11-06-2010, 08:17 AM
Flashpoints For Global War
19 Comments » By Giordano Bruno
Neithercorp Press – 06/10/2010
![[Image: Bombing21.jpg]](http://neithercorp.us/npress/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/Bombing21.jpg)
As the economic collapse progresses through 2010 and its fiscal consequences become more certain, the field of view reaching towards our social and political future has become more vague and unclear. Every analyst or researcher of the New World Order and the global elite now seems to have a different insight into how our situation will develop once the financial implosion peaks, and people actually start to react to the obviously severe circumstances.
While having a microphone in the middle of the annual Bilderberg conference in would surely clarify the details of exactly how the globalists plan to conduct themselves over the coming year, this is unfortunately not an option, and reports leaked from Bilderberg cannot always be taken at face value. One element nearly all of us can agree on, though, is the distinct possibility of expanded wars in the near term, used as a diversion by the elites to pull the focus of the masses away from their dire economic atmosphere, away from the bankers that created the meltdown, and towards an overseas adversary.
War on a broad scale creates fear, and fear often inspires a senseless brand of collectivism and misguided patriotism in those uninformed subsections of the public, a patriotism based on blind zealotry instead of individual liberty. The average citizen faced with an ample and immediate threat by a foreign enemy tends to fall in line with establishment policy, even if the conflict with that foreign enemy is entirely fabricated, even if establishment policy is ultimately a greater threat. War has always been utilized as a tool by aristocrats and monarchy to not only expand kingdoms and empires, but to keep the “peasants” of their empires weak, weary, and subservient.
The size of these wars seems to reflect the scope of the goal the globalists wish to accomplish at the moment, and today the stakes are very high. The world has reached a point of no return as far as the economy is concerned, and only two conclusions are possible: the people stand down, the elites prevail, and global government is established, or, the people stand firm, the elites fall, and their designs are put to an end perhaps forever. It is an all or nothing scenario, and one of the few tricks the globalists have left to turn the tide fully in their favor is war on a magnitude so humbling that it intimidates champions of free society into conceding without attempting a defense. To paraphrase the Chinese tactician, Sun Tzu: the best generals win without ever having to fight a real battle. They simply give their enemy the impression that fighting back would be utterly futile and force them to surrender before the battle ever begins.
In this article, we will examine some of the regions around the world in which such a “shock and awe” campaign could begin, facilitating the escalation of global war.
Israel And The Middle-Eastern Powder Keg
If any nation poses an immediate threat to the stability of the world at large, it would have to be Israel.
Israel receives “official” financial aid from the United States to the tune of $3 billion a year, and this does not include off-book aid or armament projects such as Obama’s recently approved ‘Iron–Dome Defense’ missile system costing $205 million:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-de...e-1.291339
Despite this massive monetary and military support, the Israeli Government continues to hide behind the insincere notion that the country is some kind of “underdog” surrounded and threatened by the entire world:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContri...?id=177306
The unbalanced denial in the majority of the Israeli community over the actions of their own leadership borders on clinical insanity, and their obsessive self identification with the ‘David and Goliath’ mythology often leads them to conveniently rationalize any act of brutality. When you constantly paint yourself as the victim, every attack you make on others can then be justified as “self defense”. As the recent slaughter of activists in international waters on a Turkish flotilla bringing food and supplies to Gaza has shown, ironically, the open viciousness of their government’s foreign policy has actually begun to legitimize their paranoia by actively turning other nations, including former allies such as Turkey, against them:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/...l-flotilla
As anyone with any sense can see, the current establishment in Israel is a comprehensive disaster waiting to happen. Trying to warn most Israelis of the peril their administration has exposed them to seems to only invite accusations of racism and Anti-Semitism. Obviously, if someone is against the policies of the Israeli Government, then they must hate the entire Jewish community. Why listen to the cold hard irrefutable facts, or engage in honest debate, when you can simply label a critic as a “Neo-Nazi”?
What could be more hazardous than a country with endless support from the world’s only superpower, and a collective Napoleon Complex? That same country with its finger on the button of a nuclear arsenal.
