The Coming Iraq Pull Out and the Defeat of Neocons - Jesus Ain't Comin

[Azur]

_http://www.wakeupfromyourslumber.com/node/1596

Excerpt:

Even though the article states that America is preparing to attack Iran, Islamservices is of the opinion that with the defeat of Israel at the hands of Hizbullah last year, America’s fate was sealed and there was no alternative for them but to end any neo-con dreams of attack on Iran. All the sabre rattling and threats against Iran are mere face saving rhetoric, and psychological warfare. The Iranians know this well and are playing the game excellently.
A pullout from Iraq a la Vietnam would have led to a total financial meltdown since the Dollar is propped up by perceived American military power. Bush and Democrats orchestrated the surge and allowed the additional funds for the war effort to keep up appearances. Americans will pullout from Iraq with Arabs and Iran providing a face saving formula.

Arab governments in the Middle East have understood this very well and therefore organized the Mecca peace conference, and there is already a thaw between Arab states and Iran. Iranian president is visiting the Gulf countries to assure them that Iran has no hostile intentions towards them and is in fact offering the Arabs military protection and trade deals.

There is now a new dynamic at play and it will lead to America’s reigning in of Israeli mischief.

I hope this resembles reality and is not just wishful thinking.

 

[Laura]

I dunno. I'd like to believe it too but there is one problem: it does not take into account the absolute audacity of the psychopath.

 

[Azur]

I dunno. I'd like to believe it too but there is one problem: it does not take into account the absolute audacity of the psychopath.

Yes, this gave me pause too, but the money angle seems to be inline with that type of behaviour, and I see a little glimmer of hope they might be more interested in saving their "stash", ahead of all other considerations.

The side effect would still be a good thing, overall.

Fingers crossed.

 

[Peto]

Yes, this gave me pause too, but the money angle seems to be inline with that type of behaviour, and I see a little glimmer of hope they might be more interested in saving their "stash", ahead of all other considerations.

I don't think the money angle will give them pause. It's more likely that they will have switched their monetary positions before doing it. Ultimately, the financial markets are their game, in which they are the dominant player, the referee and the rule maker at the same time.

 

[NormaRegula]

It would be something if these tactics were successful, however...

Some of us who are trying to awaken are sitting here in the US of A wondering when the next big manufactured homeland 'terrorist event' will occur to A. Shore up Bushes' dismal poll ratings. B. Distract from the appalling failure and horror of the Iraq war. C. Rally the sleepwalker citizenry into hating/distrusting those 'dirty' Muslims even more so, while accepting more rights be taken away from them (martial law, concentration camps, death sentences, etc.) and their fellow citizens for their own 'safety.' and D. Give the 'Synogogue of Satan' Israel a true home advantage with all of the above.

This sort of thinking is what comes of searching for the truth of why the world is such a mess on the internet. Interpretations and predictions may vary...but the rabbit hole goes pretty deep.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

Some of us who are trying to awaken are sitting here in the US of A wondering when the next big manufactured homeland 'terrorist event' will occur to A. Shore up Bushes' dismal poll ratings.

My thinking here is that they might want to just blame everything on Bush and get him out of office, doesn't matter if by way of impeachment or not, just to create the illusion that the "bad guy" responsible for the mess is now gone and replaced by someone who will fix things. Also the republicans might wanna start distancing themselves from Bush. We'll see. But in light of that possibility, I don't think that they will create an attack for the sake of raising Bush's ratings. Now, whether Bush himself will try to fight this is another question. I wonder how much ability he has in orchestrating fake attacks? We know that the government is really compartmentalized and more than one group can do terrorist attacks, not always in agreement with other groups.

Yes, this gave me pause too, but the money angle seems to be inline with that type of behaviour, and I see a little glimmer of hope they might be more interested in saving their "stash", ahead of all other considerations.

One thing to consider is that this is Israel's game to a large degree, and US may not call all the shots here since Israel basically "infiltrated" the US power structure from all angles. US is very useful to Israel. If the dollar collapses, not everyone will be in trouble - those who are invested in currencies or assets that are not riding on the dollar I think would be ok, so they might even pull the plug on the dollar if needed. But dropping the dollar completely is risky right now I think - the people will want someone to blame and with all the mainstream media ruckus about Bush's handling of the economy, Bush and his cohorts might be the target of blame. Then again, maybe this is exactly what is planned - just not by Bush, by Israel. Collapse the US dollar, blame Bush and his incompetence. Get rid of Bush, install someone who is supposed to fix this mess. You get 2 birds with one stone. One, everybody in the country that depended on the dollar is broke and suddenly there is massive influx into the military which now sounds like a darn good idea. This is good for Israel and its plans for war in the middle east - more American cannon fodder - all this without a draft! This is also good for the general government in US (above Bush) - all the bad stuff is blamed on the administration that is now gone, so the people cannot blame the new guys, and at the same time the people are disenfrenchised and depressed and sick of it all and angry and confused. You have massive military influx and an angry/depressed/broke/desperate population, demanding a solution from the newly installed government. Then all you need is just one finishing touch - blow something up and blame some middle eastern terrorists. Of course, in America's time of need, it's only natural that a bunch of freedom-hating terrorists would exploit the situation and attack at that time, it is very plausible and it can be sold to the public. Their own self-pity about that predicament will anger America to no end, MUCH more than 911 ever could do. That blind furor will be exploited by the blind Fuhrer, and with all this newly found military strength, Israel will have the war it wanted.

