Summary: There are good reasons to believe that the US / NATO wars and false flag operations since the 2nd World War have as the underlying cause the US military-political -industrial complex (MPI), of which President Eisenhower was the first to warn in his farewell address in 1961.
This MPI is so powerful because of its immense arms sales, which make it possible to bribe everybody: The White House, Congress and everybody of influence in the US – even a former Swedish and British Prime Minister. One of the most powerful corporations behind this is Carlyle, the members of which comprise former presidents, foreign ministers and defence ministers.
On fateful 9/11, 2001, 500 prominent Carlyle members were accidentally gathered in Washington – including Pres. Bush Senior and bin Laden’s brother, Shafiq. Rothschild agent, George Soros, is of course, also a member.
These corporations are financed by Wall Street banksters and the London City / the “British Crown” and simply cannot thrive without war. Thus, the MPI has a common interest with Rothschild´s FED which makes the enormous US war loans – printed out of thin air.
The heart of the syndicate is the US Pentagon. The current Defence Minister, Ashton Carter, has financial relationships with many of the MPI corporations and with Rothschild´s Goldman Sachs Bank
The Pentagon has just released an updating of the National Defence Strategy, which warns that the threat of a major war with another nation “is increasing.”
In particular, the strategy mentions Iran, Russia and North Korea as aggressive threats to world peace. It also mentions China, but most importantly this paragraph begins with the words, that the Obama administration wants to “support China’s rise and encourage them to be partners for a greater international security”. “None of these nations probably strive for direct military conflict with the United States or our allies,” so the strategy. “Nevertheless, each of them stands for serious safety concerns”.
The United States is no longer guaranteed technological superiority, and technological superiority in conflict with groups such as the Islamic state may not be a guarantee of victory. “Today and in the foreseeable future, we need to pay challenges posed by state actors more attention. They increasingly have the opportunity to contest regional freedom of movement and threaten our homeland. Of particular importance is the proliferation of ballistic missiles, precision attack technologies, unmanned systems, space and cyber capabilities and WMD – technologies that are designed to counter military advantages and to curtail the access to the global commons’.
According to the Brzezinski- strategy “The Grand Chessboard”, the US must win Eurasia, encircle Russia and put them under pressure, so that this multi-ethnic country falls apart into small states – willing to submit to the US / Wall Street / London City-NWO, like the rest of world. Every one opposing US imperialism is an enemy. The new national military strategy hints at a major conflict against this backdrop and the background of Putin’s Eurasia ambition for Russian dominance / hegemony from Lisbon to Vladivostok.
These greedy forces decide war and exceptional peace for the world.
The US military industrial complex (MPI) was first mentioned by Pres. Eisenhower as an increasing danger to the US and the world in his farewell speech in 1961. Since then, this complex seems to have taken unrestrained control of US foreign policy, Obama, too, submitting to it – with endless wars pouring taxpayer money into the pockets of the politicians, generals and industrialists involved.
The following video explains the US wars as due to dictates from the military/political/industrial complex – including the notorious “War on Terror” – which is nothing but a gradual developing WWIII to submit the world to the NWO of the political/bankster complex of the FED, Wall Street and the London City/the “British Crown”.
Obama had to submit to the MPI. He is in conflict with the military, which has apparently attempted a coup d´etat against him, after he fired hundreds of high ranking officers.
On 31 Dec. 2011, Obama signed the notorious H.R.540 bill into law as part of the National Defence Authorisation Act 2012 – the MSM keeping silent about it.
This law gives the US-President the authorisation to attack “terrorists” (d.h. people opposed to the US) in any country without consulting Congress – with or without a declaration of war.
Zbigniew Brzezinski´s, Obamas mentor´s, view on the world: Brzezinski sees Eurasia as the centre of the world – necessary for the USA to dominate, if the US wants to rule the world, keeping any rival away. (As for his views on regionalisation as the way to the world state – see here)
Comment: Here, he clashes with Putin´s and Alexander Dugin´s Utopia of a Russian Eurasia.
