War Without End Forum Index War Without End
The global war against terror from a British (aka American) perspective
 FAQ   Popular Topics   Search   Memberlist   Usergroups   Register 
 Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
 UK and World News   

Russia/China ally against JINSA/PNAC Neocon agenda

Post new topic   Reply to topic    War Without End Forum Index -> Wake Up America! Your Government is Hijacked by Zionism
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 5:03 pm    Post subject: Russia/China ally against JINSA/PNAC Neocon agenda Reply to topic

Russia and China call for an end to world 'domination'
David Holley, Los Angeles Times

Saturday, July 2, 2005

Moscow -- Russia and China, teaming up in a thinly veiled attack on perceived U.S. efforts to dominate the world, issued a declaration Friday demanding respect for the right of all countries to develop free of outside interference.

Signed by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Hu Jintao on the second day of a summit here, the declaration denounced "the aspiration for monopoly and domination in international affairs" and called for an end to "attempts to divide nations into leaders and those being led."

While not mentioning the United States directly, the "Declaration on World Order in the 21st Century" left no doubt that Washington was its main target.

Russian-Chinese ties have been steadily warming, boosted by the signing last year and ratification this spring of a final settlement of a long border dispute. The two countries are planning to hold their first joint military maneuvers later this year in China.

Putin and Hu offered each other support in Moscow's war against separatist rebels in Chechnya and Beijing's effort to assert control of Taiwan, which it considers a renegade province.

"Any actions aimed at splitting sovereign states and kindling ethnic discord are inadmissible," the declaration said.

"The declaration reflects similar approaches by Russia and China to fundamental world policy issues," Putin told reporters after the signing ceremony. "We understand well the importance of good neighborly relations based on partnership between Russia and China, both for our own peoples and for the entire world."

Hu told reporters that the two sides had discussed cooperation concerning Taiwan and Chechnya, promotion of stability in Central Asia, reform of the United Nations and "the nuclear problem of the Korean Peninsula."

The declaration shows that Russia and China "don't quite believe the sincerity of the second Bush administration's attempts to break its image of being a proponent of unilateral actions and decisions," said Andrei Kortunov, president of the New Eurasia Foundation in Moscow.

"It is confirmation that Washington's attempts to somehow draw various countries into cooperation on a whole number of issues doesn't seem very convincing to China and Russia," Kortunov said. "This may be connected with the unilateral actions of Washington in the Middle East, its latest decisions on increasing its defense budget and some others."

The declaration endorsed a stronger U.N. role in global affairs and rejected attempts "to impose models of social and political development from outside." Both China and Russia hold permanent seats on the U.N. Security Council.

The accord also prominently recycled language that China has pushed in international agreements for decades: "All countries of the world should strictly observe the principles of mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual nonaggression, noninterference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence."

Vasily Mikheyev, deputy director of the Institute of Far Eastern Studies at the Russian Academy of Sciences, said the declaration was "to some extent counterproductive because it is composed in an old diplomatic style, in the spirit of the Cold War -- that is, the declaration is full of cliches from Cold War times."

"The language of this declaration has very little to do with the diplomacy of globalization," Mikheyev said. "It is neither in Russian nor in Chinese interests to spoil relations with the United States. That is why no country is named by name in the declaration, which makes it sound even more like a bureaucratic Cold War document."

Last edited by Alpha on Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:25 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 5:11 pm    Post subject: Bush neocon cabal planned JINSA/PNAC agenda years in advance Reply to topic

Bush neocon cabal planned JINSA/PNAC agenda years in advance

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Sun Jul 03, 2005 8:58 pm    Post subject: The Chechens' American Friends Reply to topic

The Chechens' American Friends

The Washington neocons' commitment to the war on terror evaporates in Chechnya, whose cause they have made their own

by John Laughland


Today's New York Times has a piece from Richard Pipes, a semi-retired neocon, who also backs the Chechen cause, in a piece called: 'Give the Chechens a Land of Their Own'. Here's an excerpt :


In his post-Beslan speech, Mr. Putin all but linked the attack to global Islam: "We have to admit that we have failed to recognize the complexity and dangerous nature of the processes taking place in our own country and the world in general." Reports that some of the terrorists were Arabs reinforce that line of thinking. But the fact is, the Chechen cause and that of Al Qaeda are quite different, and demand very different approaches in combating them.

