Lawrence Wilkerson: Those pipelines are the matrix of the future

March 17, 2010

Is the United States planning to bomb Iran? A British newspaper has reported the United States is shipping bombs to the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean to possibly do just that. Lawrence Wilkerson says that if the US is, they cannot simply use airstrikes to attack Iran.


Final destination Iran? by Rob Edwards

In a sense the U.S.-NATO war on Iran has already begun by Bruce Gagnon

Noam Chomsky: Iran pursuing nuclear weapons out of fear By Matthew W. Hutchins

3 thoughts on “Lawrence Wilkerson: Those pipelines are the matrix of the future

  1. Pingback: Seven Years of War in Iraq: Still Based on Cheney’s Torture and Lies « Dandelion Salad

  2. Pingback: Iran’s Natural Gas Riches: US Knife to the Heart of World Future Energy by Finian Cunningham « Dandelion Salad

  3. How chilling it is to hear Wilkerson state with such equanimity that hydrocarbon pipelines are the future matrix of the world. This shows the dark and blighted vision of even relatively well intentioned and seemingly honest people amongst the political ‘elites’.

    As for his remarks on Iran, I think that what he seems to be missing is that a Rumsfeldian confidence in tricks and technology still pervades both the military and the political establishment. We see this in Afghanistan which has become a very dirty war of PR campaigns, black ops and drone killings. They certainly do think they can run a war with relatively few ‘boots on the ground’. In addition, we can almost certainly assume that deals are being worked out with Rafsanjani, Mousavi and others to stage a coup against a government struggling to survive under a rain of fire from the sky. Such a coup is surely part of the ‘grand’ strategy.

    The implications from what Wilkerson says about the pipelines-as-the-matrix of-the-future are opposite to what he seems to want to suggest: if the pipelines are that important, and if Iran’s role in the matrix of pipelines is that important, the implication is that Iran will be forced to submit NO MATTER WHAT IT TAKES. I suspect that nukes are even being considered, should Iran turn out to be tougher than expected. Remember that Thatcher was apparently seriously considering nuking Argentina over the Falklands (eg, over ocean floor and antarctic hydrocarbons). I don’t think the Anglo-Empire has become kinder and gentler since then.

    But we need to remember that modern combat does not necessarily require that many boots on the ground, because the intention of the boots on the ground is to bring out opposing forces which air power can then slaughter. Ground forces are not expected to fight true pitched battles as in wars of the past. US forces can enter Iran from Iraq and Afghanistan, and their goal will be to draw forces from protecting the government, and hopefully, to slaughter those forces as well, but mainly to make it easier for a coup to take place at the center of Iran.

    I also think Wilkerson is wrong about three aircraft carriers being required. I don’t think Israel and the Obama administration will want to tip Iran off by bringing more aircraft carriers into the region, as Bush did repeatedly, and there are many bases in the wider region from which airplanes and drones can come. Diego Garcia itself seems admirably placed to help out. DG’s critical role in the US global military architecture is quite a tribute to the way the US and UK have long been intertwined in the Anglo Empire, Diego Garcia being an island the English acquired, cleared (that means, forced the people out) and handed to the US military and it sits right near key global crossroads. Lyndon Larouche is wrong about many things but he’s right about one thing: the British Empire never ended. It just made a few mainly cosmetic changes. The same will happen when the US collapses. The Anglo Empire will roll on, but we won’t necessarily be the ostensible center of it anymore. We’ll provide many of the centurions, no doubt.

Comments are closed.