Israel has never officially confirmed or denied the possession of nuclear missiles. However, in 2006, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made an embarrassing slip during a visit to Germany in which he named Israel as a nuclear armed state:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1809421.htm
Evidence has been uncovered showing that not only has Israel had nukes for decades, but they have also tried to sell them to other countries such as apartheid South Africa during the 1970’s:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/...908105.htm
Reports of Israeli war games in preparation for a strike on Iran also apparently include a nuclear option:
The Israeli government has refused to join in a recent anti-nuclear arms treaty which would make its nuclear facilities subject to UN inspection:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64S1ZN20100529
One would think that if Israel is so concerned about countries such as Iran constructing nuclear weapons, they would put their money where their mouth is and support a treaty which mandates UN inspection to prevent ballistic development. Apparently, Israel has more to hide than Iran does…
Last year, we talked about the link between Syria and Russia, and the possibility that any strike by Israel in the Middle East could spur Russia into open warfare. This possibility seems more and more prevalent as 2010 progresses.
Russia has maintained a naval base on the Syrian coast of Tartus for years, and has recently revamped and rearmed it:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,...45,00.html
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=175607
Last year, Iran signed a ‘mutual defense treaty’ with Syria:
[URL="http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/93798/iran-syria-sign-defense-pact-against-39-foreign-aggression-39-.html"]http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/93798/iran-syria-sign-defense-pact-against-39-foreign-aggression-39-.html
[/URL]
And now, Israel has threatened both these countries with war:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,...04,00.html
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=117...=351020104
The U.S. has pressed for tough sanctions against Iran in the UN, and Barack Obama has stated essentially that the nuclear option is viable in response to Iran’s enrichment program (even though UN inspectors have found no evidence that this program is for weapons purposes):
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06armstext.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep...-elbaradei
What this produces is a regional domino effect. Anyone who thinks that an Israeli or U.S. attack on Iran or Syria will be isolated to just those countries is sorely mistaken. An attack on one will eventually if not immediately involve the other, and the potential for intercession by Russia is high, especially if even a single nuclear weapon is used. How far such a conflict would escalate is anyone’s guess, but even a war on Iran alone would be devastating to the world economy and to the United States specifically. The chances for a catastrophic global conflict are very high in this situation.
China, North Korea, And The Asian Union
Communist China has been, and probably always will be, a construct of Globalist interests. The Chinese communist revolution succeeded because of supply and support from the U.S. military under the direction of Roosevelt and General George C. Marshall using Russia as an intermediary. The Rockefeller Foundation and the UN helped form China’s one child policy 1979, and the Rockefellers are heavily involved in the financial affairs of China to this day. China plays a key role in the push towards forced globalization.
As we have covered in numerous articles over the past few years, China has been shifting its economic policies away from an export based economy with an artificially weakened currency, to an immense 1.3 billion person import and consumption hub with a strong reserve currency at the center of the new ASEAN trading bloc. There is a very high probability that this move is in anticipation of a final economic plunge in world markets soon to occur, allowing China to not only survive, but thrive as a new center of trade and finance.
For this shift to succeed, China will eventually dump its extensive holdings of U.S. Treasury Bonds, causing the now publicly traded Yuan to rise, and the Dollar to finally collapse. A dollar implosion, of course, was always inevitable, and the dumping of bonds by China makes perfect sense when one understands this, but due to a lack of knowledge on currency issues a majority of the American public could be convinced that the dollar collapse was completely facilitated by China, and that war is a viable response. If recent Chinese military movements are any indication, they may be preparing for just such an eventuality.
