The world seems to be on the brink of yet another war as the U.S. and its allies seem set to launch

an attack on Syria.  According to a Reuters report, the United Nations Security Council was set for a showdown over Syria on Wednesday after Britain sought authorisation for Western military action that seems certain to be vetoed by Russia and probably China.
U.N. chemical weapons experts investigating an apparent gas attack that killed hundreds of civilians in rebel-held suburbs of Damascus, made a second trip across the front line to take samples. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon pleaded for them to be given the time they need to complete their mission.
But the United States and European and Middle East allies have already pinned the blame on Assad and, even without full U.N. authorisation, U.S.-led air or missile strikes on Syria look all but certain, though the timing is far from clear.
While it appears that Russia and China would veto any move to attack Syria, in these days of “horse trading” in global diplomacy one cannot be certain and if the latter do not veto military intervention, then we will once again be plunged into another Iraq-style scenario which will lead to the senseless loss of lives, property, economic devastation and of course the emotional/psychological scars that all wars leave behind.
With the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan still very unstable it would be senseless to plunge the world into yet another senseless adventure. But it is clear that the U.S. and its allies are most anxious to launch a military attack on Syria which is in accordance with their geopolitical objective of installing governments in the Middle East which would serve their military and political interests.
What is worrisome is that even though the investigation into the alleged chemical attack by the Syrian government is not complete, the West has already made its conclusion and it does not matter if the investigation finds they are determined to launch a military strike.
Syria on Tuesday said US Secretary of State John Kerry was lying when he stated there was “undeniable” evidence of a large-scale chemical attack likely launched by Damascus, accusing him of disregarding the work of U.N. investigators.
On Monday, Kerry used tough language to refer to an alleged poison gas attack in Damascus last week, saying that an “international norm cannot be violated without consequences.”
The remarks were the clearest justification yet for U.S. military action in Syria, which, if President Barack Obama decides to order, most likely would involve sea-launched cruise missile attacks on Syrian military targets.
The Syrian statement published Monday on the state-run Syrian Arab News Agency said Kerry’s insistence on “jumping over” the work of U.N. experts in Syria shows that the U.S. has deliberate intentions to exploit events.
It said Kerry has also “fabricated” evidence by accusing the Syrian government of non-cooperation with the U.N. delegation and of delaying their arrival to the sites that were allegedly attacked by chemical weapons.
This is not the first time that American statesmen have lied because if one were to go back to the Iraq scenario we would see the lies that were peddled about weapons of mass destruction which were used as the springboard by the West to launch its military strike.
If one were to carefully analyse unfolding events in Syria, it is clear that the West is trying desperately to reconstruct an Iraqi scenario to justify another military attack and perhaps the strategy and tactics of the Syrian government, in dealing with the conflict, are helping the cause of the West.
It seems the U.S. and its allies have not learnt the lessons of Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan. But we know that the buoyancy of the economies of the West is heavily dependent on the military-industrial complex, without which they may collapse, and therefore wars are essential to sustain them. So having global peace would be inimical to their economic interests which of course are more important to the West than the loss of lives, property and the ensuing suffering that are caused by wars.