Portal to Antiwar.com   at The Portland Alliance:  http://www.ThePortlandAlliance.org/antiwar 

Iran Launches Missile Strikes Against US Airbase in Western Iraq

US F-35s seen taking of from UAE

Breaking News: Check for further updates as available

10:50 PM ET: Analysts are suggesting Iran’s targeting at Ayn al-Asad was done so as to avoid casualties, trying to do enough damage to show its ability to retaliate without provoking further attacks.

Iran’s strikes also targeted Anbar Province and Iraqi Kurdistan, both non-Shi’ite parts of Iraq, which may have been done to minimize the risk of Shi’ite casualties.

10:30 PM ET: Tweets from President Trump and Iranian FM Javad Zarif are suggesting a deescalation of the situation following the Iranian strikes. Zarif says Iran considers what they did “proportionate” to what the US did, and Trump is saying that “all is well.”

9:55 PM ET Iran says their retaliation is finished, and that they will stop attacking so long as the US doesn’t attack them anymore.

9:10 PM ET The FAA has banned all flights over Iraq and Iran for the time being, citing concern of misunderstandings. Analysts say this will be rough on regional providers, who are already coping with restrictions in Saudi Arabia and Qatar over the acrimony between those two.

8:40 PM ET President Trump is not intending to address the situation tonight.

8:05 PM ET Fox is claiming no casualties. This cannot be confirmed. Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps has issued statements any US retaliation would lead to more retaliation from them. They added that Israel would be a possible target.

7:50 PM ET: A second round of missiles reportedly launched. This may be the strikes in Irbil. Camp Taji was also reportedly hit, no confirmation yet.

Iran suggests US forces should be withdrawn from Iraq.

7:40 PM ET: US F-35 planes took off from a base in UAE. Iran reportedly warns the UAE will be attacked if American aircraft from there strike Iran.

7:35 PM ET: The Pentagon is confirming casualties among Iraqis at Ayn al-Asad airbase. No numbers yet, and damage assessment is still ongoing.

7:15 PM ET: Reports out of the Pentagon say that something in Irbil, the capital of Iraqi Kurdistan, was targeted as well. No word on what. The White House has confirmed that they are “aware of the reports.”

Reports are that Iran fired the missiles from Kermanshah, a Western city not far from the Iraqi border.

7:00 PM ET: Iranian forces have fired surface-to-surface ballistic missiles at the Ayn al-Asad airbase in western Iraq. The base has a substantial US military presence and is seen as retaliation for last week’s US assassination of a top Iranian general.

Iran’s Fars New Agency released a video of the missile firing, calling it “hard revenge” against the US. There are no details yet on the amount of damage done, or any casualties.

US military officials are said to have confirmed six missiles hit the base, while others, including Iraq’s PMU, reported as many as 13 missiles involved. Iran’s state media said “tens of missiles” were fired.


Anti-War Committee


1200 S Washington Ave, Minneapolis, MN 55415-1227, United States




Justin Raimondo, RIP (1951-2019) - Antiwar.com Original

Justin Raimondo, former editorial director and co-founder of Antiwar.com,
is dead at 67. He died at his home in Sebastopol, California, with his husband,
- Antiwar Staff for Antiwar.com 


The Democratic Party's War History

Renee Parsons on the AUMF of 2018

James Comey's Book

Mostly about making Comey rich, says Peter Van Buren

Trump Should Follow His Instincts

And de-escalate in the Mideast, says Maj. Danny Sjursen

Leaders of Two Koreas Meet at Summit

Kim and Moon hold hands, cross demarcation line

Mattis Defends Iran Deal Trump Slammed

Says nuclear deal has robust oversight provisions

US Renewed Push Against ISIS in E. Syria

Kurdish forces are returning to Euphrates Valley

Russian Spies, Syria and Kosovo

Dan McAdams on crazy war party narratives

Trump Pushing Iran Toward Nukes

Trita Parsi on the importance of the JCPOA

Skipral Story is Nonsense

Any scientist could make that poison, says David Collum

Rise and Fall of the American Empire

Imperial decadence: is it inevitable?

by , June 27, 2011

If we look at American foreign policy under Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama, what strikes the non-partisan observer is a sense of continuity – and an escalating aggressiveness.

