Neoconservative Threat to World Order - Roberts

[striveforselflessness]

Paul Craig Roberts has a new book collecting essays from February 2014 to July 2015. I don't know about others but I get excited when he puts out a new book, collection or otherwise. It is history in the making, and he writes matter-of-factly and often impeccably. His previous collection was 'How America Was Lost" with select articles from August 2008 to December 2013. Of course, most or all of his work can be found online, from both books. The focus of this collection is on America's grandstanding against Russia.

I read the forward, a taste:

[quote author=The Neoconservative Threat to World Order]
To guard against History having second thoughts, the neo-conservatives established the "first objective of US foreign and military policy to be "to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat [to US unilateral action] on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union ..." [/quote]
The quoted portion within the quote above was written by Paul Wolfowitz who was Undersecretary of Defense in 1992, and then apparently rewritten, as Roberts goes on to explain, to look more diplomatic.

[quote author=The Neoconservative Threat to World Order]
A "hostile power" is a country sufficiently strong to have a foreign policy independent from Washington's. ...

Possibly NATO's demise might result from the EU policy of looting its own member states ... Instead of helping Greece, the EU is helping Wall Street and speculators, who have bought up the Greek debt at pennies on the dollar, seeking to make enormous profits by forcing Greece to pay the full face value of its bonds, not to creditors but to speculators.[/quote]

Interesting that he posits the shortsighted (wishful thinking) greed of the elites could be their downfall, specifically when they impress their greed upon the people they are supposedly protecting and 'funding.' Perhaps the house of cards that comes crashing down on them in the end is exactly this unfettered greed, when it inevitably becomes unsustainable.

 

[luc]

Hi diligence,

Thanks for bringing this up. Roberts' thoughts were also discussed in one of the last Sott radio shows: Constructive Revolution.

I haven't read the book, but I think the bottom line in the show was that while Roberts makes many good points, he fails to see that the NeoCons are not the real problem, it's just one particularly nasty faction in our psychopathic government. For real change to happen, I think we must understand how these people (not just the neocons) work psychologically, as outlined in in the book Political Ponerology. Also, it was said in the show that Roberts seems to favor a violent revolution à la French Revolution, beheading the neocons and all that! As we know from history, this never works...

But maybe you could share a bit more once you have finished the book (if you are planning to) and summarize some things that you found interesting?

Thanks again for sharing!

 

[striveforselflessness]

Thank you luc, I will check out the radio show when I have time in a couple of days. I personally don't recall him openly advocating violent revolution, but on the other hand that is the only way some people understand revolution so it is possible. It would seem like from all his research into the insurrections around the middle east and North Africa, and his knowledge of recent political history in general, that he would be able to realize violent revolutions are among the easiest ways for psychopathic types to take advantage. I find it more likely, however, that his support of protests that reveal truth and urge reform, and that perhaps his appearance on several radio shows and so on is mistaken for support of 'violence.' In his writings I have seen him expressing his disappointment, that we have no more hope, when political figures of more upstanding character (in comparison to others) are wrong or when they participate in paranoid rhetoric. This suggests to me that his hope lies in people of conscience coming to power or having influence, and if that is impossible then there is no hope or no use (i.e. no use to engage in violent revolution, included).

Nonetheless the truth within his articles is generally not affected by such a bias if indeed he holds it.

If my mind changes then I'll share if it's worth sharing.

 

[sitting]

Paul Craig Roberts has a new book collecting essays from February 2014 to July 2015.

Interesting that he posits the shortsighted (wishful thinking) greed of the elites could be their downfall, ...
Perhaps the house of cards that comes crashing down on them in the end is exactly this unfettered greed ...

Greed I think is a secondary issue, not the primary. The greedy ones themselves are being set up -- by someone or something higher still.

For understanding, we need to go back to the C's comment. The one that was so intriguing & remarkable that it constitutes a singularly important insight. Something you can't make up even in science fiction.

The ultimate goal: is for the annihilation of the true semitic gene pool. Not the pretend ones, the real ones. And the reason given, was a prior genetic coding that will hinder if not negate Nephilim domination & control.

So the real issue is genetic. Not money. And not religion. And that's perhaps why the focus is on the Middle East, and not in say Indonesia (where the largest Muslim population resides.)

But I could be wrong.

FWIW.

 

[striveforselflessness]

Interesting point, and I recall something like that here from you or other users before. Money nonetheless is an equivalent for energy, and the chaos and economic problems caused by the greed of those elites serves to feed them, with no consideration for the livelihoods of those at the bottom. If there is any country like Greece or Italy, or the people of the U.S., that they can loot without much backlash, they will do so. I think energy is the ultimate goal, but genetics is a part of that. It could also be that people who are easiest to target are the ones targeted, and they play off the prejudiced mentality of most people wherein those in the middle east are seen as backwards and incorrigible. If they can do that to Russia or eastern Asians they would (and they try, and they have done so), it is just that those regions are on the border of their sphere of influence.

I would like to propose something that might not make sense. If genetics is a problem for them, then maybe it has to do with a number of people, from a diverse range of races, that are capable of seeing the truth. The tactics used in attacking these people, or preventing them from action, are what we see - disinformation, chaos and violence, confusion of what is true and what is not. Such tactics are just in a psychopath's nature, since to a psychopath whatever they make up is automatically true, as long as it serves them.

 

[sitting]

I would like to propose something that might not make sense. If genetics is a problem for them, then maybe it has to do with a number of people, from a diverse range of races, that are capable of seeing the truth.

It isn't genetics in general. It's one particular line -- the true semitic one.

That's the one obstructing their (4th D STS) plan. Hence the relentless drive for war and killing that borders on insanity. It tells you how far they're willing to go. And why it's genocidal.

The "elites" you're referring to are mid level players -- at best. And many do not have the faintest idea as to who or what's pulling their strings.

An excellent example is Dick Fuld of Lehman Brothers fame (or infamy.) Right up to the end, he thought he was safe. The Fed window had open, accepting collateral. What he did not know, was it was open to everyone else's collateral but not Lehman's.

To this very day, this former "elite" is still walking around in a daze.

FWIW.

 

[striveforselflessness]

It isn't genetics in general. It's one particular line -- the true semitic one.

That's the one obstructing their (4th D STS) plan. Hence the relentless drive for war and killing that borders on insanity. It tells you how far they're willing to go. And why it's genocidal.

I get that. For now there is no proof so I proposed a different way of thinking. Merely tending to commit genocide against one race, may have different reasons for it, i.e. history has shown that they do not usually come together to defend themselves, that those in the region continue be divided by ethnicity and by religion, all the easier to be conquered.

The "elites" you're referring to are mid level players -- at best. And many do not have the faintest idea as to who or what's pulling their strings.

That is true and probably extends to 4D STS. I do not disagree with what you say.

An excellent example is Dick Fuld of Lehman Brothers fame (or infamy.) Right up to the end, he thought he was safe. The Fed window had open, accepting collateral. What he did not know, was it was open to everyone else's collateral but not Lehman's.

To this very day, this former "elite" is still walking around in a daze.

Everyone is expendable.

 

[striveforselflessness]

I am thinking the way I put that comes across a bit defensively. I think you come up with good examples worth considering. :)