diplomacy” instead of launching a military strike—at this moment. But thuggish threats and violent crimes on the one hand and diplomacy on the other are two sides of the same coin. Speaking to a world population that is much more aware than are people in the U.S. of the legacy of U.S. violent crimes around the world, and speaking to (and embracing) the “hawks” in the ruling class and good ole boys watching on TV, Mr.Obama put on his stern face, looked into the cameras, and made this ominous declaration and threat:

“Let me make something clear: The United States military doesn’t do pinpricks.”

Don’t the families of the millions slaughtered know it!

U.S. diplomacy rests on violence and threats of violence, and is aimed at the same ends as violence of enforcing exploitation and oppression, fending off rivals, and keeping people enslaved. And, again, in Iraq, where U.S. sanctions (“diplomacy”) killed hundreds of thousands of children, and softened up Iraq for the 2003 invasion and all the horrors that came with that. On the basis of a world of lies, Mr.Obama proclaimed: “Our ideals and principles, as well as our national security, are at stake in Syria, along with our leadership of a world where we seek to ensure that the worst weapons will never be used.”

First of all, given that Mr.Obama is speaking for a ruling class of imperialists who have carried out the greatest crimes against humanity in history, who in their right mind would want to identify with the so-called “principles” behind what Mr.Obama calls “our national security "?.They are the “ideals and principles” of a murderous, sadistic, depraved imperialist ruling class driven to subjugate, dominate, and terrorise the planet. So why would anyone want to “debate” what the United States should do in Syria based on those interests? Unless they identify with ensuring that the U.S. imperialist ruling class can continue to dominate the planet, violently enforcing a system of sweatshops and slums, environmental devastation, and a system whose culture and “traditions” have produced an epidemic of rape.

The American public is being trained to think in these terms through Mr.Obama’s speech, and through endless spinning and “debate” among media pundits who are allowed access to the Whore Press owned by media barons like Rupert Murdoch and his ilk. But, people who have the ability to think critically and have the moral sense to look at things from the standpoint of the interests of humanity have to loudly and clearly reject these terms in all kinds of ways, including connecting that outlook with, and encouraging political protests against, any U.S. moves against Syria.

The interests, objectives, and grand designs of the imperialists are not our interests—they are not the interests of the great majority of people in the U.S. nor of the overwhelming majority of people in the world as a whole. And the difficulties the imperialists have gotten themselves into in pursuit of these interests must be seen, and responded to, not from the point of view of the imperialists and their interests, but from the point of view of the great majority of humanity and the basic and urgent need of humanity for a different and better world, for a different way of organising both economy and society in the interests of the majority of the people not the 1% corrupt and genocidal elite.


See also  U.S. Peace Activist ,Joseph Gerson's speech at Stockholm, Sweden, here:



 

 
 

 
 

Thursday, August 29, 2013

Syrian War Tragedy worsens:




OPPOSITION MOUNTING
TO NATO PLANS FOR ATTACK
ON SYRIA:
 
CAMERON FAILS TO GET PARLIAMENTARY MAJORITY
IN HOUSE OF COMMONS FOR MILITARY ACTION;
71 TORY BACKBENCHERS REVOLT;
LABOUR DEMANDS DELAY UNTIL UN INSPECTORS'
REPORT IS PUBLISHED; WASHINGTON ISOLATED AS NATO
ALLIES DECLINE TO SUPPORT ILLEGAL WARFARE; GERMANY,
ITALY AND SPAIN DECAMP; CYPRUS PROTESTS USE OF
BRITISH BASES FOR ATTACK ON SYRIA:
 
 
The plans for an attack on Syria by the US and Britain began to unravel today as mounting popular opposition domestically and political forces demanded evidence be provided to back up Washington and London's crude propaganda attempts to slander the Damascus government with responsibility for an alleged chemical attack in east Damascus last week which supposedly caused several hundred civilian casualties in the rebel opposition controlled suburb of the city.

Anti-War coalitions in the US and Europe have begun mobilisation against the criminal intent of the Washington and London elites and demonstrations have already been mounted in Times Square, New York, London, Glasgow, and several European cities which will be reinforced this coming weekend by further events in opposition to a new war in the Middle East with horrendous unforeseen consequences for the entire region and global peace and security.


In London, British Premier, David Cameron, faced an open revolt by as many as 70 Conservative Party Mp's who demanded more time and further evidence be presented to parliament before a vote would be taken and the  British opposition Labour Party leader, Ed Miliband,  scuttled Cameron's plans by announcing just after 5pm today that he would instruct his MPs to vote against the government motion if a separate Labour amendment – calling for any action to be delayed – was defeated.



                                                       House of Commons, Westminster.


Within two hours, Downing Street issued a statement, as it published its motion for the debate, that a second vote would have to be held before Britain joins any military action. The motion states: "Before any direct British involvement in such action a further vote of the House of Commons will take place."


An enraged Cameron turned on Miliband accusing him of having suffered a giant "wobble" after he had appeared to indicate on Tuesday night that he would be prepared to support military action, subject to legal approval. But Labour hit back and said that the Prime Minister had been resisting a second vote until Miliband tweeted his plan to table his own amendment.

