The $1,500 billion military industrial complex of the USA.

.
.
.
.
.

Bleep NATO

By Jeff Huber at antiwar.com

Tom Shanker of the New York Times tells us that NATO defense ministers have given their "broad endorsement" to Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s plan to escalate the Afghanistan war into a full-Monty counter insurgency effort. NATO defense ministers love Afghanistan; it justifies their phony-baloney jobs.

(generally NATO nations, bar America/UK, are reluctant to get involved in pseudo-colonial wars, which serve no real obvious purpose for their countries; Wars which have no definitive objectives but quite the contrary seem to be open ended fair weather, ever changing explanations for why they must be in Afghanistan; Military operations which are well beyond the borders of NATO countries and their traditional operational mandate. Such disparities of issues gives NATO nations ample opportunity to reflect on the long term necessity of NATO, after the demise of the Soviet Union. The wishes of the Jewish one world government concept not withstanding-----instituted around the Protocols, which were written in the 19th century by the Rothschilds of England with agreement with all the rest of them, and the need to build security structures around that single desire and ideology for the future )

Like much of the U.S. military, NATO became irrelevant when the Cold War ended. Pseudo-counterinsurgency expert David Kilcullen, who has been an adviser to David Petraeus and McChrystal (He is not American, but useful if you are thinking of building a global military force, which follows the Jewish master plan, which is not constrained by irritating debating and voting procedures of the UN. Yet yet another Celtic person.......This sounds like another Jewish instituted, albeit subliminal, race war.....Celts verses who though?) says one of the major reasons to press for a larger effort in Afghanistan is to preserve the NATO alliance. He doesn’t think counterterrorism is a particularly important reason to be in Afghanistan. (It’s not at the top of his list.)

(From a Jewish one world master plan perspectives Kilcullen's logic is perfectly reasonable....but obviously not for "ordinary" Americans out of the Jewish master plan loop......you use unnecessary wars to forge future global forces which will without question follow your dictates..."Starship troopers" (1997)..mocking anti-American satire from an European director, which unfortunately has become the reality with the USA, UK.......and even European countries, including the movie directors country Netherlands.....the insects in the desert are the rag heads who are faceless, dehumanised things which must be destroyed.....invaded....based on the thinest and wildest excuses straight from the colonial era.........in the movies case asteriods being sent by the primitive insects at Earth.

Afghanistan is profitable for them obviously, since it generates narcotics profits in the region of $50--80 billion annually.................The Afghans harvest it and they get about 5%....Hamid Karzai's brother: The American and British military protect and transport it. The proceeds are laundered in NY and London high street banks, and finally of course a select few in the Pentagon and in the UK profit from it.)

To escalate our woebegone war in Afghanistan because NATO wants us to would be the dumbest foreign policy choice our country has ever made, and we’ve made a lot of dumb foreign policy choices. (My favorite example is becoming involved in World War I. We should have stiff-armed that fandango, let the Europeans bleed themselves ashen, then offered to feed them on strict conditions. Alas.)

("Dumb choices" is the wrong adjective because it suggests the people in power who make such choices were MERELY misguided, but for their choices.......I would argue otherwise........the people who make the "dumb choices" for America are actually not that "dumb", but have priorities which shall we say do not run parallel with the general true interests of the USA overall.......they are highly intelligent, articulate, aggressive, amoral criminals who have over time amassed power and privilege in American society.

..........This means that these criminals can both fund the Soviet Union covertly, giving it a decisive push in its creation in 1918, AND at the same time run a $6 trillion Cold War HOAX, involving many unnecessary proxy wars around the world in Korea, Vietnam, Cuban missile crisis, fighting their created monsters......etc etc, over 40 years. Saddam's Iraq, and Taliban/"al-Qaeda" Afghanistan thus, along this line of facts isn't a new phenomenon.



Getting perfectly intelligent capable gentiles all heated up, doing the woggy sun dance around their set of fake agenda's, without the hindsight of being able to see their overall covert picture.

Funding the Nazis into power; providing the materials and finance for German rearmament, and then building the coalition to defeat the Nazis...after 60 million people have perished.