Unfortunately for Israel, it's a much smaller and closer target than US for the now really upset Arab population. And clearly Arabs know that they cannot fight America without also fighting Israel, not just because most of them already know that they are one and the same, but even those who don't know that, know that they are best buds and it'll be a 2-front war one way or another. So if America attacks, even if Israel just stands there acting like it had nothing to do with anything, I think Israel will be the first to go so it might as well expect it, it would makes sense as a strategic decision by the Arab militaries to take out the smaller guy and not fight a war on 2 fronts (America and Israel at the same time). Then they will focus on US and we have those nukes we were promised by the C's. I can imagine that a lot of countries wouldn't want to get in the middle of this - yeah they'll run their mouths as US's lapdogs when US is all big and mighty, but when US is seriously weakened economically and attacked by the whole Arab world, there is great opportunity there to just sit tight and collect the spoils of war when the dust settles. Hmm.. factor in the comet cluster, that might actually be confused as an attack by a country instead of a cosmic event, and we have a mess.

The question is, can US maintain and increase its military might with a collapsed economy? Does the military depend on the value of the dollar, or are there alternative ways that the military can be financed and maintained? Did tyrranical nations with horrible economies in the civilian sector manage to get money for massive militarization in the past?

 

[PopHistorian]

<< The question is, can US maintain and increase its military might with a collapsed economy? Does the military depend on the value of the dollar, or are there alternative ways that the military can be financed and maintained? Did tyrranical nations with horrible economies in the civilian sector manage to get money for massive militarization in the past? >>

Depends on what they want from the military. And what they want will probably depend on what kind of social effects/controls are wanted. My guess is that the US military doesn't even give a hint of its true abilities in terms of secret, never-before-used-in-battle weaponry, which could easily "win wars" if that was the intent of the people behind the curtains, IMO.

 

[ScioAgapeOmnis]

My guess is that the US military doesn't even give a hint of its true abilities in terms of secret, never-before-used-in-battle weaponry, which could easily "win wars" if that was the intent of the people behind the curtains, IMO.

I'm guessing that this sort of thing is true for many countries though, not just US. In that sense, US may actually be surprised that for all its size and money, size might not matter with high technology weaponry, but the effectiveness of the weapon. In the civilian sector US is lagging behind many other countries in technology. This might be a result of a highly ponerized state in US which might put a dent in ingenuity, creativity, and critical thinking that is required to stay ahead of the game - despite its resources. I'm wondering if the same would be true for the military/secret sectors, where creativity might also be a dwindling resource? I'm sure there would be no lack of hubris and wishful thinking though to make up for it. Just a thought.

 

[NormaRegula]

My thinking here is that they might want to just blame everything on Bush and get him out of office, doesn't matter if by way of impeachment or not, just to create the illusion that the "bad guy" responsible for the mess is now gone and replaced by someone who will fix things.

That very well may be...and the someone who will fix things waiting in the corner whilst Bush twists and turns will obviously not be an improvement. Perhaps, I should have wrote: A. Shore up support for whoever the PTB decide to pull the strings of in the future. There's a lot of discontent amongst people I interact with on a daily basis regarding the current administration. Sadly, but not surprisingly, they believe a Democrat will make things right. Guess the plan is working...for the dark side that is.

Also the republicans might wanna start distancing themselves from Bush. We'll see. But in light of that possibility, I don't think that they will create an attack for the sake of raising Bush's ratings. Now, whether Bush himself will try to fight this is another question. I wonder how much ability he has in orchestrating fake attacks? We know that the government is really compartmentalized and more than one group can do terrorist attacks, not always in agreement with other groups.

Regarding the latter, Bushes' buds (and certain family members) are probably not above such things. Regarding the former, one might consider another orchestrated attack to 'explain' how yet another Republican, whether he distances himself or not from Bush, gets himself elected POTUS in '08...to save America from those appeasing liberals who don't understand the 'enemy.' (Yeah, I know, there are machines that can guarantee elections...and there are more important things to consider, contemplate and work on in the cosmic scheme of things.)

 

[NormaRegula]

I'm guessing that this sort of thing is true for many countries though, not just US. In that sense, US may actually be surprised that for all its size and money, size might not matter with high technology weaponry, but the effectiveness of the weapon.

That would be an interesting surprise for the US, Britain, and Israel, should a smaller country develop, discover, or decide to use an effective 'gifted' weapon against the Big Boys. Sort of reminds me of the Peter Seller/Peter Usinov film "The Mouse that Roared. " (At least the title, if not the actual plotline.)

In the civilian sector US is lagging behind many other countries in technology. This might be a result of a highly ponerized state in US which might put a dent in ingenuity, creativity, and critical thinking that is required to stay ahead of the game - despite its resources.

My husband and I have been pondering this very same thought for the last twenty years...although the term ponerized was not in our vocabulary until very recently.

I'm wondering if the same would be true for the military/secret sectors, where creativity might also be a dwindling resource? I'm sure there would be no lack of hubris and wishful thinking though to make up for it. Just a thought.

This definitely reminds me of some of the rather crazy, scientific gooblety goop, no-real-end-in-sight 'secret weapon' projects that were carried out (or conned out) of the Nazi government during the final days of the Third Reich. (Grant it, some of the ideas just needed more time and some fine tuning...and some were given just that, compliments of the compartmentalized groups here in the USA.)