Beware the Gleiwitz*
On the evening of August 31, 1939, a group of concentration camp prisoners were transported to the German town of Gleiwitz, dressed in Polish military uniforms, drugged, and shot. Their bodies were arranged around the station in a manner suggesting an attack had been repelled, and a brief anti-German message broadcast. The event was one of a series of false-flag operations and diplomatic maneuvers Hitler used to justify the invasion of Poland, which began the next day. What is now known as the "Gleiwitz Incident" is often seen as a casus belli of WWII.
The idea of defending oneself against attack as a justification for aggression is common throughout history. And this makes complete sense. If you are attacked, you defend yourself. You push me, I push back. Turn-the-cheek beliefs aside, it's OK to retaliate to defend oneself.
Even when you aren't sure you were really attacked. Was the sinking of USS Maine, leading to the Spanish American War, actually due to hostile action? Fifty-fifty at best.
You can also defend when you are sure you haven't been attacked. Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara eventually admitted North Vietnam did NOT attack U.S. ships in the Gulf of Tonkin, an event that prompted the expansion of the Vietnam conflict.
It's also Ok to defend yourself when you are sure you haven't been attacked but might be in the future. Hence, the fabrication of WMDs that precipitated Iraq II.**
Which brings us to 2025, when we are told we are already in a war against a nationless, vaguely defined, non-military foe that has already killed millions of Americans. How can this be?
From the perspective of our administration, we have both an enemy (narcoterrorists) and an attack (poisoning our citizens with drugs.) In a news conference on 12-4-25, President Trump claimed, "I think you will find that this is war, that these people are killing our people, by the millions, actually." Pete Hegseth, Secretary of War, has gone so far as to refer to drugs as "chemical weapons." The language is classic Hegtrumpist hyperbole: weapons, drugs (narco--as in those shows on Netflix,) attack, poisoning, terrorism, millions dead. Who wouldn't get upset?
We've converted a long-standing issue--illegal drugs entering the country--from a criminal act to an act of war. It's as if the myriad governmental agencies charged with managing drug trafficking – –DEA, ICE, DHS, border patrol, TSA, etc.--have been so ineffective, we have to push the response into the red, to, in the words of Secretary Hegseth, "deter our adversaries."
What's really going on?
-Deterrence? Because the "narcos" are businessmen, not terrorists, they will find a new route for the sale of their product.
-Interdiction to deny resources to real terrorists, like Hezbollah? The tanker was "sanctioned" with that claim.
-Removal of a despised leader? Venezuelan President Maduro has been labeled as a "cartel boss responsible for trafficking drugs into the US."
-Squeezing Venezuela as a route to toppling Cuban leadership, Secretary of State Marco Rubio's all-time wet dream?
-Grabbing an oil source? "
-Call of duty" thinking--as in, "we've got all these weapons, may as well blow some shit up?"
All of the above? None of the above?
We will have to wait and see.
What we can already see is that there is much more going on than stopping drugs. The fabrications and exaggerations have effectively shifted our attention. As has become typical, there is no concern with legality: we know the president cannot conduct "war" involving the armed forces beyond 60 days without congressional authorization. The involvement of the military has shifted the alleged issue to the geopolitical level and the costs – – personal, economic, moral, reputational – – are escalating. The Gleiwitz has been played.
I can only urge that we listen to the language, speak truth to bullshit and try to restore checks and balances to those forcing the military to violate its historical, legal mandates. Maybe this is the issue that will finally get our representatives to strengthen their spines enough to stand up. A country really concerned about loss of civilian lives does not cut healthcare and food security programs. A country that has consistently labeled drug users/addicts as criminal, weak-willed, drains on society does not suddenly want to protect them. These contractions are obvious, but we're busy looking elsewhere.
As the invasion of Poland commenced, Hitler claimed he had no other choice, "than to meet force with force." Military force, justified by lies, opening a real war that would eventually kill millions. Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler have little in common, and whatever happens in Venezuela will not be the opening of a global war. I can only urge that we stay aware of how leaders--whether it be Putin invading Ukraine because the country has been "nazified," or Trump justifying military action to confront "narcoterrorism"--create crises to mask their intentions and justify their actions.
This why I read the daily news with a cynical eye and remind myself,
Beware the Gleiwitz.
*Pronounced, "gly-vitz"
**It is tempting to use the 9-11 terrorist attacks as the "cause" Iraq II. I tend to see it based on the thinking of "we've got to do something! WMD allowed a focus for conventional military action that loosely bound terrorist groups could not..