Military movement on the Chinese mainland has been muted, and signals little if any intentions of expansion or conflict with its neighbors, but Chinese naval production and scope has greatly increased, which is congruent if China has expectations of conflict with the West. China has diverted large portions of funds away from its ‘People Liberation Army’ into its Navy, Air Force, and Missile Command. In 2008, an underground nuclear class submarine base was discovered on the South Pacific, which would give China the ability to command the region, including the Asian shipping lanes vital to countries like South Korea, and Japan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-base.html
The number of nuclear class submarines being built by China in the past few years has also caused India concern:
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unca...45380.html
Chinese aggressiveness in the pacific has been heightened since 2008 as well. Most of us remember the incident last year when five Chinese vessels harassed the USNS Impeccable in international waters. But this was only a preview. In April, a Chinese armada passed extremely close to Okinawa and Japanese territorial waters, which some in the Japanese government consider an act of intimidation:
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/n...414a2.html
This was quickly followed by the harassment of a Japanese ship by a Chinese helicopter from the same armada:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=..._article=1
A Chinese submarine had also been spotted near the coast of Taiwan only days before the U.S. approved a $6 billion arms sale to the island nation, though China has officially denied the incident:
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/china...denies.htm
All of these events appeared to culminate in a long range war games display by the Chinese at the end of April. The message is obvious; China wants pacific dominance, and is preparing to commandeer it by force. Why now? Because the economic bridge between Beijing and Washington D.C. is about to collapse, and there will no longer be any financial incentive to keep mutual relations peaceful.
That does not mean that the citizenry of either side would be supportive of all out conflict, but this could change with events in North Korea.
North Korea, like Iran or Syria, could be used as a stepping stone by globalists to lure the west into a wider war. The American public would not accept immediate full-scale combat with China, but they might accept the invasion of North Korea, and then later be manipulated into seeing combat with China as a necessary “outgrowth” of the smaller war. The bottom line is, whether China is willing to risk an alliance with North Korea in the face of U.S. opposition, the mere presence of large U.S. naval forces so close to China at this point in time would be like tripping the Chinese in the middle of their puffed-up strutting and chest beating. It would be an invitation to hostilities…
A war in the East would be a perfect opportunity for consolidation of power. Desperate Asian nations affected by the resulting fallout would be much more apt to fully commit to ASEAN and an Asian Union. The Economic collapse would hit the U.S. harder than any other country, and China would be left to centralize control of the Pacific region.
Pakistan, India, And The Bomb
The U.S. has been blatantly encroaching on Pakistani territory since the Afghan war started. Aerial drone attacks on Pakistani soil now take place almost daily. Ten years ago, open U.S. incursions into allied airspace without permission would have been unheard of. Now, it’s almost expected. This type of activity undoubtedly breeds resentment in the local populace, and the terrible cycle continues. America oversteps its bounds on the orders of globalists, innocents get killed, their families become militant against us, and then we label them “terrorists”; lumping them in with Al Qaeda, an organization the CIA created and supported in the early 80’s using $3 billion in taxpayer funds. Is this irony, or is it completely intentional? Creating pockets of vengeful people around the world can be useful…
After angering the locals with indiscriminate killing, the U.S. has now given Pakistan an ultimatum; launch more offensives against the “terrorist networks” (which we created) in outlying territories, or we will involve ourselves further in your affairs:
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ap-...36113.html
One would think that the U.S. government was TRYING to infuriate Pakistan. Perhaps they are…
Pakistan makes a wonderful target for the Elite. First, it holds a moderate nuclear arsenal of 70 to 90 missiles. Second, their western mountain ranges are home to the Taliban which was driven from Afghanistan by the U.S. Third, their previous alliances with America can be used to take advantage of them while at the same time slowly turning them into an enemy. Fourth, the failed attack in Times Square by supposed Pakistani terrorist, Faisal Shahzad, has been widely reported.
Now, imagine a successful attack befalls an American city. Perhaps a false flag nuclear attack. How easy would it be to fabricate evidence and blame this event on Pakistan? A substantial number of Americans would buy such a story in a heartbeat. The tale falls together perfectly. U.S. actions in Pakistan are interpreted as invasion. The Pakistani government “recruits” terrorist cells in secret, hands them a nuclear weapon, or allows them to steal one, and then helps them to unleash it on their enemies in America. Retaliation and invasion becomes essential to American “security”.
Pakistan is being groomed by our media as the new “axis of evil” state, and why not? The perfect motive has been carefully provided by us!
The same tactic could be used on Indian soil. India holds between 60 and 80 nuclear weapons. An attack of this magnitude could set off a nuclear exchange between the two countries which would reverberate throughout the world. Even if a wider war did not erupt, the global economy would evaporate within a day.