These games are not new)

The world needs NATO like fish need hammers. I had fun galore getting pie-faced with Brits and Germans and other Europeans at after-hour planning sessions for international combat exercises, but fun galore isn’t a reason to escalate our war in Afghanistan. How much more blood and treasure do we need to pour into one of the bleakest parts of the world in order to throw a party for our European pals?

(No America does not need to be in Afghanistan. Osama is dead...his fictional non-existential organization constitutes no clear threat to the USA, and the Taliban can be managed via the Pakistan military comprehensively if America is serious about it)

Defense Secretary Robert Gates has been consistently critical of NATO involvement in Afghanistan to date. Gates has danced on a lot of laps in regard to this subject. He always wants more help from NATO, but he doesn’t like the help he gets. NATO doesn’t know how to do counterinsurgency, Gates has complained. But now, they’re all lovey-dovey about counterinsurgency, now that they realize how manpower-intensive it is and how much throwing in with the McChrystal plan will defend their defense budgets. NATO, like much of the U.S. military, hasn’t had a reason to exist since the Berlin Wall came tumbling down in the early 1990s.

(Iran/Contra Gates is merely doing his duty for his real masters/constituency.....ensuring the Afghan narcotics flows into Europe and Russia, and his friends in the Pentagon, and UK profit from their sale.......$50---80 billion annually...presumably that is why he has been left at this vital post as a Republican appointee, and a crony of the Bush clan out of Texas. If Obama was really serious about curtailing this $1,500 billion gravy train which is the MIC, then he would have appointed a close trusted Democrat in that vital position, and not a left over from the Bush era.....this merely signals continuity, surely)

Ludicrous Dick Cheney has asserted that the Obama administration’s "dithering" on what course to take in Afghanistan will "embolden" the evil ones. Everybody who can find the ends of their noses knows Dick Cheney is a dithering idiot; he’s never been right about anything. The only entity that has been emboldened is the Western alliance’s military industrial complex, led by the Pentagon, who are fighting not for the safety of their countries but for their own existence.

(There we go again, calling "Darth Vader" Dick a dithering idiot.......the guy is a billionaire who has made is money through the American MIC, serving in several administrations, gradually shifting to the loony right as he progressed with age and senility. Dick makes money through war,......and did not become a billionaire from humble beginnings by being a dithering idiot full stop...a former lineman of humble background, who is now a billionaire....for him war is profitable.....obviously he is going to "fight" for America to continue on-going unnecessary wars, using what ever cock and bull snarling, grimace, hardball, nose expanding excuses he can think of ....but certainly not a dithering idiot---this gives a misleading analysis; as if he is somehow a cuddly man, who is inherently honest, forever doing the right and decent thing for America, selflessly at his post working away for America, but somehow quite not up to the job----NOT. He is a businessman first and foremost, making money through war and conflict....merchant of death, looking after number one)

The Pentagon’s long-war grand strategy is good for everybody’s war business. The Afghanistan conflict is particularly suitable; it’s the kind of Orwellian war that can go on forever without getting too obnoxious, and in the case of America, it’s one that the Democrats, not the Republicans, have ownership of. Or at least it can be sold that way.

(Do you really need 500,000 Afghan and coalition forces to fight 10,000 poorly armed Taliban militia?---Obviously not.......to really fight the Taliban you squeeze the Pakistan military first and foremost, the Taliban's main backers, and then arm the Afghan's who don't like the Taliban SINCERELY, and who do not have a criminal background, not tongue in cheek...and I am so JEW clever kind of way, and that is it....without the backing of the Pakistan military the Taliban cannot exist. Of course here we must talk about intentions...what are the true intentions.......of the occupation forces? Let us not leave out the $50--80 billion annual narcotics profits. Maybe this later fact can be circulated to the NATO members beyond the USA/UK........a pimp force for international narco traders)



Shanker writes, "Mr. Gates, who has kept his views about additional troops close to his vest and has discouraged his commanders from lobbying too publicly for their positions, declined to be drawn out on this assessment." That’s the biggest lie out of the New York Times since the Nigergate hoax that led to the invasion of Iraq. The media campaign the Pentagon has been waging to pressure Obama into acceding to McChrystal’s demands amounts to a soft coup.