Terrorism is a means to an end: it can be employed for limited ends as well as for unlimited destructiveness. The terrorists who blew up the train station in Madrid just before the Spanish election this year had a specific goal in mind: to compel the withdrawal of Spanish troops from Iraq. The Chechen case is, in some respects, analogous. A small group of Muslim people, the Chechens have been battling their Russian conquerors for centuries.


So, why should the neo-cons have it in for Putin?
When we are dealing with the neo-cons, the first thing we must realise is that their first priority is their own self-interest, not necessarily a loyalty to any kind of ideological consistency.

With this understanding, we would immediately suggest 3 reasons for the anti-Putin line of much of the British media:
1. The neo-cons, as well as the plutocratic Russian oligarchs, want a soft Russian leader, like Boris Yeltsin, whom they can push around and who will do what they want, in order that they can enrich themselves.
2. In attempting to pull Russia out of the grip of the oligarchs, Putin has upset many of them. They are now using their money and influence -- with a little help from their friends around the world -- to get back at him and attempt to pull him down.
3. Putin was not sufficiently for the Iraq War and has to be punished, just like France has to be continually mocked in the neo-con lexicon.



Simultaneously, efforts are being redoubled to crank into action the various pipelines which are supposed to transport Caspian oil to Western markets. One of these is the Brody pipeline which runs between the Ukrainian town of that name and the Black Sea port of Odessa (a Russian city but also in Ukraine). The Brody pipeline was initially supposed to take US-controlled Caspian oil to Western markets, but it has instead been pumping Russia oil, something the Americans do not like.[v] So the New World Order strategists are determined to put their man in control of Ukraine, at the presidential election on 31st October. Huge influence, and presumably money, is being pumped in to ensure a victory for Victor Yushchenko. Paul Wolfowitz said in Warsaw on 5th October that Ukraine should join NATO;[vi] Mark Brzezinski and Richard Holbrooke have rattled their sabres over Ukraine,[vii] and Anders Aslund, the architect of Yelstin's mass larceny, has eloquently outlined the West's strategic interest in that country.[viii]

Is the U.S. actively trying to undermine Russia's control over FSU oil resources by interfering in Chechnya and Ukraine?

What do you think, Volk?:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:37 am    Post subject: US getting ready to attack Iran for Israel Reply to topic

US getting ready to attack Iran for Israel


Whose War?:

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Mon Jul 04, 2005 7:52 am    Post subject: Reply to topic


The Neo cons in the PNAC Group have already planned a major war on Russia, so this demonization of Putin over Chechnya may be a not so subtle attack on Russia. To say nothing of what else the Neo Cons have been doing all around Russia in the former states of the Soviet Union. The Neo cons continue to whittle away at and around Russia's borders, building bases and escalating overall US/Russian tensions as well. It seems the Neo cons are preparing for their war against Russia, and to initiate "Regime change" there as well.

I think you'll enjoy this link, it's to a Guardian Article...


I once did a search on one of the Chechnyn leaders, I can't think of his name right now,
and used " + Mossad" and came up with tons of hits that built a solid link between him and Mossad....it may be that Mossad is helping the Chechnyas, or has installed Chechnyans that are doing terror, or are doing things the Chechnyans are blamed for. Then Russia does stuff like this to the Chechnyans.......


Of course the NEO CONs still want to take over Russia, just as the Oligarchs and Bolsheviks did, as the NEO CONS, Bolsheviks and the Oligarchs are from the same tribe that's waging it's war on Muslims and Christianity.

Just a brief opener on this subject....
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Tue Jul 05, 2005 3:49 pm    Post subject: AIPAC/Franklin Spy Scandal Spreads to the Whitehouse Reply to topic

AIPAC/Franklin Spy Scandal Spreads to the Whitehouse:


Who is Michael Ledeen (a full blown Zionist - Israel first - Jew who is also a JINSAN and works with Richard Perle at the American Enterprise Institute in D.C.):


ROVEGATE: Scandal merging with AIPACgate and Niger DocuGate cases.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 2:43 pm    Post subject: Russia, China, Central Asia Call for US Withdrawal Reply to topic


From the Christian Science Monitor

Russia, China, Central Asia Call for US Withdrawal

The members of something called the Shanghai Cooperation Council are trying to push the United States back out of Central Asia. The SCO consists of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, China, and Russia. The US essentially came into their territories or spheres of influence in 2001 to prosecute its war on al-Qaeda and the Taliban. At the time, China and Russia appear to have acquiesced in part because of their own struggles with Muslim radical movements in Chechnya and Xinjiang, which al-Qaeda was encouraging. In part, the Americans may have more or less bribed them behind the scenes. For the post-Soviet Central Asian states themselves, an American military presence had the attractions not only of protecting them from radical Islamists (who are a tiny, tiny minority in long-Communist Central Asia), but also of providing a counterweight to Russia, the military power in the region since the mid-nineteenth century.