In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in May, General Petraeus warned that a new terrorist attack in India could destabilize the region and increase tensions with Pakistan:
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn...-830-zj-04
A conference of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation in April was also overshadowed by the growing antagonism between Pakistan and India:
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/asi...96899.html
The fact that Pakistan had to borrow $11.3 billion from the IMF last year just to stay afloat does not help. The austerity measures demanded by the IMF could eventually cripple the Pakistani economy. If the their government were to default on it sovereign debt load, their nuclear weapons facilities could go unprotected as many in Russia did during the fall of the Soviet Bloc. Under those conditions, a nuclear event would be assured.
War Is Good For Globalists
Each one of these projections might sound entirely theoretical, but the the evidence supporting their development is tangible, and their culmination is far closer than any of us might like to admit.
While a large nuclear exchange would be devastating for everyone, including the Elites, a smaller controlled exchange would create enough fear to take hold of the population without laying the world to waste. Even without radiological disaster, conventional war on a new front in the midst of the most fragile financial atmosphere modern man has ever seen would be just as demoralizing. War makes drastic change, sometimes terrifying change, possible. Changes that would normally require decades to accomplish can be unleashed in the span of months or even weeks. War conditions the national psyche, and makes it susceptible to tyranny. It gives rise to collective madness, and makes us forget who we are.
As the Liberty Movement gains ground in the real battle, the battle for the truth, we should also anticipate proxy conflicts, false terror attacks, and engineered international diversions. The closer we get to exposing reality to the masses, the more probable a global war will be. This is just the name of the game. Men in positions of unrestrained power do not give it up without taking other men down with them, and they prefer to take as many as possible. We will see terrible things in our lifetimes, and make difficult decisions no one should ever have to make, but our purpose remains clear: end the fog of lies, and keep the world free. No matter what happens, the focus should not be whatever war we are faced with, but who caused the conditions that led to that war. In all the confusion, there is only one real confrontation, one campaign; the fight between those who wish to dominate life, and those who merely wish to live unchained.
19 Comments » By Giordano Bruno
Neithercorp Press – 06/10/2010
As the economic collapse progresses through 2010 and its fiscal consequences become more certain, the field of view reaching towards our social and political future has become more vague and unclear. Every analyst or researcher of the New World Order and the global elite now seems to have a different insight into how our situation will develop once the financial implosion peaks, and people actually start to react to the obviously severe circumstances.
While having a microphone in the middle of the annual Bilderberg conference in would surely clarify the details of exactly how the globalists plan to conduct themselves over the coming year, this is unfortunately not an option, and reports leaked from Bilderberg cannot always be taken at face value. One element nearly all of us can agree on, though, is the distinct possibility of expanded wars in the near term, used as a diversion by the elites to pull the focus of the masses away from their dire economic atmosphere, away from the bankers that created the meltdown, and towards an overseas adversary.
War on a broad scale creates fear, and fear often inspires a senseless brand of collectivism and misguided patriotism in those uninformed subsections of the public, a patriotism based on blind zealotry instead of individual liberty. The average citizen faced with an ample and immediate threat by a foreign enemy tends to fall in line with establishment policy, even if the conflict with that foreign enemy is entirely fabricated, even if establishment policy is ultimately a greater threat. War has always been utilized as a tool by aristocrats and monarchy to not only expand kingdoms and empires, but to keep the “peasants” of their empires weak, weary, and subservient.
The size of these wars seems to reflect the scope of the goal the globalists wish to accomplish at the moment, and today the stakes are very high. The world has reached a point of no return as far as the economy is concerned, and only two conclusions are possible: the people stand down, the elites prevail, and global government is established, or, the people stand firm, the elites fall, and their designs are put to an end perhaps forever. It is an all or nothing scenario, and one of the few tricks the globalists have left to turn the tide fully in their favor is war on a magnitude so humbling that it intimidates champions of free society into conceding without attempting a defense. To paraphrase the Chinese tactician, Sun Tzu: the best generals win without ever having to fight a real battle. They simply give their enemy the impression that fighting back would be utterly futile and force them to surrender before the battle ever begins.