(Obama has yet to make his decision. Let us hope that he is not fixed by the MIC too quickly and early in this new administration, which then fetters his policy options for the future, in Afghanistan, and domestically; both very linked you see.......guns or butter? You can't have both. For Obama to realize his health care initiatives, education, social welfare programs he has to cut the real security budget of $1.5 trillion eventually...he can't have both)

Candidate Obama stuck his nose in the wringer when he deflected criticism of his vote against the surge in Iraq by saying it took vital assets away from the effort in Afghanistan, the "war of necessity." That may turn out to be the tragic flaw of his presidency. The war in Afghanistan is no more necessary than most other American wars have been. None of the 9/11 attackers came from Afghanistan, and al-Qaeda isn’t there any more. As best we can tell, what remains of al-Qaeda is in Pakistan, and very little remains of it.

(No they came from Israel and America. al-Qaeda does not exist. Doubtful if any of the 19 Arabs "hijackers" were actually involved.....remote controlled planes...the list of 19 hijackers was created/provided by Indian intelligence and forwarded to the FBI (as per Jewish desire for one world government, where international security/intelligence "cooperate" with each other around the Jewish master plan) never mind that Indian intelligence were dubiously unqualified to identify who the real perpetrators of 9/11 were IN AMERICA.........far, far away in India....and that mysteriously some of the said identified hijackers are still alive in their countries.......GWOT reduced to its simple form is a Jewish war, instituted to enforce their agenda around the world, and for one world government. Thus when you have such an ambition security institutions play an important role obviously, because you need the sheep to follow your orders, whether they like it or not....as it was with Gestapo Nazi Germany...and the NKVD Soviet Union.)

America and its NATO allies account for about 90 percent of global arms sales. We have no competitors.

(Global arms sales are here to stay no matter what. The main issue rather is that rich powerful nations should not commit to war against Third World nations on dubious false grounds, and then attempt to continue with these military adventures with even more ever shifting dubious explanations, thereafter, through the Jewish controlled MSM)

There’s a lot of money to be made now on body and vehicle armor that don’t work. So the more kids we send to Afghanistan to get blown up, the more the folks who make the body and vehicle armor that don’t work make.

(The MIC in America could be worth $1.5 trillion annually.....a lot of money, power and lobbying goes behind that using the American MSM. As with the Soviet Union this is harmful for America in the long term. A society that invests in war, and arms, but not in health care, education and welfare must slowly deteriorate, as happened with the Soviet Union.......which on the eve of collapse in 1989 was spending maybe around 14% of GDP on defense, 5.5 million men under arms, 65,000 tanks, 30,000 artillery, 12,000 nuclear warheads, 8500 combat jets, .....ALL this despite the best efforts of Gorbachov, after four years in power.

The excessive expenditure on defense starved out the expenditure on all the other necessary investment areas such as infrastructure, education, healthcare, social welfare, and innovation in technology which results in manufacturing better cars, tv, hi-fi...etc...America is no longer the leader this vital area. The best engineers and innovators invariably end up working in the defense industry, rather than creating things which have real social value, and which contribute to the expansion of the economy in a meaningful way.

Obviously since 1950 there has been a steady motion in this direction, but a strong administration can put a decisive break into that and forever save America from inevitable economic ruin. You simply can't have a $1500 billion MIC and not want to twitch and itch for war to justify such a huge expenditure.........the MIC and their Jewish overlords will find that excuse always, as they have.....so I say to the peace movement of America that the ultimate objective for America is not merely the withdrawal from the illegal wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the dismantling of the MIC, and a reorientation of the American culture away from war)

The neoconservatives who push our war agenda are invested in it, and they have, incredibly, gained a toehold in intellectually elite circles. That the "dumbest freaking human being on the planet," Cheney sycophant Doug Feith, managed to become a visiting lecturer at Columbia University gives you an idea of how badly the national brain trust has been damaged by neoconservative influence. He eventually got canned, but he never should have been hired in the first place.

(Jewish Israeli Zealot Douglas Feith with the Celtic name is not dumb.......he is an accomplished lawyer, with connections to the MIC. He is a ardent Zionist Israeli firster, holding an Israeli Passport, and who penned the "Clean Break" 1996 document with other Neo-cons for Benjamin Netanyahu to be more bold in foreign policy, and then the PNAC 2000. He lived in Israel for many years.

