What I take from Michael's article is that for the good of the world, but especially for the good of our own country we need to bring the forces home and pursue a neutralist foreign policy.
I must sound like a johnny one-note, but there it is.
I still remember when Saddam Hussein was a US "ally," and then the video of his execution when he was no longer useful. When you consider how the US treats a lot of our "allies," it makes sense why countries like Iran and north Korea work so hard to develop nuclear weapons.
There's a long list of rogues the USA has supported. Even now, there's the dictators of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel and Oman. Turkmenistan may still be at play, and Africa is a jungle of foreign policy.
Another Kissinger gem which goes "It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." That applies to the UK too, plus their dirty deeds poodle routine about to get them in a pile of trouble.
When I was young, I learned how dangerous Kissinger was. I was talking with my dad and a couple of younger brothers. We were discussing JFK. I don't know what I said, or why, but the moment I mentioned his name, that ended the conversation. I asked my dad why that was the end of our discussion. He said that he didn't like talking about anyone, if he couldn't say something good about that person. I asked what so wrong with Kissinger and all my dad would say is that there was something very wrong with him.
A co-worker friend would not discuss anything about Kissinger. She believes that Kissinger was responsible for an uncle's death.
For those who like to point fingers at Soros and others for pushing the "Democrat" agenda, I rarely hear about these same people pointing their fingers at Kissinger and Rockefeller for being registered Republicans. Their agenda was global governance, controlling everything needed for human beings to survive (never to thrive). At what point will people realize we have a uniparty, with one side attacking us from one perspective and the other side attacking us from a polar-opposite perspective ..., and no politician can save us from their global agenda?
Yep, you'd think that sooner or later every country would learn never to trust the U. S. and UK? Money, or the threat of money being withheld must be overwhelming. Gates and Pfizer my be going to court, but I will be shocked if either is held accountable for their mischievious actions throughout the scam/plandemic. Someone in the system will be bought-off, allowing Gates and Pfizer to walk away with minor files, if that!
Having both sides work for the same master ensures no accountability. Any attempts to placate the bewildered herd is kabuki theatre. Once total censorship is in play there will no longer be a need for kabuki style theatrics. It’s all diversion.
These are the terrorists that Assad was brutally suppressing in order to protect his secular state. Do we believe that there was another way to control them? Was AbuGharib so different from his prisons? Did videos of our soldiers killing civilians and press from a helicopter seem so different from slaughtering families? The corruption in the Syrian government made the sanctions even worse on the population. That’s what happens when there’s a concentration of wealth in a few hands. Sound familiar? The hegemonic power has destroyed a 7,000 year old country for greed and power. The blowback is inevitable
Capitalism values human life the least, all talk to the contrary, and cheap goods the most. Both goals are achieved in Syria, it is a great victory for the West, since an impoverished population works for less in privatized public institutions.
This has been the CIA's modus operandi for almost 8 decades. CIA lies and leadership incompetence has driven the insane US Foreign Policy Decisions from its inception. USA Foreign Policy has been influenced by the false assumptions and in many cases completely fabricated "intelligence" by the CIA, in lieu of the actual ability to provide real usable human intelligence. The players change throughout the decades, but the CIA script does not. Read the Book "LEGACY of ASHES" for a full explanation of the process. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend . . . . until they are not"!
There was a political cartoon during the Cultural Revolution. It depicted Mao standing on a swing and moving like a pendulum. When he was left of the center, his subordinates were all leaning right and counter-revolutionary. When Mao was right of the center, his subordinates were all leaning left and aggressive. There is no line, because the USA does not have a consistent thinking of national interests. Furthermore, the thinking of the US DS is to make war around the world. But who wins the war is not quite important, as long as the wealth in the warring area flows to the USA.
From the US point of view, the War On Afghanistan worked out just dandy. The Soviet Union was waeakened, contracts were awarded, programs instituted, promotions granted, no elite class Americans got hurt.
..., and, unfortunately, the U. S. military protected the poppy fields and extraction of drugs to the U. S. and across the globe, further enriching those outside of government who control governments all over the globe from outside of government.
I think a good call is to check for one's self when a country's leader is described as the next Hitler. For example, I check out Karl Sanchez's site, Geopolitical Gymnasium, to read the speeches of a number of leaders of BRICS countries.
The “so called” victim from the beginning of this article has launched numerous wars, invasions and government “changes” ….. all ending in disaster and total destruction of society, millions dead, orphaned, widowed, disabled and homeless.
Check out the history of the US state department over the last 35 years or so. Follow the names, their relatives, schools, organizations, companies etc. compare to the continuing or renewing of conflicts, wars etc.and cost in destruction, lives, cultures, wealth and dollars. Ask yourself, has anything been made better for anyone, anyplace? Do the same for the Department of Justice, names again, there might be some crossover.
What I take from Michael's article is that for the good of the world, but especially for the good of our own country we need to bring the forces home and pursue a neutralist foreign policy.
I must sound like a johnny one-note, but there it is.
American foreign policy =Murder,Inc.
I still remember when Saddam Hussein was a US "ally," and then the video of his execution when he was no longer useful. When you consider how the US treats a lot of our "allies," it makes sense why countries like Iran and north Korea work so hard to develop nuclear weapons.
There's a long list of rogues the USA has supported. Even now, there's the dictators of Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Israel and Oman. Turkmenistan may still be at play, and Africa is a jungle of foreign policy.