President Clinton moved with force into Haiti, Bosnia, and Kosovo, the latter two in support of a Muslim minority that was fighting for independence against Serbia. The result: a permanent US “mission” (under NATO auspices) in both Bosnia and Kosovo, and the establishment of a de facto protectorate in Haiti. He also moved against Iraq, bombing constantly during his two terms in office and maintaining draconian sanctions that killed as many as a half a million Iraqis, mostly children and the aged.

In the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, President George W. Bush launched two major wars – and a worldwide covert “shadow war” – that represented a Great Leap Forward for the American Empire. We invaded Iraq, and occupied it: we invaded Afghanistan, and set up the conditions for the longest war in our history. The Bush presidency also set the stage for future interventions, ratcheting up tensions with Iran, and extending our reach into the former Soviet republics of Central Asia and the Caucasus, taking on Russia in the bargain.

President Obama took office as the “antiwar” candidate, criticizing the Iraq invasion while advocating an escalation of the “neglected” Afghan front. Iraq, he argued, was a “diversion” away from our central task, which was fighting terrorism (and al-Qaeda) in Afghanistan – and in Pakistan, as well. This last was an important addition to our enemies list, one that went little noticed at the time but has since loomed large in this administration’s sights, as the stealthy but steady expansionism of the frontiers of empire pushes forward.

In Iraq, and now in Afghanistan, the US is announcing a “drawdown” – indeed, as far as the former is concerned, we are supposed to be withdrawing entirely. At least that’s what the US-Iraq Status of Forces Agreement, signed by President Bush, stipulates. However, the Americans are trying to get around that by claiming – as newly confirmed Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said in Senate hearings recently – there are still 1,000 al-Qaeda fighters in Iraq. The country “continues to be a fragile situation,” he averred, “and I believe that we should take whatever steps are necessary to make sure that we protect whatever progress we have made there.” Asked about the Iraqi government’s willingness to let the Americans stay, he testified:

“It’s clear to me that Iraq is considering the possibility of making a request for some kind of [troop] presence to remain there,” he said, adding that he had “every confidence that a request like that will be forthcoming.”

Ever since the Obama administration took office, US officials have been pressuring our Iraqi sock-puppets to cave in to US demands for an extended stay, in defiance of the “radical” Shi’ite leader, Muqtada Sadr, and his followers, who have joined the ruling coalition government. The fiercely nationalistic Sadrists are threatening to withdraw from the coalition, and even take up arms, if the deadline for the US withdrawal passes and the Americans are still there. This would serve the administration’s purposes rather neatly, providing a rationale for an extension of the deadline and marginalizing a troublesome figure who stands in the way of our long range plans.

And what, exactly, are those plans?

It’s clear that what the US envisions in Iraq is an “independent” state entirely dependent on US aid and military assistance: in short, an American protectorate, garrisoned with a “residual force” of several tens of thousands of “non-combat troops.”

The same holds true for Afghanistan, although the process is not as far along. That’s the purpose of announcing this fake “drawdown.” Look at the Afghan pattern: it’s virtually the same as in Iraq – a “surge,” followed by a “drawdown” to previous levels, with the end result being a garrison of US soldiers left behind to police its newly-integrated province. As Bob Woodward related in Obama’s Wars, then defense secretary Robert Gates – at a dinner for Afghan “President” Hamid Karzai – expressed his regret for going along with George H. W. Bush’s decision to “abandon” Afghanistan, and went on to declare:

“We’re not leaving Afghanistan prematurely,” Gates finally said. “In fact, we’re not ever leaving at all.”

Make no mistake: both Iraq and Afghanistan are provinces in an American empire that has rapidly expanded, since the fall of the Soviet Union, to include much of the Middle East – and, now, parts of North Africa, where the Libyan intervention is the tip of the American spear.

In Libya, to be sure, we are going in with our NATO allies, but this is just a stylistic difference with the previous administration: Bush and the neocons preferred to go it alone, while the present gang flies the flag of “multilateralism.” The result, however, is the same: a conquered province in an ever-expanding global empire, totally dependent on Western aid and support to keep afloat.

Back in the cold war era, the US constructed what the late Chalmers Johnson called “an empire of bases,” a series of lily-pads that allowed Washington to project American military power to the four corners of the earth at a moment’s notice. With the implosion of communism, and the end of the US-Soviet global confrontation, the Americans moved rapidly to put flesh on the bare bones of their empire.