Islam Karimov and the other Central Asian rulers assumed that they were dealing with the old realist Washington, which would trade them acquiescence in their authoritarianism for use of bases.

In fact, the Bush administration has a messianic commitment to destabilizing the area, under the rubric of "democratization." Apparently it prefers failed states such as American-dominated Afghanistan and Iraq to stable, even pro-American dictatorships. This policy creates a key contradiction. Bush needs authoritarian states such as Syria and Uzbekistan to fight radical Muslim groups. But even as it seeks their help in this endeabor, it announces that it hopes to toss their leaders out of power.

The persistent rumors that the United States ran a covert operation to produce the crisis in the Ukraine, helping install the Yushchenko supporters and to ensure the ouster of Kuchma and his would-be successors, appears to have given leaders like Uzbekistan's Karimov and Kazakhstan's Nursultan Nazarbayev a bad chill. The last straw for them came when crowds overthrew Askar Akaev in Kyrgyzstan in March. From the point of view of Astana and Tashkent, this event looked suspiciously like the Ukraine reprised, and they appear to have seen an American hand in it.

Whatever benefits the US is offering the Central Asians for use of their bases are far outweighed by this new fear of the revolutionary impact of Bush administration policies. Just as Syria abruptly ceased helping the US against al-Qaeda when the Neocons pushed through new sanctions on that country in Congress, so the Central Asians now want out. Bush has not handled the Russians and the Chinese very diplomatically, either, so they have every reason to cooperate with Karimov and Nazarbayev in beginning a push for getting rid of the US.

There is a real question as to whether an elected Afghan parliament, which will certainly be dominated by Muslim fundamentalists, will want a US presence much longer, either. Even the pro-American Karzai government offered scathing criticism over the recent civilian deaths in a US air attack on suspected terrorist safe houses in eastern Afghanistan.

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 5:36 pm    Post subject: Sniegoski on Uzbekistan, Democracy, and Israel Reply to topic

From: "Stephen Sniegoski" <hectorpv@comcast.net>
To: "Sniegoski, Stephen" <hectorpv@comcast.net>
Subject: Sniegoski on Uzbekistan, Democracy, and Israel
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 07:09:27 -0400


Sniegoski on Uzbekistan, Democracy, and Israel

I have a new article published at the Last Ditch web site, entitled "Idealistic democracy, total hypocrisy, and Israel: America's man in Uzbekistan," http://www.thornwalker.com:16080/ditch/snieg_uzbek.htm
The essay deals with America's support for the dictator of Uzbekistan, which shows the United States' claim to be concerned with democracy to be a total sham. Obviously this is not novel, but the essay also points out the important neocon/Zionist connections with Uzbekistan, which have been largely ignored elsewhere

Some excerpts from the work

Uzbekistan, which has Central Asia's largest population, economy, and military, is a strategic American asset, just as Saddam Hussein's Iraq was in the 1980s. After the 9/11 attacks, Uzbekistan granted the U.S. military permission to use its Khanbad base just north of the border of Afghanistan, providing a key location for U.S. operations in the latter country.
The strategic importance of Uzbekistan for the United States far transcends Afghanistan, for the American military presence there provides Washington with significant leverage in the vital heart of energy-rich Central Asia, with its oil and gas fields stretching eastward from the Caspian Sea to border of China.

The neocons themselves have plainly revealed their dislike of bona fide democracy, but the total hypocrisy of the democracy motive emerges in the starkest colors with respect to America's Central Asian ally Uzbekistan, which has recently been in the media spotlight because of anti-government protests and the regime's concomitant slaughter of hundreds, if not thousands, of protesters. [3] As Marc Perelman puts it in the Forward: "The recent violence in Uzbekistan has cast a spotlight on the cozy relationship between the authoritarian regime of President Islam Karimov and Israel and its American supporters."

The fact of the matter is that Karimov's positions mesh with those of Sharon's Israel and its American supporters, and that those ties have been used to enhance his standing with the United States. As Marc Perelman wrote in the Forward: "Observers said that Karimov ... has used the American Jewish community as a beachhead to cement relations with both Washington and Jerusalem. Israeli and American Jewish communal leaders said that their efforts to cultivate ties with Uzbekistan have been motivated primarily by the regime's positive attitude toward the local Jewish community and Israel as well as its hawkish stand against radical Islam."