In this article, we will examine some of the regions around the world in which such a “shock and awe” campaign could begin, facilitating the escalation of global war.
Israel And The Middle-Eastern Powder Keg
If any nation poses an immediate threat to the stability of the world at large, it would have to be Israel.
Israel receives “official” financial aid from the United States to the tune of $3 billion a year, and this does not include off-book aid or armament projects such as Obama’s recently approved ‘Iron–Dome Defense’ missile system costing $205 million:
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-de...e-1.291339
Despite this massive monetary and military support, the Israeli Government continues to hide behind the insincere notion that the country is some kind of “underdog” surrounded and threatened by the entire world:
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Op-EdContri...?id=177306
The unbalanced denial in the majority of the Israeli community over the actions of their own leadership borders on clinical insanity, and their obsessive self identification with the ‘David and Goliath’ mythology often leads them to conveniently rationalize any act of brutality. When you constantly paint yourself as the victim, every attack you make on others can then be justified as “self defense”. As the recent slaughter of activists in international waters on a Turkish flotilla bringing food and supplies to Gaza has shown, ironically, the open viciousness of their government’s foreign policy has actually begun to legitimize their paranoia by actively turning other nations, including former allies such as Turkey, against them:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/...l-flotilla
As anyone with any sense can see, the current establishment in Israel is a comprehensive disaster waiting to happen. Trying to warn most Israelis of the peril their administration has exposed them to seems to only invite accusations of racism and Anti-Semitism. Obviously, if someone is against the policies of the Israeli Government, then they must hate the entire Jewish community. Why listen to the cold hard irrefutable facts, or engage in honest debate, when you can simply label a critic as a “Neo-Nazi”?
What could be more hazardous than a country with endless support from the world’s only superpower, and a collective Napoleon Complex? That same country with its finger on the button of a nuclear arsenal.
Israel has never officially confirmed or denied the possession of nuclear missiles. However, in 2006, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made an embarrassing slip during a visit to Germany in which he named Israel as a nuclear armed state:
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2006/s1809421.htm
Evidence has been uncovered showing that not only has Israel had nukes for decades, but they have also tried to sell them to other countries such as apartheid South Africa during the 1970’s:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/...908105.htm
Reports of Israeli war games in preparation for a strike on Iran also apparently include a nuclear option:
The Israeli government has refused to join in a recent anti-nuclear arms treaty which would make its nuclear facilities subject to UN inspection:
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64S1ZN20100529
One would think that if Israel is so concerned about countries such as Iran constructing nuclear weapons, they would put their money where their mouth is and support a treaty which mandates UN inspection to prevent ballistic development. Apparently, Israel has more to hide than Iran does…
Last year, we talked about the link between Syria and Russia, and the possibility that any strike by Israel in the Middle East could spur Russia into open warfare. This possibility seems more and more prevalent as 2010 progresses.
Russia has maintained a naval base on the Syrian coast of Tartus for years, and has recently revamped and rearmed it:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,...45,00.html
http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=175607
Last year, Iran signed a ‘mutual defense treaty’ with Syria:
[URL="http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/93798/iran-syria-sign-defense-pact-against-39-foreign-aggression-39-.html"]http://www.turkishweekly.net/news/93798/iran-syria-sign-defense-pact-against-39-foreign-aggression-39-.html
[/URL]
And now, Israel has threatened both these countries with war:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,...04,00.html
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=117...=351020104
The U.S. has pressed for tough sanctions against Iran in the UN, and Barack Obama has stated essentially that the nuclear option is viable in response to Iran’s enrichment program (even though UN inspectors have found no evidence that this program is for weapons purposes):
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/06/world/06armstext.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep...-elbaradei
What this produces is a regional domino effect. Anyone who thinks that an Israeli or U.S. attack on Iran or Syria will be isolated to just those countries is sorely mistaken. An attack on one will eventually if not immediately involve the other, and the potential for intercession by Russia is high, especially if even a single nuclear weapon is used. How far such a conflict would escalate is anyone’s guess, but even a war on Iran alone would be devastating to the world economy and to the United States specifically. The chances for a catastrophic global conflict are very high in this situation.
