Strategies of War
There has been much talk of shared values and responsibility to protect the growing and developing world from imminent danger and threats. Presumably this responsibility falls upon the United States and thier allies in NATO as they have dubbed themselves leaders and protectors of the free world. In November of 2010 NATO leaders met in Lisbon, Portugal for what was given the dubious title "NATO's Strategic Concept" to discuss a range of topics including cyber warfare, climate change, high tech missile defense systems, nuclear armaments, and of course the war on terror. The title "NATO's Strategic Concept" is clearly dubious because NATO has no strategy of its own, the strategical plan of NATO is to abide by the rules of Washington D.C. NATO seems to be laying claim the job of the United Nations with a harsher more aggressive undertone. The only strategy of the United States and NATO is to make way for American hegemony as Zbigniew Brzezinski most blatantly ascertained in his 1993 book The Grand Chessboard. This chessboard is the world map and the U.S. has pawns aplenty.
Finding a Culpable Threat
The United States government lays claim to being progenitors of freedom, but this freedom as the government boldly professes only comes through democratic means. Thus, the U.S. and its allies in NATO under the guise of international law have created neverending pretexts invading sovereign countries, often rewriting its own rules on a whim. Case in point being the Kosovo war in 1999, when the U.S. and Nato bombed Yugoslavia, defying international law, the United Nations, and its own rules, regulations, and charter. NATO did this by waging a war of aggression outside of its defensive perimeters, therefore making the pact of nations an offensive machine. In this war, NATO committed quite a few acts of aggression that many believed to be contrary to the Geneva Convention, namely killing innocent refugees, bombing hospitals, churches, and nurseries, along with foreign embassies. What should have been defined as ethnic clashes in a sovereign nation became a pretext for aggression and war mongering. The same culpability has occured in Libya, as NATO has once again reared its head and bombed a country under the guise of saving lives. NATO has expanded its powers to go far beyond its call of duty and is now policing piracy, cyber security, climate change, extreme weather events such as catastrophic storms and flooding, rising sea levels, large-scale population movement into inhabited areas, sometimes across borders, water shortages, droughts, decreasing food production, global warming, CO2 emissions, the retreat of Arctic ice uncovering hitherto inaccessible resources, fuel efficiency and dependence on foreign sources, etc. None of which require military operations, but due to NATO's need for pretexts of war, they can produce some form of conflict through their "Strategic Concept".
An End To Diplomacy
NATO is becoming an ever increasing threat to the world because of its lust for power and non-diplomatic rhetoric and actions. Military campaigns have become the norm for NATO as they have continuously adopted a 2PAC bomb first ask questions later approach to dealing with dissenting countries, military force has become the bargaining chip. Many of the new threats to NATO as outlined by Anders Fogh Rasmussen should be addressed by the international community and not an alliance of military powers. The pentagon has relinquished the state deparment in its negotiating role therefore you have military rhetoric instead of peaceful talks when dealing with countries with contrary views to NATO. In a military state of mind, diplomacy is seen as weakness and despised as such. The pentagon has quietly became the negotiator in world affairs due to the militarys' vast expansion across the seas, spanning many countries. This military-industrial complex by the U.S. has gave way to a very dangerous game with other major world powers, namely China and Russia. By belittling the U.N. and what that amalgamation of countries supposedly stand for, the U.S. is now using NATO is a substitute with a no-diplomacy insistence.
The Military-Industrial Complex
The United States of America has built a vast military at the expense of its citizens. The country accounts for a little over fifty percent of all the world's military spending. Meaning that the U.S. spends the same amount of money on defense as the rest of the 194 countries in the world combined. It is said that the U.S. has between 700 to 1000 military bases in over 130 countries throughout the world, that's astounding when there are approximately 195 countries in the world. So, the question is to what honor do all of these countries owe such a great prescence of militray personnel. The answer presumably is the "Strategic Concept" of U.S. domination and conquest. These various military bases provide a pretext for wars with dissenting countries most notably Russia and China as well, as they are often provocations. Evidence of a provocation came in November 2010 when military exercises by South Korea near the Korean border sparked the shelling of an island by North Korea killing and injuring civilians. While the U.S. was not directly involved in the military exercises, the North has often considered the South a puppet regime following orders from the U.S. due to the large number of U.S. military personnel, bases and camps surrounding South Korea. It must be noted that the Korean peninsula is a very strategic point if the U.S. and China were to ever clash. Provocative measures against China and Russia are evidenced in the encircling and flanking of these two powers by the U.S. with the numerous bases and camps in various countries, along with the ratcheting up of military exercises in plain view, often off the coasts of major Chinese and Russian cities. The average American citizen is pobably unaware of what is happening but to others such as myself we know what's going on. As well, the war on terror must be thrown in the mix, as it has provided the pentagon with a blank check. The terrorist threat propaganda has provided certain cover for the pentagon to bomb a country without explicit permission from congress.
