America's favorite pastime isn't baseball. It's war!

By Stephen Lendman

America's favorite pastime isn't baseball. It's war, permanent imperial wars that won't end in our lifetime Dick Cheney said earlier. America is addicted to war. One nation after another is ravaged and plundered. Unchallenged global dominance is sought. Who's next? Syria? Iran? Washington's long knives target both countries.

On June 29, AP headlined "US, Russia fail to reach agreement on Syria, jeopardizing Annan plan to end crisis," saying:

Before heading for Geneva, Hillary Clinton and Sergey Lavrov met in St. Petersburg. Differences between them weren't resolved.

Washington demands regime change. Moscow wants Syrians to decide who'll lead them. Lavrov said:

We "agreed to look for an agreement that will bring us closer based on a clear understanding of what's written in the Annan plan that (all) sides in Syria need an incentive for a national dialogue."

"But it's only up to the Syrians to make agreements on what the Syrian state will be like, who will hold (government) jobs and positions."

Putting a brave face on intractable differences, Lavrov hoped Geneva discussions would move closer to resolving Syria's conflict peacefully. "But I am not saying that we will agree on every dot."

Kofi Annan proposed unity government. Government and opposition members would be included. Elements seeking belligerent change would be excluded. Russia and other major powers expressed support. Washington insists Assad must go. He told Iran's IRIB channel 4:

"We, in Syria, do not accept any model that is not Syrian and national, regardless of whether it was imposed by superpowers or proposed by friendly countries." 

"No one knows how to resolve the problem in Syria as well as we do, as Syrians....so, any model that comes from abroad is unacceptable regardless of its content."

At the same time, he thanked Russia, China, and other countries for trying to resolve things peacefully to restore stability. On June 30, America, Russia, China, Britain, France, Turkey, Iraq, Kuwait and Qatar met in Geneva. Moscow wanted Iran there. Washington rejected Tehran's participation. Reports late Saturday said world powers struck a transitional government deal. What part Assad would play remains unclear. Russia says Syrians must decide who'll lead them. The deal struck has no preconditions. 

Ahead of word from Geneva, insurgent leaders rejected transitional government with Assad in it. Earlier they spurned peace initiatives. They take orders from Washington. Expect little more now than earlier. America won't tolerate peaceful resolution. Regime change depends on violence and instability. What's next remains to be seen. Iran is also targeted. On June 25, Aviation Week (AW) headlined "Raiding Iran Triggers Discussion of When and How," saying:

"Evidence is mounting that the U.S. defense community and the Obama administration view 2013 as the likely window for a bombing attack on Iran's nuclear and missile facilities."

"It could be earlier, timed to use the chaos of the Syrian government's fall to disguise such an attack, or later, if international negotiations with Iran stretch out without failing completely."

"But there is evidence that Iran's intransigence over shutting down its uranium-enrichment program will not buy it much more time."

"The tools for (conducting) an attack are all operational."

Proponents in and outside America suggest Iran already conducted one or more nuclear tests in North Korea. Corroborating evidence didn't follow claims. They're baseless like other accusations about Tehran menacing the region.

Debate continues in Washington. To attack or not attack? If so, when? Electoral priorities dictate policy. Three unnamed retired senior war planners offered views. Comments were as follows:

"I think it would take an extraordinarily dumb move on the part of the Iranians to force U.S. kinetic interventions before the U.S. presidential election (by abandoning negotiations)." "Israel has fewer reservations (about attacking) given the recent solidification of their government." The most politically opportune time would be 2013 or 2014. "The assessment I'm betting on is continued watching, but (with U.S. forces) close to action."

An attack "would employ a totally stealthy force of F-22s, B-2s and Jassms (joint air-to-surface standoff missiles) that are launched from F-15Es and (Block 40) F-16s."

Other advanced weapons and radar jamming devices would be used. "We should give Iran advanced warning that we will damage and likely destroy its nuclear facilities. It is not an act of war against Iran, the Iranian people or Islam." "It is a pre-emptive attack solely against their nuclear facilities and the military targets protecting them. We will take extraordinary measures to protect against collateral damage."