China, North Korea, And The Asian Union
Communist China has been, and probably always will be, a construct of Globalist interests. The Chinese communist revolution succeeded because of supply and support from the U.S. military under the direction of Roosevelt and General George C. Marshall using Russia as an intermediary. The Rockefeller Foundation and the UN helped form China’s one child policy 1979, and the Rockefellers are heavily involved in the financial affairs of China to this day. China plays a key role in the push towards forced globalization.
As we have covered in numerous articles over the past few years, China has been shifting its economic policies away from an export based economy with an artificially weakened currency, to an immense 1.3 billion person import and consumption hub with a strong reserve currency at the center of the new ASEAN trading bloc. There is a very high probability that this move is in anticipation of a final economic plunge in world markets soon to occur, allowing China to not only survive, but thrive as a new center of trade and finance.
For this shift to succeed, China will eventually dump its extensive holdings of U.S. Treasury Bonds, causing the now publicly traded Yuan to rise, and the Dollar to finally collapse. A dollar implosion, of course, was always inevitable, and the dumping of bonds by China makes perfect sense when one understands this, but due to a lack of knowledge on currency issues a majority of the American public could be convinced that the dollar collapse was completely facilitated by China, and that war is a viable response. If recent Chinese military movements are any indication, they may be preparing for just such an eventuality.
Military movement on the Chinese mainland has been muted, and signals little if any intentions of expansion or conflict with its neighbors, but Chinese naval production and scope has greatly increased, which is congruent if China has expectations of conflict with the West. China has diverted large portions of funds away from its ‘People Liberation Army’ into its Navy, Air Force, and Missile Command. In 2008, an underground nuclear class submarine base was discovered on the South Pacific, which would give China the ability to command the region, including the Asian shipping lanes vital to countries like South Korea, and Japan:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnew...-base.html
The number of nuclear class submarines being built by China in the past few years has also caused India concern:
http://www.thaindian.com/newsportal/unca...45380.html
Chinese aggressiveness in the pacific has been heightened since 2008 as well. Most of us remember the incident last year when five Chinese vessels harassed the USNS Impeccable in international waters. But this was only a preview. In April, a Chinese armada passed extremely close to Okinawa and Japanese territorial waters, which some in the Japanese government consider an act of intimidation:
http://search.japantimes.co.jp/cgi-bin/n...414a2.html
This was quickly followed by the harassment of a Japanese ship by a Chinese helicopter from the same armada:
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=..._article=1
A Chinese submarine had also been spotted near the coast of Taiwan only days before the U.S. approved a $6 billion arms sale to the island nation, though China has officially denied the incident:
http://www.chinapost.com.tw/taiwan/china...denies.htm
All of these events appeared to culminate in a long range war games display by the Chinese at the end of April. The message is obvious; China wants pacific dominance, and is preparing to commandeer it by force. Why now? Because the economic bridge between Beijing and Washington D.C. is about to collapse, and there will no longer be any financial incentive to keep mutual relations peaceful.
That does not mean that the citizenry of either side would be supportive of all out conflict, but this could change with events in North Korea.
North Korea, like Iran or Syria, could be used as a stepping stone by globalists to lure the west into a wider war. The American public would not accept immediate full-scale combat with China, but they might accept the invasion of North Korea, and then later be manipulated into seeing combat with China as a necessary “outgrowth” of the smaller war. The bottom line is, whether China is willing to risk an alliance with North Korea in the face of U.S. opposition, the mere presence of large U.S. naval forces so close to China at this point in time would be like tripping the Chinese in the middle of their puffed-up strutting and chest beating. It would be an invitation to hostilities…
A war in the East would be a perfect opportunity for consolidation of power. Desperate Asian nations affected by the resulting fallout would be much more apt to fully commit to ASEAN and an Asian Union. The Economic collapse would hit the U.S. harder than any other country, and China would be left to centralize control of the Pacific region.