I still remember the video of Saddam's death. He died well, no whining, just get on with it.
Would our leaders do as well?
The only thing more dangerous than being an enemy of the U. S. (and the UK) is being an "ally" of the U. S. (and the UK)!
Another Kissinger gem which goes "It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." That applies to the UK too, plus their dirty deeds poodle routine about to get them in a pile of trouble.
When I was young, I learned how dangerous Kissinger was. I was talking with my dad and a couple of younger brothers. We were discussing JFK. I don't know what I said, or why, but the moment I mentioned his name, that ended the conversation. I asked my dad why that was the end of our discussion. He said that he didn't like talking about anyone, if he couldn't say something good about that person. I asked what so wrong with Kissinger and all my dad would say is that there was something very wrong with him.
A co-worker friend would not discuss anything about Kissinger. She believes that Kissinger was responsible for an uncle's death.
For those who like to point fingers at Soros and others for pushing the "Democrat" agenda, I rarely hear about these same people pointing their fingers at Kissinger and Rockefeller for being registered Republicans. Their agenda was global governance, controlling everything needed for human beings to survive (never to thrive). At what point will people realize we have a uniparty, with one side attacking us from one perspective and the other side attacking us from a polar-opposite perspective ..., and no politician can save us from their global agenda?
The way the USA chooses its enemies and friends is double-edged for its enemies and friends choose the USA.
Yep, you'd think that sooner or later every country would learn never to trust the U. S. and UK? Money, or the threat of money being withheld must be overwhelming. Gates and Pfizer my be going to court, but I will be shocked if either is held accountable for their mischievious actions throughout the scam/plandemic. Someone in the system will be bought-off, allowing Gates and Pfizer to walk away with minor files, if that!
Having both sides work for the same master ensures no accountability. Any attempts to placate the bewildered herd is kabuki theatre. Once total censorship is in play there will no longer be a need for kabuki style theatrics. It’s all diversion.
We are a snivelling species.
There are no allies or enemies. Only interests.
These are the terrorists that Assad was brutally suppressing in order to protect his secular state. Do we believe that there was another way to control them? Was AbuGharib so different from his prisons? Did videos of our soldiers killing civilians and press from a helicopter seem so different from slaughtering families? The corruption in the Syrian government made the sanctions even worse on the population. That’s what happens when there’s a concentration of wealth in a few hands. Sound familiar? The hegemonic power has destroyed a 7,000 year old country for greed and power. The blowback is inevitable
I agree but let's not give Assad a free pass for robbing his people.
Capitalism values human life the least, all talk to the contrary, and cheap goods the most. Both goals are achieved in Syria, it is a great victory for the West, since an impoverished population works for less in privatized public institutions.
And the US seems to own 1/3 of Syria now. Not coincidentally, it's the 1/3 with oil.
Bulgarians, Romanians and Moldovans are the latest slaves of the EU, the source of cheap workers always tied to where NATO wants to go.
This has been the CIA's modus operandi for almost 8 decades. CIA lies and leadership incompetence has driven the insane US Foreign Policy Decisions from its inception. USA Foreign Policy has been influenced by the false assumptions and in many cases completely fabricated "intelligence" by the CIA, in lieu of the actual ability to provide real usable human intelligence. The players change throughout the decades, but the CIA script does not. Read the Book "LEGACY of ASHES" for a full explanation of the process. "The enemy of my enemy is my friend . . . . until they are not"!
There was a political cartoon during the Cultural Revolution. It depicted Mao standing on a swing and moving like a pendulum. When he was left of the center, his subordinates were all leaning right and counter-revolutionary. When Mao was right of the center, his subordinates were all leaning left and aggressive. There is no line, because the USA does not have a consistent thinking of national interests. Furthermore, the thinking of the US DS is to make war around the world. But who wins the war is not quite important, as long as the wealth in the warring area flows to the USA.
It's definitely a cluster fuck😕 and the Syrian people are suffering the most😞
From the US point of view, the War On Afghanistan worked out just dandy. The Soviet Union was waeakened, contracts were awarded, programs instituted, promotions granted, no elite class Americans got hurt.
Correct...in the short run.
..., and, unfortunately, the U. S. military protected the poppy fields and extraction of drugs to the U. S. and across the globe, further enriching those outside of government who control governments all over the globe from outside of government.
I think a good call is to check for one's self when a country's leader is described as the next Hitler. For example, I check out Karl Sanchez's site, Geopolitical Gymnasium, to read the speeches of a number of leaders of BRICS countries.
Interesting that despite history long record of despots etc the acceptable title is Hitler. Coincidence I’m sure.
The “so called” victim from the beginning of this article has launched numerous wars, invasions and government “changes” ….. all ending in disaster and total destruction of society, millions dead, orphaned, widowed, disabled and homeless.
That's very true. I don't think I tried to hide that in this article
🫡
Check out the history of the US state department over the last 35 years or so. Follow the names, their relatives, schools, organizations, companies etc. compare to the continuing or renewing of conflicts, wars etc.and cost in destruction, lives, cultures, wealth and dollars. Ask yourself, has anything been made better for anyone, anyplace? Do the same for the Department of Justice, names again, there might be some crossover.
Never trust a hypocrite.
Blowback seems to take about 15 years. The clock is ticking.
You can put a man in a Western suit and trim his beard but he’s still an Al Qaedae terrorist