In Iraq and Afghanistan, we are making the transition to a more traditional form of imperialism, following the Roman model: setting up protectorates which are allowed to run their own affairs internally – as long as they don’t conflict with US objectives, and permit a contingent of US troops to stand guard over the frontiers of empire.

Those frontiers are being pushed ever onward, and this is clearly the goal of the Obama administration in Pakistan – the next American target – as well as Libya. Yet this is also, for Washington’s empire-builders, an era of consolidation, when the military conquests of the previous administration are to be formalized and “legalized.”

At home, too, the empire is being institutionalized, and given a formal structure, as the President defends his supremacy in the foreign policy and military realm – so far successfully. Although the Founders abhorred imperialism, and are no doubt turning in their graves over theongoing usurpation of Congress’s authority to make war, the White House has blithely gone about its business, ignoring its congressional critics – and this has been the case since the days of Harry Truman, who sent US troops to Korea without consulting the elected representatives of the people.

A few years ago there was a discussion among foreign policy wonks about whether America should ditch its anti-imperialist heritage entirely and become an empire. I had to laugh at this “debate,” for America has been an empire in fact if not in form since the end of World War II, and is now reaching the pinnacle of its power. Which is to say: it’s downhill all the way from this point.

The American empire may be expanding, but the economic foundations on which it rests are in fatal disrepair. As we contemplate our imminent bankruptcy – moral as well as financial –

...The pattern of imperial consolidation – “humanitarian” wars of “liberation,” followed by occupation and the installation of American garrisons in the newly-integrated provinces – is not the inevitable the result of some natural law in the evolution of great nation-states.


Read more by Justin Raimondo 

Navigation: FrontPage / Activism / Donate / Flyer / YouTube / Poster / Subscribe / Place Ad / Ad RatesOnline Ads / Advertising / Twitter / News! / Previous Issues / Blog/ Myspace / Facebook1 / Facebook2 

Features:   Active Community / A Few Words /Arts & Culture / Breaking News / Jobs /  / Labor History / MusicNewsBytesProgressive Directory / Cartoons / Community CalendarLetters / Poetry / Viewpoints & Commentary

ColumnsBeeman, Brown, Engelhardt / Kucinich / Munk / Myers / William Reed / Schwebke / Norman Solomon / Vorpahl / Wittner 

Partners: AFD / AMA / Bread&Roses / CAUSA/ CLG/ Common Dreams / DIA / FSP /ISO / Jobs w\ Justice / KBOO / Labor Radio / LGBTQMRG / Milagro / Mosaic / Move-On / OccupyOEA / Occupy PDX / Peace House / The 99% / Peace worker / PCASC / PPRCRight 2 Dream Too / Street Roots / Skanner / The Nation / TruthOut / Urban League / VFP / Voz /

Topics: A-F AIPAC /  Civil Rights / Coal / Death Penalty / Education / Election 2012 / Fair Trade / F-29 / Environment / Foreclosure  /

 Topics:  G-R Health / Homeless / J-Street / Middle East / Occupy Blog /   http://www,ThePortlandAlliance.org/onwardoregon
Peace / Persian / Police / Post Office  

Topics: S-Z STRIKE! /  ThePortlandAlliance.org/takebackthenight  Take Back the Night    Tri-MetUnion / VDay / War & Peace / Women / Writing / WritingResource

More:                            http://www.theportlandalliance.org/labornotes  

New and updated Pages! 


Haiti: Celebrating the New Year and Independence    
 Hollywood Theatre! 


AFRICA NEWS:   http://www.ThePortlandAlliance.org/africa 



/  http://www.ThePortlandAlliance.org/PICA 



 Indymedia Porta


 Hollywood Theatre! 







A Scientist Who Resisted Trump Administration Censorship of Climate Report Just Lost Her Job  “I wouldn’t do anything different, but Jesus, this is stressful.”

The Portland Alliance: phone Number: 

cell (for emergencies) 503-697-1670
Production office:  Missoula, Montana  
Servers in Portland, Oregon
For questions, comments, or suggestions for this site, please contact
editor@theportlandalliance.org or ThePortlandAlliance@gmail.com

© 1981-2020 NAAME Northwest Alliance for Alternative Media & Education,
dba The Portland Alliance:  All Rights Reserved. 
A 501C3 Oregon Non-profit Corporation for Public Benefit

Support local media:
The Asian Reporter | Kboo | The Oregon Peaceworker
| Portland.Indymedia.org | The Skanner