Merely dismissing him as, "dumbest freaking human being on the planet," is a dangerously misleading disinformation, unintentional though it is. Feith knew perfectly well what he was doing FOR LIKUD ISRAEL, whilst serving in the Pentagon with Wolfowitz..........this very fact of his real agenda's led to his removal from that position in 2005, along with the rest.......as potential Israeli spys at the center of American security)

The Obama administration has finally had direct talks with Iran. As physicist Gordon Prather wrote recently, "Director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency Secretariat Mohamed ElBaradei is seeking approval by the Obama-Biden administration of an agreement which ‘could open the way for a complete normalization of relations between Iran and the international community.’"

Is it possible that the war crowd will allow that to happen? Prather notes that we’re on the verge of getting the kind of transparency on Iran’s nuclear program that Iran offered early on in the Bush administration, only to be shunned.

(2001, and 2003...everything America could have wished for Iran offered, but America at that time was not interested)

Let’s pray that Obama doesn’t make the mistake of listening to NATO or his generals or the right-wing noise machine, and does the smart thing by beginning to back out of Afghanistan, and continues toward normalizing relationships with Iran.

(There has been progression, no doubt borne by actual experience and the passage of time.....there was initial talk of invading Libya, Sudan, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia and so forth within a few years in 2001.....Bush reiterated as much to Blair confidentially in January 2003. But this has not happened...so we must be grateful. Now Obama is in power, and hopefully significant new shifts can take place in American military planning under the new president/administration as he attempts to do the right thing domestically)

And, oh, mainstream media – especially the New York Times and the Washington Post – stop letting unnamed "officials" drop propaganda into your "news." That sort of thing gets us into wars we don’t need to fight.

______________________________________

For America, or for Likud Israel?

.
.
.
.
Long Wars and Peace Prizes
by Jeff Huber, October 13, 2009 at Antiwar.com


Gen. Stanley McChrystal, who has become the point man for the long-war mafia, delivered his ultimatum to President Barack Obama on Friday, Oct. 9. As has been his practice over the past several weeks, McChrystal proxy-leaked details of his demands through the Wall Street Journal, the New York Times, and other sources. The Journal says one of McChrystal’s proposed options calls for 60,000 additional troops, and "several officials" say the "maximum variant" is even larger.

.
(This won't solve the Taliban problem, unless you are seriously talking about invading Pakistan proper, and dealing with them in Baluchistan, and the NWFP, which the Pakistan army will never do themselves, and can never do, and nor will they countenance American intervention......otherwise, therefore the Taliban "problem" will always linger........AND if you are thinking about invading Pakistan then you will require a heck of a lot more troops than a mere 60,000 more, unless after this escalation is granted you subsequently shout for more troops and more..............if later the American recession begins then your options for troop escalation and sustaining them will be limited anyway)

.
How odd it will seem to future historians that the world’s sole superpower seriously considered escalating a war in a country that is not a threat to anyone. The most insane tenet of McChrystal’s proposals is to train up 400,000 Afghan security forces. 400,000 armed and trained Afghans is the last thing we want. Five years from now we’ll have to deploy 60,000 troops to defend Iran from Afghanistan. Won’t that be a kick in the cup?

.

(Afghanistan given its level of governance, management, corruption, economic size and national resources can at best sustain a 100,000 military, and an additional 100,000 police and paramilitary; total 200,000; the projected 400,000 is way too unrealistic, and unsustainable.....creating more problems rather than actually solving anything in Afghanistan. Investing huge amounts of money on security when the money could be better spent on the Afghan people, and nation through infrastructure projects, education, health care, agricultural subsidies.....which permanently ingratiates them to America)

A "senior military official" says McChrystal is concerned that some of Obama’s advisers are telling him the Taliban are not a threat to the United States. That would be tantamount to Obama’s advisers telling him the sun doesn’t rise in the West. The Taliban want us to leave their country, that’s all. They may or may not get back control of Afghanistan if we leave it, but why should we care? Afghans have been controlling their own affairs for thousands of years, and not once have they invaded Poland or France.
.