A Labour source said: "We will continue to scrutinise this motion but at 5.15pm David Cameron totally ruled out a second vote, an hour and a half later he changed his mind. Ed Miliband was determined to do the right thing. It has taken Labour forcing a vote to force the government to do the right thing."
Downing Street spinners immediately said Cameron offered a second vote because he wants to act in a consensual way. A spokesperson said: "The Prime Minister is acutely aware of the deep concerns in the country caused by what happened over Iraq. That's why we are committed to taking action to deal with this war crime – but taking action in the right way, proceeding on a consensual basis."
"So this motion endorses the government's consistent approach that we should take action in response to Assad's chemical weapons attack; reflects the need to proceed on a consensual basis, taking account of the work done by weapons inspectors; and reflects the Prime Minister's respect for the UN process – something he made clear to President Obama several days ago."
The Government move is likely to take the heat out of Thursday's parliamentary debate that will be opened by Cameron at 2.30pm and wound up by Nick Clegg (Liberal Democrat), the Deputy Prime Minister, at 10pm. The debate will be preceded by a meeting of the cabinet that will receive a recommendation from the National Security Council that Britain should join the military strikes. Dominic Grieve, the British Attorney General, advised the NSC that such action would be legal under international law. The shadow of War Criminal Blair's calculated deception of the House of Commons in 2003 over the preparations for War in Iraq loomed large over events in London today with newspaper polls reporting 74% of voters opposed to any new war in the Middle East.
The National Security Council reportedly also discussed a specific plan for a British contribution to military action. This focused on a "limited one-off" operation and the measures that might have to be taken to protect British interests in the region, including the defence of the UK's sovereign base in Cyprus, which is thought to be potentially within range of President Assad's Scud missiles. The Cyprus Government is extremely alarmed at the possibility of longer range Syrian missiles being fired at the British bases in Akrotiri and hitting cities and towns in Cyprus by random off-target events.
Some sources in London speculated that it was possible the US would act without British support – which would be a huge embarrassment for Cameron. It would also be politically difficult for the White House. US officials have previously been at pains to stress that the US would not act unilaterally, but in concert with partners. The US claims that "it knows" that the Assad government was the author of a chemical attack, as stated by Vice-President Biden and Secretary of State John Kerry yesterday in bellicose statements threatening use of force against Syria, is based on the dubious and partisan reports from Israeli "intelligence" of alleged interception of Syrian military cables discussing such an event. The US has failed to produce any concrete evidence from independent sources to back up it's slanderous claims. Not much different from the kind  of "intelligence" presented to the UN in 2003 as justification for the War and invasion of Iraq and later found to be entirely spurious.
 UNITED NATIONS:
Russia and China refused to collaborate today with British attempts to rush the UN Security Council into making a premature decision on using military force against Syria.
The permanent representatives of Russia and China to the United Nations left the closed meeting of the Security Council on Syria after its end, there was no demarche, the Russian Permanent Mission to the UN told waiting Press representatives.
It was reported earlier in the day that the Russian and Chinese officials had walked out of the UN Security Council meeting in New York after US Permanent Representative Samantha Power had called for an immediate action in Syria. The permanent members of the UN Security CouncilRussia, Britain, China, the US and France – had been invited to the closed meeting. An hour later the Russian and Chinese diplomats left the meeting and headed to the Security Council’s main conference room where debates on Haiti was taking place.
Western countries could have, until the end of the day, submitted to the Security Council a draft resolution that would give the green light to an armed operation in Syria. Russia and China, which have the right of veto in the Security Council, have spoken up strongly against the use of force. However some Western countries have made it clear that they might take measures without waiting for the U.N. Security Council’s decision as they did in 1999 in Kosovo.
Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Gennady Gatilov said this would be a gross violation of international law. “Certain states are ready to use force even before UN experts make public the results of their investigation. Our country will be committed to international law,” he said. “Modern international law allows the use of force only in exceptional cases: for self-defence and if so authorised by the UN Security Council. Some states see priorities in a distorted way.”
Meanwhile, Syria has formally asked the UN to investigate three chemical attacks  which the Syrian Government believes were carried out by rebels in the suburbs of Damascus on August 22, 23 and 24.


Syrian Bishop warns intervention could spark ‘world war’ :

A Syrian Chaldean Catholic bishop on Monday warned that an armed intervention in Syria could unleash a “world war”, while the Vatican’s official newspaper called for more “prudence” from Western powers. “If there is an armed intervention, that would mean, I believe, a world war. That risk has returned,” Monsignor Antoine Audo of Aleppo told Vatican Radio.

“We hope that the pope’s call for real dialogue between the warring parties to find a solution can be a first step to stop the fighting,” he said. Bishop Audo is also the head of the Syrian arm of the international Catholic charity Caritas and has repeatedly warned about the human cost of the war.
 
 
                                                 Monsignor Antoine Audo of Allepo, Syria.

The Vatican daily, L’Osservatore Romano, meanwhile criticised Western powers in an editorial. “The drumbeat of an armed intervention by Western powers is becoming ever more insistent and ever less restrained by prudence,” it said. “Several representatives of these countries say they are convinced that the accusation that the Syrian Army used chemical weapons is founded – a question which the United Nations is investigating,” it said.