Pakistan, India, And The Bomb
The U.S. has been blatantly encroaching on Pakistani territory since the Afghan war started. Aerial drone attacks on Pakistani soil now take place almost daily. Ten years ago, open U.S. incursions into allied airspace without permission would have been unheard of. Now, it’s almost expected. This type of activity undoubtedly breeds resentment in the local populace, and the terrible cycle continues. America oversteps its bounds on the orders of globalists, innocents get killed, their families become militant against us, and then we label them “terrorists”; lumping them in with Al Qaeda, an organization the CIA created and supported in the early 80’s using $3 billion in taxpayer funds. Is this irony, or is it completely intentional? Creating pockets of vengeful people around the world can be useful…
After angering the locals with indiscriminate killing, the U.S. has now given Pakistan an ultimatum; launch more offensives against the “terrorist networks” (which we created) in outlying territories, or we will involve ourselves further in your affairs:
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/ap-...36113.html
One would think that the U.S. government was TRYING to infuriate Pakistan. Perhaps they are…
Pakistan makes a wonderful target for the Elite. First, it holds a moderate nuclear arsenal of 70 to 90 missiles. Second, their western mountain ranges are home to the Taliban which was driven from Afghanistan by the U.S. Third, their previous alliances with America can be used to take advantage of them while at the same time slowly turning them into an enemy. Fourth, the failed attack in Times Square by supposed Pakistani terrorist, Faisal Shahzad, has been widely reported.
Now, imagine a successful attack befalls an American city. Perhaps a false flag nuclear attack. How easy would it be to fabricate evidence and blame this event on Pakistan? A substantial number of Americans would buy such a story in a heartbeat. The tale falls together perfectly. U.S. actions in Pakistan are interpreted as invasion. The Pakistani government “recruits” terrorist cells in secret, hands them a nuclear weapon, or allows them to steal one, and then helps them to unleash it on their enemies in America. Retaliation and invasion becomes essential to American “security”.
Pakistan is being groomed by our media as the new “axis of evil” state, and why not? The perfect motive has been carefully provided by us!
The same tactic could be used on Indian soil. India holds between 60 and 80 nuclear weapons. An attack of this magnitude could set off a nuclear exchange between the two countries which would reverberate throughout the world. Even if a wider war did not erupt, the global economy would evaporate within a day.
In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee in May, General Petraeus warned that a new terrorist attack in India could destabilize the region and increase tensions with Pakistan:
http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn...-830-zj-04
A conference of the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation in April was also overshadowed by the growing antagonism between Pakistan and India:
http://www1.voanews.com/english/news/asi...96899.html
The fact that Pakistan had to borrow $11.3 billion from the IMF last year just to stay afloat does not help. The austerity measures demanded by the IMF could eventually cripple the Pakistani economy. If the their government were to default on it sovereign debt load, their nuclear weapons facilities could go unprotected as many in Russia did during the fall of the Soviet Bloc. Under those conditions, a nuclear event would be assured.
War Is Good For Globalists
Each one of these projections might sound entirely theoretical, but the the evidence supporting their development is tangible, and their culmination is far closer than any of us might like to admit.
While a large nuclear exchange would be devastating for everyone, including the Elites, a smaller controlled exchange would create enough fear to take hold of the population without laying the world to waste. Even without radiological disaster, conventional war on a new front in the midst of the most fragile financial atmosphere modern man has ever seen would be just as demoralizing. War makes drastic change, sometimes terrifying change, possible. Changes that would normally require decades to accomplish can be unleashed in the span of months or even weeks. War conditions the national psyche, and makes it susceptible to tyranny. It gives rise to collective madness, and makes us forget who we are.
As the Liberty Movement gains ground in the real battle, the battle for the truth, we should also anticipate proxy conflicts, false terror attacks, and engineered international diversions. The closer we get to exposing reality to the masses, the more probable a global war will be. This is just the name of the game. Men in positions of unrestrained power do not give it up without taking other men down with them, and they prefer to take as many as possible. We will see terrible things in our lifetimes, and make difficult decisions no one should ever have to make, but our purpose remains clear: end the fog of lies, and keep the world free. No matter what happens, the focus should not be whatever war we are faced with, but who caused the conditions that led to that war. In all the confusion, there is only one real confrontation, one campaign; the fight between those who wish to dominate life, and those who merely wish to live unchained.
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"