Support for Karimov is one case in which Israel's interests coincide with those of both the new-style Bush imperialists and Big Oil. The interests of the latter two groups were not in harmony in the Middle East, where Big Oil preferred the stability of peace to the instability of war. [46] In Uzbekistan, the United States is simply propping up a dictator to maintain stability a classic technique of old-style U.S. imperialism that in the past has included support for Saddam Hussein and the Shah's Iran.

The aim is to counter instability in an energy-rich region the Caspian Basin and Central Asia where American oil and gas interests would like to reap benefits, and the United States would gain leverage over vital resources not currently in its domain. Moreover, the American support for a dictator involves limited costs in terms of military manpower and money, in contrast to the huge costs involved in waging war and occupying Iraq, which have become so great as to make it difficult for the United States to act elsewhere.

See the entire article "Idealistic democracy, total hypocrisy, and Israel: America's man in Uzbekistan" at:



Sharansky's Double Standard:


Last edited by Alpha on Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:52 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Wed Jul 06, 2005 6:49 pm    Post subject: Central Asian Group Calls For U.S. To Withdraw From Region Reply to topic

Central Asian Group Calls For U.S. To Withdraw From Region

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

Joined: 06 Jan 2003
Posts: 55963

PostPosted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 8:27 am    Post subject: Russia/China Ten Activate 10 Divisions To Counter US Reply to topic

From: Canilor
Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 22:44:17 EDT
Subject: An Eye for an Eye

This article is a logical follow-up to Scott Ritter article about an imminent invasion of Iran through Azerbaijan:

Scott Ritter: The US is already at war with Iran


Scott Ritter: US at War with Iran



Russia/China Ten Activate 10 Divisions To Counter US

By Sorcha Faal

Russian Intelligence Analysts are reporting today that both President Putin (Russia) and President Hu (China) have ordered the immediate activation of 10 Combat Ready Divisions to counter the increasingly aggressive moves being made by the United States in the Caspian Oil Regions of Central Asia. Special Forces Army Units of both Russian Spetsnaz and Chinese Immediate Action Units were also ordered to be immediately deployed to both Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan to surround the large American Military bases in those regions, and that the governments of both of these countries have ordered the Americans to leave.

The government of Uzbekistan had called first for these actions, and as we can read as reported by the Indian National Newspaper Hindu News Service in its article titled

Uzbekistan Steps Up Pressure On US To Close Base


and which says -

"Uzbekistan is stepping up pressure on the United States to withdraw its air base set up in the Central Asian country for operations in neighbouring Afghanistan. Uzbekistan also said that the United States had not paid takeoff and landing fees, as well as compensation for security services, new infrastructure, ecological damage and inconvenience to the local population.

The statement was issued two days after the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation called for the United States and its coalition allies in Afghanistan to set a date for withdrawing their military bases from Central Asia. Last month Uzbekistan introduced severe restrictions on American flights from the Khanabad base forcing the U.S. command to redeploy some aircraft to Afghanistan. Kyrgyzstan has joined Uzbekistan in calling on Washington to shut down its air base near the Kyrgyz capital Bishkek."

The government of Kyrgyzstan has also called for the Americans to leave their country, and as we can read as reported by the RIA Novosti News Service in their article titled

Kyrgyz Ambassador: US Base Must Go - Russia's Should Stay


and which says,

"The United States' military base near the Manas Airport, in the Central Asian republic of Kyrgyzstan, must go and Russia's, at Kant, should stay, the Kyrgyz Ambassador to Russia said Monday at a press conference here. Apas Jumagulov recalled the recent Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit explaining the need for the Manas base's withdrawal by the fact that the situation in the neighboring Afghanistan was returning to normal."

The actions of the United States Military Leaders though to these demands to leave have been met instead with their increasing their combat capabilities in both Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan, and in total disregard to both Russian and Chinese warnings issued to them, and of which can read as reported by the USA Today News Service in their article titled

China, Russia-Led Alliance Wants Date For US Pullout


and which says

"A regional alliance led by China and Russia called Tuesday for the U.S. and its coalition allies in Afghanistan to set a date for withdrawing from several states in Central Asia, reflecting growing unease at America's military presence in the region. The Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which groups Russia, China, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan, urged a deadline be set for withdrawal of the foreign forces from its member states in light of what it said was a decline in active fighting in Afghanistan. The alliance's move appeared to be an attempt to push the United States out of a region that Moscow regards as historically part of its sphere of influence and in which China seeks a dominant role because of its extensive energy resources."