(The Taliban created by America in 1994, through the Pakistan military, and initially funded by certain Gulf countries was never a threat to the USA....It is a regional insurgency outfit controlled by the Pakistan military to achieve strategic depth viz India in Afghanistan, and envisaged as a force for stability, after the civil war which ensued when the Soviets departed Afghanistan.....The Taliban does not have any globalist pretensions and ambitions, factually stretched embellishments from Neocons aside.

.

The Taliban realistically numbers about 10,000 armed with AK-47, operating for the last 15 years in Afghanistan, Baluchistan and the NWFP, areas where significant numbers of ethnic Pashtun dominate. So although an Islamic fundamentalist movement its true root/base is as an ethnic vehicle for the Pashtun community based in Afghanistan and Pakistan.........beyond this limited ethnic theater it has no further ambitions.)

The Times quotes the senior military official (he insisted on anonymity because he’s a sanctioned leaker) as saying, "The real question is, do you want the Taliban to be in power in Afghanistan? If you don’t, then they have to be addressed through a counterinsurgency campaign."

.

(The Taliban don't have to be in power in Kabul....the Taliban is an ethnic Pashtun political/military vehicle controlled by the Pakistan military, which represents 40% of Afghans.......or to put it another way 60% of Afghan's are not Pashtun. The Northern Alliance is a credible center of power which is not Taliban, and there must be other centers of power within Afghan civil society which is not Taliban.

.

Obviously when you promote murderers, criminals, drug trafficking warlords into the mainstream power structure of Afghanistan under foreign occupation, and project these very same people to ordinary Afghan's as sanctioned allies of American OVERTLY, and when ordinary Afghan's can patently observe and see them for what they really are, pure unadulterated criminals, there will obviously be a certain level of disenchantment which will set in, and a misguided yearning for sections of Afghan society out of sheer desperation to want to wish the old Taliban back into power in Afghanistan....................BUT this does not have to happen, when America leaves eventually....as they surely must.

.

America should not waste its time fighting the Taliban, a thankless theoretically endless task given that there are 36 million Pashtun's in Af/Pak (6/7 million Pashtun men of military age?), but rather concentrate politically in grooming alternative credible leaders within Afghanistan who are effective, competent, have a mass support base, and finally who are organized militarily, and can seriously challenge the Taliban......The Northern Alliance shorn of its colorful characters; Dr. Abdullah Abdullah, RAWA and many other groups....America enables "good" moderate Afghans to both run their own country, and withstand the onslaught of the Pakistan military controlled Taliban.
.
This does not mean ignoring the ethnically dominant Pashtuns, but finding moderate characters within their community who will work with a new government.

.

Finally it must mean ditching Karzai and the sham election circus for a better set of political leaders in Afghanistan. There sheer corruption, ineptitude fuels decisively a significant portion of the insurgency, which is then managed by the Pakistani military)

Poppycock. There are ways to address the Taliban other than through the kind of nation-birthing counterinsurgency campaign that McChrystal and his allies – who include Gen. David Petraeus and Adm. Mike Mullen – are trying to cram up our nose pores. Our counterinsurgency doctrine is a crock of beans. In the case of Afghanistan, it purports that we can transport a culture from the Middle Age to the 21st century by flooding it with teenagers armed with M-16s, Oakley sunglasses, and inferior body armor.

.

(It will create a greater mess)

If the Taliban take back power in Afghanistan, so what? Hamid Karzai, the guy in power whom we’re backing now, is a knock-knock joke (Who’s there? Nobody). We’d have been far better off after 9/11 to tell one-eyed, illiterate Taliban leader Mohammed Omar to cough up Osama bin Laden in return for a shiny new Cadillac. At the cost of many millions of Cadillacs later, we’re no further along in Afghanistan than we were from the outset.

.

( Mullah Omer head of the Taliban requested evidence of Osama's culpability in 9/11 before they considered handing him over to be tried in a court of law, from the American government........which was not forth coming, and hasn't been produced since; The FBI don't have him as a suspect on their website of the 9/11 culprits......so the refusal to hand him over to America was taken as a no, and America attacked Taliban Afghanistan in October 2001)

Obama’s National Security Adviser James Jones says al-Qaeda now has fewer than 100 fighters, and even McChrystal admits they aren’t in Afghanistan. Someone needs to explain why we should escalate a foreign war to counter a threat that is insignificant.