“Long-term, global policy must become more akin to a supremacy of power in the hands of a single state. Thus, America is not only the first, but also the only true global superpower, and it may probably be the very last” – very ominous!!! (s.209)
Brzezinski: “Between 2 Ages” 1970:” 9. Society is controlled by the elite. Democracy and the humanitarian, social values are, unfortunately, mistakes that result in the uneducated´s regime.” And, he also argues that the “One-World society” is the crown and completion of the work.
This ideology fits like hand in glove into the war policy of the US military/politician/industrial complex (MPI)- and is the explanation for the following National Military Strategy for the US to rule the world. Is Obama strong enough to resist the pressure from these forceful powers towards a war with Russia? Is Putin strong enough to resist the pressure from his mentor, Alexander Dugin, who wants Putin to conquer all of Europe?
Defence News 2 July 2015: The Pentagon has released a new National Military Strategy, the first update to that document since 2011 — one that warns the threat of major war with another nation is “growing.”
The strategy is being updated to reflect the new global security situation, one in which the US is facing near-peer adversaries like Russia and China while simultaneously having to handle diffuse militant groups like the Islamic State.
“Since the last National Military Strategy was published in 2011, global disorder has significantly increased (Thanks to the USA) while some of our comparative military advantage has begun to erode,” Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey wrote in his introduction to the strategy document.
“We now face multiple, simultaneous security challenges from traditional state actors and transregional networks of sub-state groups ,” Dempsey continued. “We are more likely to face prolonged campaigns than conflicts that are resolved quickly.”
The document focuses on the importance of partnerships to maintain the delicate security balance around the globe.
Speaking after the release of the document, Dempsey (right) said the strategy acknowledges that American success “will increasingly depend on how well our military instrument supports the other instruments of national power, and how it enables our network of allies and partners.”
The strategy specifically calls out Iran, Russia and North Korea as aggressive threats to global peace. It also mentions China, but notably starts that paragraph by saying the Obama administration wants to “support China’s rise and encourage it to become a partner for greater international security,” continuing to thread the line between China the economic ally and China the regional competitor.
“None of these nations are believed to be seeking direct military conflict with the United States or our allies,” the strategy reads. “Nonetheless, they each pose serious security concerns which the international community is working to collectively address by way of common policies, shared messages, and coordinated action.”
Later, the strategy authors note that “today, the probability of U.S. involvement in interstate war with a major power is assessed to be low but growing.”
However, “hybrid conflicts” — not just the Islamic State, but forces such as the Russian-backed rebels in Ukraine — are likely to expand.
The strategy also hits on the concerns, highlighted by Secretary of Defense Ash(ton) Carter and Deputy Secretary Bob Work over the last six months, that the US is no longer guaranteed technological superiority, or that in conflicts with groups like the Islamic State, that technological superiority may not be a guarantee of victory.
Counterpunch 3 July 2015: War, war and more war. This is the Pentagon’s vision of the future.
In other words, none of these countries wants to fight the United States, but the United States wants to fight them. And the US feels it’s justified in launching a war against these countries because, well, because they either control vast resources, have huge industrial capacity, occupy an area of the world that interests the US geopolitically, or because they simply want to maintain their own sovereign independence which, of course, is a crime.
According to Dempsey, any of these threadbare excuses are sufficient justification for conflict mainly because they “pose serious security concerns” for the US, which is to say they undermine the US’s dominant role as the world’s only superpower.
This is from the NMS report:
“Russia has repeatedly demonstrated that it does not respect the sovereignty of its neighbors and it is willing to use force to achieve its goals. Russia’s military actions are undermining regional security directly and through proxy forces. These actions violate numerous agreements that Russia has signed in which it committed to act in accordance with international norms.” (2015 NMS).