Pope Francis on Sunday called for the international community to help find a solution to the civil war.

“I launch an appeal to the international community to be more sensitive to this tragic situation and to commit itself to the maximum to help the dear Syrian nation find a solution to a war which spreads destruction and death,” he said.

Attacks on Christians, Chaldeans, Copts and other religious minorities are daily occurrences in Syria, Iraq and Egypt with no expressions of outrage from either Washington or London.




LIES, HYPOCRISY, WAR CRIMES:



The Union of Liars, Hypocrites and War Criminals = NATO, were planning their own chemical attack in Syria according to the London Daily Mail last January:


 
"London, Jan 30 (ANI): The Obama administration gave green signal to a chemical weapons attack plan in Syria that could be blamed on President Bashir al Assad's regime and in turn, spur international military action in the devastated country, leaked documents have shown.


A new report, that contains an email exchange between two senior officials at British-based contractor Britam Defence, showed a scheme 'approved by Washington'.


As per the scheme 'Qatar would fund rebel forces in Syria to use chemical weapons,' the Daily Mail reports.


Barack Obama made it clear to Syrian president Bashar al-Assad last month that the U.S. would not tolerate Syria using chemical weapons against its own people.


According to Infowars.com, the December 25 email was sent from Britam's Business Development Director David Goulding to company founder Philip Doughty.

The emails were released by a Malaysian hacker who also obtained senior executives resumes and copies of passports via an unprotected company server, according to Cyber War News.

According to the paper, the U.S. State Department has declined to comment on the matter. (ANI)"

Details from Cyber War News here:




ROME:


                                                          Italian Foreign Ministery, Rome.

Italian Foreign Minister Emma Bonino says Italy will not support force in Syria
without UN mandate:


"Italy will not take part in any military solutions without a UN Security Council mandate," Foreign Minister Emma Bonino told parliamentarians in Rome.
"
Even the option of a limited intervention risks becoming unlimited," the minister said, adding that Italy was "already stretched and even over-stretched" militarily in other parts of the world.

"There is no military solution to the Syrian conflict. The only solution is a negotiated political solution," she said, calling for "great determination" in pursuing negotiations between the warring sides.


LONDON

 
 
National demonstration: No attack on Syria
Stop the War Coalition, 31 August 2013.
National Demonstration: assemble Saturday 31 August, 12 noon, Temple Place, London (nearest tube Temple)
The national demonstration on Saturday will gather at Temple Place (near Temple tube) and march via Parliament and Downing Street, ending in central London for a political rally to say No attack on Syria.
Called by Stop the War and CND.
 
Statement on Syria
Stop the War Coalition, 27 August 2013.
The Stop the War Coalition strongly opposes any military attack on Syria. While we oppose all use of chemical weapons, the latest alleged such attack in Damascus should not be used as a pretext for further exacerbating an already bloody civil war.
It seems that the Western governments have already made up their minds about this attack before it has even been reported on by UN weapons inspectors. They are demanding that ‘something must be done’ even though their record of ‘doing something’ has been nothing short of catastrophic.
There have been numerous western interventions in the Middle East and South Asia over the past 12 years. While the attacks on Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya were all argued for on humanitarian grounds, they have all increased the levels of killing and misery for the ordinary people of those countries. They were in reality all about regime change. This is also what Syria is about.


PARIS

French National assembly will debate Syria crisis:

                                                                                  French President, François Hollande



The French parliament will hold an emergency session to debate the Syria crisis on September 4, minister Alain Vidalies said on Wednesday.

The announced debate comes as France and US/UK threaten a potential military intervention in Syria following an alleged chemical weapons attack last week in the Damascus suburbs that the governments in Washington and London are blaming on the Assad regime.

"There will be a special debate in the (lower house) National Assembly and in the (upper house) Senate," said Vidalies, who is in charge of relations between the Government and parliament.

It is as yet unclear whether a military operation will take place over last Wednesday's alleged attack and if it does, when it will happen. But, under French law, a one-off military intervention does not need parliamentary approval.
French President François Hollande gave a militant speech on Tuesday warning the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad that France was "ready to punish" those responsible for the chemical weapons attack. Hollande further warned that the Syrian civil war posed "a threat to world peace." Stressing a "responsibility to protect civilians," Hollande also said that "chemical massacre cannot remain without a response from France."

Neither Hollande or the French Government have produced any evidence associating the
Assad regime with a chemical attack in Damascus but, have seen fit only to parrot Washington and London's disputed claims.

Hopefully, more sober elements of French politics will come to the fore in the debate.



IN WHOSE INTEREST?


 

Stock shares of perennial Defence contracting powerhouse Raytheon hit nearly $77 apiece Tuesday as news of a possible US strike in Syria intensified. The US has said if it strikes Syrian government targets for alleged use of chemical weapons, it would likely use Tomahawk cruise missiles from warships positioned in the Mediterranean. Raytheon is responsible for making and selling the bulk of the long-range, subsonic missiles to the US government.