Pouring more troops into Afghanistan would be a travesty. We need to go back to a global security posture that looks like the one we had before we got into the business of nation-birthing, one in which we strike surgically with naval, air, and special operations forces, and step away. Invading and occupying countries as a national pastime is a grand strategy for fools.

Fred Kagan, the darling of the military-industrial-congressional complex, was a key contributor to McChrystal’s Afghanistan analysis. Neocon Kagan is a professional warmonger who never saw a war he didn’t like or couldn’t justify. (Defense contracts for all my friends!)

.

(Ah the Jewish neo-cons......what would we do without them?)

The Pentagon’s blatant media assault on President Obama continues. It began around Sept. 18 when a McClatchy article noted that the military is growing "impatient" with Obama on Afghanistan and cited unnamed "officers at the Pentagon in Kabul" as saying McChrystal will resign if he doesn’t get what he wants. The leak of his analysis to Bob Woodward came on Sept. 21, in a story that warned "More Forces or Mission Failure." McChrystal’s 60 Minutes infomercial on Sept. 27 was a Douglas MacArthur-like act of blatant insubordination. McChrystal followed that with a speech in London to a warfare-centric think-tank in which he repeated his position: if Obama doesn’t give me what I want, it will be his fault when we lose.

Among the latest assaults is an Oct. 11 article from right-wing media maven Rupert Murdoch’s Times of London that heralds "Barack Obama ready to pay fighters to ditch the Taliban." Times doesn’t mention that bribing insurgents is precisely how "King David" Petraeus created the illusion of success in the Iraq surge. The article notes that "Despite five war councils in two weeks, President Barack Obama has so far failed to come up with a strategy for the conflict." The Pentagon has had eight years to come up with a strategy for Afghanistan and failed to come up with anything better than its long-war mantra, a policy that says we can’t win, we just want to keep fighting. Now, the lack of a coherent strategy is somehow the fault of Obama, who has been commander in chief for less than a year.

.

(Paying money to Taliban members to stop fighting occupation forces is a loser .....how do you determine which of the 6/7 million Pashtuns of fighting age in Af/Pak is a member of the Taliban?....whats to stop all of them coming forward to volunteer not to fight again as Taliban.........in a region with very low incomes this might work out as a good scam for many impoverished Pashtuns......but, how do you guarantee that once money is taken as a bribe they won't fight again, whats to stop them reneging on their promise....speaking of financial scams this is exactly the sort of thing which allows sticky fingered Pentagon/military officials to make some war profits on the side.........."Monday 2,000 Taliban came forward........we gives them $1,000 each......so total $4 million.......yea yea write that down on the receipt book..........there's Abdul, and Abdul, and Abdul, and Abdul, and his brother Abdul, and his cousin Abdul, and his nephew Abdul, and his friend Mohammed, and .........Tuesday $5 million....Wednesday $10 million big ones...........Woowoa, Mr. President keep it coming, we're winning ."
.

If we recall a few trillion $ are unaccounted for in the Pentagon ledger, as stated in 10th September 2001 by Donald Rumsfeld. "al-Qaeda" helpfully killed ALL the accountants in the one room, out of thousands in the Pentagon, looking for those Pentagon zillions, unfortunately the next day on 9/11.

.

Seriously.........lets fund Afghan's who are really honest, effective and not corrupt to run their own country instead......lets give these types the money.....they are not difficult to find, because most Afghan's belong to this category.......lets get rid of Karzai finally....then put the squeeze on the Pakistan military to stop funding the Taliban.)

.
Obama made an enormous mistake when he called the Afghanistan conflict a "war of necessity." We need to fight in Afghanistan like fish need running shoes. Afghanistan is a discombobulated society that couldn’t work itself out of a paper bag. Al-Qaeda consists of fewer than 100 fighters, and the Taliban, which our intelligence describes as a "franchise operation," has no interest in or capability of invading the United States.

Let’s hope our Nobel winner finds the courage to stand up to the media blitz he’s facing.