Russia is an evildoer because Russia refused to stand by while the US toppled the Ukrainian government, installed a US stooge in Kiev, precipitated a civil war between the various factions, elevated neo Nazis to positions of power in the security services, plunged the economy into insolvency and ruin, and opened a CIA headquarters in the Capital to run the whole shooting match. This is why Russia is bad and must be punished.
But does that mean Washington is seriously contemplating a war with Russia?
Here’s an excerpt from the document that will help to clarify the matter:
“Today, and into the foreseeable future, we must pay greater attention to challenges posed by state actors. They increasingly have the capability to contest regional freedom of movement and threaten our homeland.
Of particular concern are the proliferation of ballistic missiles, precision strike technologies, unmanned systems, space and cyber capabilities, and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) technologies designed to counter U.S. military advantages and curtail access to the global commons.” (2015 NMS)
It sounds to me like the Washington honchos have already made up their minds. Russia is the enemy, therefore, Russia must be defeated. How else would one “counter a revisionist state” that “threatens our homeland”?
In this skewed view of reality, one can see how the invasion of Iraq was justified on the grounds that Saddam’s control of Iraq’s massive oil reserves posed a direct challenge to US hegemony. Naturally, Saddam had to be removed and over a million people killed to put things right and return the world to a state of balance. This is the prevailing view of the National Military Strategy, that is, that whatever the US does is okay, because its the US.
Everyone knows that United States is going to do whatever it wants to do to keep the empire intact. The 2015 National Military Strategy merely confirms that sad fact.
Of course, the US military/political/industrial complex wants to make blood money by instigating wars. But are they so avaricious that they are willing to take the ultimate war with Russia – which will destroy their flourishing business and their possibilities to spend the blood money?
Carl Bildt is previous Prime Minister and Foreign Minister of Sweden. And he is a big shot in the military/political/industrial complex. He made millions on the invasion of Iraq: He sat on the board of directors of investment company Legg Mason, managing huge financial holdings in the US weapons industry, and at the same time was a lobbyist for weapons giant Lockheed Martin. He is on the Board of Trustees of the Rand Corporation. “Two-thirds of Rand’s research involves national security issues (providing research and analysis for the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and the defense agencies).
Here is what he has to say about his religion, the NWO
But Bildt is not the only politician bought by the weapon makers:
The following is from Le Monde 29 April 2004: Carlyle is the biggest private investor in the world, deeply entrenched in the weapons’ sector, flourishing, as then Ronald Reagan’s Defense Secretary, Frank Carlucci became its chairman.
Some Carlyle insiders
George Bush senior, (right) ,
George W. Bush
.John Major, former British Prime Minister;
Fidel Ramos, former Philippines President;
Park Tae Joon, former South Korean Prime Minister;
Saudi Prince Al-Walid;
Colin Powell, former Secretary of State;
James Baker III, former Secretary of State;
Caspar Weinberger, former Defense Secretary;
George Soros (Rothschild-Agent) and even some
bin Laden family members.
Alice Albright, daughter of Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State.
Carlyle emerged from the shadows in spite of itself on September 11, 2001. Frank Carlucci and James Baker III played masters of ceremony with 500 of the biggest Carlyle investors. George Bush senior made a lightning appearance at the beginning of the day. One of the guests was Shafiq bin Laden, one of Osama’s many brothers
Today’s fatuous rhetoric from the White House, Congress, most establishment media and all too many think tanks are all willing recipients of defense industry money.
Between stints at the Pentagon, Obama´s latest Secreary of Defence, Ashton Carter – left) has associated with defense-connected firms including MITRE, Goldman Sachs (Rothschild´s bank), Global Technology Partners and Textron.
He more recently associated with a firm called SBD Advisors. Its board includes former Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Mike Mullen and former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair—a seeming contradiction.
Other US politicians heavily paid by the MPI complex are John MaCain, Carl Levin, James Inhofe and many more.
80 percent of retiring three- and four-star generals went to work for defense related firms—and one year, 34 out of 39 did. Much, but not all, of this behaviour is perfectly legal