Angering President Putin also has been the United States pressuring the European Union to attempt to take away Russia's vast oil resources, and as we can read as reported by the Moscow Times News Service in their article titled

Putin's Aide Warns Of Finno-Ugric Conspiracy To Seize Russia's Oil Assets


and which says

"The deputy head of Russia's presidential administration, Vladislav Surkov, has said that foreigners are accusing Russia of oppressing provinces that are home to Finno-Ugric nations and "strategic resources" of oil..Speaking at a meeting with Russian businessmen, Vladislav Surkov said, "Today, Finland, Estonia and the European Union have become markedly more intense on the topic of Finno-Ugric nations. It turns out that we oppress them somehow. They allegedly have no rights in our country. Regions where those nations are dominant have strategic resources of our oil. I am not a follower of a conspiracy theory. But this is evidently a planned action."

Moscow Officials further report that upon hearing of these latest moves by the United States against Russia President Putin remarked, "Then let's see how well they are prepared when the UN orders them (the Americans) to return California to Mexico."

To the Western peoples it still appears that they believe this American War upon the World is based on 'terrorism', but to the rest of the World it has long been known what the Military Leaders of the United States were planning, and even to as far back as 1998 were the warnings of these wars being reported, and as exampled by one such warning issued by the World Socialist Web Site News Service in their article titled

New Caspian Oil Interests Fuel US War Drive Against Iraq


and which had said

"Powerful geo-political interests are fueling the American war drive. In many respects US policy in the Persian Gulf is driven today by the same considerations that led it to invade Iraq nearly eight years ago. As a "senior American official"--most likely Secretary of State James Baker--told the New York Times within days of the Iraqi occupation of Kuwait in August of 1990: "We are talking about oil. Got it? Oil, vital American interests."


This struggle recalls the protracted conflict between Britain and Russia at the end of the nineteenth century for hegemony in the Middle East and Central Asia that became known as the Great Game. Germany made its own thrust into the region with its decision to build the Berlin to Baghdad railroad. The resulting tensions played a major role in the growth of European militarism that erupted in World War I. This time American imperialism is the major protagonist. Over the past several years, the battle for dominance in the region has come to center on one question: where to build a pipeline to move oil from the Azeri capital of Baku to the West. http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/nov1998/casp-n16.shtml

"The Caspian region has emerged as the world's newest stage for big power politics. It not only offers oil companies the prospect of great wealth, but provides a stage for high-stakes competition among world powers.... Much depends on the outcome, because these pipelines will not simply carry oil but will also define new corridors of trade and power. The nation or alliance that controls pipeline routes could hold sway over the Caspian region for decades to come."

What is perhaps most insane about these Western peoples reactions to these true things is their not caring to know that both Russia and China are not going to lose Central Asia, or the Middle East, by anything other than Military defeat. The suddenness of this Wars escalation will surprise these Westerners, even as their Military Forces had been the ones who started it, and as we can read as reported by the Washington Post News Service in their article titled

Undeclared Oil War


The and which says

"Asia's undeclared oil war is but the latest reminder that in a global economy dependent largely on a single fuel -- oil -- "energy security" means far more than hardening refineries and pipelines against terrorist attack. At its most basic level, energy security is the ability to keep the global machine humming -- that is, to produce enough fuels and electricity at affordable prices that every nation can keep its economy running, its people fed and its borders defended. A failure of energy security means that the momentum of industrialization and modernity grinds to a halt. And by that measure, we are failing. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10714-2004Jun27.html

In the United States and Europe, new demand for electricity is outpacing the new supply of power and natural gas and raising the specter of more rolling blackouts. In the "emerging" economies, such as Brazil, India and especially China, energy demand is rising so fast it may double by 2020. And this only hints at the energy crisis facing the developing world, where nearly 2 billion people -- a third of the world's population -- have almost no access to electricity or liquid fuels and are thus condemned to a medieval existence that breeds despair, resentment and, ultimately, conflict. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A10714-2004Jun27.html

In other words, we are on the cusp of a new kind of war -- between those who have enough energy and those who do not but are increasingly willing to go out and get it. While nations have always competed for oil, it seems more and more likely that the race for a piece of the last big reserves of oil and natural gas will be the dominant geopolitical theme of the 21st century."