Throwing Rings Around Russia to get to China
Ultimately, the major threat to the U.S. is China. WWIII will be so much more than a militarily fought war. It will also be a war of economics, which the United States is losing and badly. The U.S. deficit has breached the debt ceiling which is over 14 trillion dollars. To what has to be the chagrin of the Russian government, the U.S. and NATO has shwon great "interest" in areas in the Black Sea, the Baltic and the Arctic circle. Countries such as Ukraine have shown a taste of naivete, allowing NATO to be placed as a pawn on the chessboard, although it is said that the vast majority of Ukranians are against joining NATO. Too, being used as a pawn is Georgia, who were delivered from the detructive forces of Russia's army a couple of years ago. To put this all in context, the first element to consider is the enlargement of NATO as an instrument of American projection of power and the re-emergence of Russia's instinctive fears since the days of the Tsar of being encircled by hostile powers. Moscow observes and apprehends the series of existing or developing American strategic partnerships and alliances encasing its territory. This encase starts with the Baltic states and Poland, passes by the NATO protectorate of Kosovo, then Turkey, Israel, Georgia, the occupation of Iraq, the NATO military presence in Afghanistan, the growing ties with India, to finally end with Japan and South Korea. As the 1980's came to an end, President H.W. Bush promised Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not entice Warsaw Pact members in Eastern Europe to join NATO and peace negotiations would give way to the breaking up of the trans-Atlantic alliance. H.W. must have had his fingers crossed, because President Bill broke that promise as soon as he began seeking NATO membership to the eastern parts of Europe all the way to Russia's borders, deliberately and blatantly taunting Moscow. Recently, the U.S. has been trying to establish a missile defense system in strategic points around the world. The one is most concern happens to be in Poland, very close to Russia. Although Washington claims the missile defense system is a deterrent from missile capabilities and threats from Iran, the Russians aren't buying it. Clearly, Iran does not have those capabilities, neither has Iran ever threatened the U.S. If and when Iran does get long range ballistic missiles in its arsenal, they would presumably be used as protection from Israel who has been a known aggressor towards its enemies. The Russians percieve this as an imminent threat and an attack on their defenses. The ballistics deterrent system will surround Russia and render its own defense missiles useless giving the U.S. even more incentive to attack Russia knowing they could not retaliate. It must be said that scientists aren't sure if the system even works due to all of the tests conducted being in a very controlled environment. Seemingly, U.S. policy is to encircle and intimidate Russia to such an extent that it accepts a semi-satellite status that neutralizes it in the anticipated future conflict with China.
Neutralizing China the Big Fish In a Little Pond
U.S. relations with China have seemed to be continuously deterriorating, whether it be due to conflicts about territories, human rights, or the evaluation of currency, the tension can be spread on a slice of bread. And thus again the "Strategic Concept" comes into play. The United States' strategy for China is seemingly the same as its strategy for Russia, surround, beseige, and lay the foundation for internal chaos and disorder. Except in the case of China, the U.S. is trying to control and disrupt China's flow of resources, chiefly its oil supply. This is the cause for so much of the disorder and chaos in the Middle East and North Africa, and Thailand and Myanmar in South East Asia. China has been developing infrastructure throughout Southeast Asia with major plans to build highspeed railways connecting Thailand, Singapore, and Laos. In Myanmar China is developing a deep sea port, an oil pipeline and a highway network that runs from parts of Myanmar to its border with China. The West in response to China's growing influence in the region has deferred to the "String of Pearls" strategy and is attempting to contain China by fostering instability in both Myanmar and Thailand. This attempts to install servile, pro-Western regimes and by doing so, the globalists would be able to sever China's newly proposed links and force it to continue relying on the Malacca Strait.
Disrupting China's oil supply, encircling them with a wave of destabilization along with stoking domestic tension internally, all aims at frustrating their ambitions as a sovereign nation . As the globalists build financial networks of fiat paper, the Chinese are building networks of high-speed rail throughout their nation and beyond their borders. They are building real, tangible infrastructure from neighboring Laos to the continent of Africa. With the United States and its allies in NATO playing these war games with China and Russia, the world may very well be on the brink of WWIII....
No comments:
Post a Comment