To this 'New Kind Of War" the Washington Post speaks of we can already see by the actions of these Western Nations how it is to be waged, by the deliberate terrorizing of their own citizens through continued mass attacks designed to keep them in constant fear against enemies that do not exist for the purpose of creating a War Society built upon the model established by the Nazi Germany Regime of the 1930's, and which led to the last Global War.

For their continued refusal to see the whole truths of the very World they live in, and instead believing only in the repeated lies of propaganda told to them, these Western peoples have now been labeled as the most insane in the world, and as we can read as reported by the Australian News Service in their article titled

People In West Suffer More From Mental Illness


and which says

"People in the West suffer more from mental illness than those in poorer countries, with chances of recovery being higher in places like India than in say New York or London, says an Australian study. Their findings are expected to rewrite international textbooks on the devastating mental illness characterized by symptoms such as hallucinations, delusions, disorganized communication, poor planning and reduced motivation, it reported."

To the shocking devastation of Total Global War these Westerners know only through their movies, soon they will know it by looking out their doorways.



The following includes some feedback on the above article:

- I was aware that for quite some time the US has used Finland (and now Estonia) to stir up the Finno Ugric regions of Mari-El, Komi, Udmurtia and others. Looks like the Russians got wise to it.

- Everything that she wrote is absolutely true. The one item she doesn't cover is that we don't NEED the oil in the US. We have enough oil in our strategic resources to last us another 50 years minimum. This evil game is to make sure that no one ELSE gets the strategic resources around the world, as though the US somehow owns all of it. That comment "How come our oil is under their sand" is not only true, it's how the US runs its business.

The large oil companies don't really care who they sell their product to as long as they get the price they want. From seven sisters in l950, the oil business is now down to about four sisters that count... ExxonMobile, Shell, BP and ChevronTexaco. Two of these companies are NOT US companies and now China is trying to buy Unocal, a small competitor to the ones named above, but a competitor nonetheless BECAUSE the pipeline everyone is talking about is being put into place by Unocal.

The US gets less than 20% of its oil from the Middle East. That's all. No matter what the hysterics out there say, it's less than 20%. Most of our oil comes from our own resources, then from Mexico, Canada and Venezuela. The primary reason we want to overthrow Chavez is because we want someone in there that will give us what we want, and Venezuela has already bought CITGO.

The puzzle is not very complicated. We want all the pieces even though we don't need them. We want them because we can do it. And we want them because we want to be the last man standing as Danny DeVito said in "Wall Street."

- I've long felt - that with the fall of the Soviet Union - the world has been much more dangerous.
I'm not surprised that our 'empire building' would result in China & Russia now trying to counterbalance us.
What would our response be IF China or Russia were building military bases in Canada or Mexico??
The Neo Cons have made us into a 'rogue' nation - NO surprise that the entire world would want to stop our empire building and world domination.
ALL 'empires' come to an end!!

- I need to do some more studying on this latest situation, but if there was ever a time in modern history that our military forces are vulnerable to attack, it's now. And you can thank President Bush for our vulnerability with his misguided war in Iraq and his orders from Israel. Russia is no fool. They will wait until our military strength is depleted and exhausted before their next move. The fight for more oil may be the beginning of the next world war.

- I'd seen and forwarded Sorcha Faal's chilling article earlier this week.
I forwarded it because folks like you are sorting / putting together the global jigsaw puzzle...and
only as we all contribute our little puzzle pieces, do we even get a minute opportunity to glimpse
what is happening on a global basis, particularly true as we have little info on the "Stans"..

I can tell you that an article I recently found on an Asian daily (Chinese? I think) mentioned the refusal
of Australia to send thousands to Basra, but rather 700 Special Forces into Afghanistan...bear Uzbek
border. Thousands of Spec forces have gone there for years now and yet we have
little information and lots of speculation about who, what, why, etc.

- There is much concerning but that is the case in many corners of the planet. A counter balance
in such a world is no surprise, raised against "empire". As with any power vacuum, there will be
efforts to challenge. However, this not being Roman times, and with the vast array of weapons
now available globally, I can only say this nail-biter could have any number of resultant conclusions.

- I don't believe it. If such mobilizations had taken place, the reporting would have gone well beyond an obscure web blog, particularly if Chinese troops were to enter Uzbekistan and surround the US base. This is just nonsense, straight out nonsense. Moreover, since it was just a few days since the US was asked to leave, there could not have been time for the US to beef up those bases, and with what troops could they do it?

- I have doubts about the original source.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    War Without End Forum Index -> Wake Up America! Your Government is Hijacked by Zionism All times are GMT
Page 1 of 1

Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Social Links:  HAS Housing Association Software