Everything that we have discussed so far in our Meet the War Criminals series (i.e. US led crimes against humanity in the form of sexual violence and same-sex marriages) requires us to closely examine the role the US has played in Europe and world-wide. We begin with the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine is a US policy which, while limiting the United States' involvement with European colonies and European affairs, held that European powers ought not to have involvement with States in the Western Hemisphere. This policy forms the foundations of the European Sovereign Debt Crisis. It cuts Europe off from relevent communication inside America's well known Bubble Market that's fueled by the Federal Reserves. This policy also shows US-Soviet enmity in post World War II as Cuba's alliance with the USSR was regarded as unacceptable and sparked the Cold War.
Next, we know that Yulia Tymoshenko is in prison because of her efforts to deliver unto Europe a European and Independent Ukraine. The question now becomes... what happened when she was confronted with (through her political rival) US post-World War II foreign policy that led to the Cold War and now has the European Union facing a total collapse through the systematic debt known as the European Sovereign Debt Crisis? We discussed, in Part III of Meet the War Criminals, how this situation forms the foundations of Cold War 2. We will now reveal the truth about US foreign policy by discussing the following:
The Cuban Missile Crisis - known as the October crisis in Cuba and the Caribbean crisis in the
USSR - was a 13-day confrontation between the Soviet Union and Cuba on one side, and the US on the other, in October 1962. It is one of the major confrontations of the Cold War, and is generally regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to turning into a nuclear conflict. It is also the first documented instance of the threat of mutual assured destruction (MAD) being discussed as a determining factor in a major international arms agreement. Note: Meet the War Criminals has been created so that there is a zero chance of any mutual assured destruction (MAD) by known war criminals and thieves!
After provocative political moves and the failed US attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime (Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose), in May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles on Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt by the US. Cuba, a Latin American country, allying openly with the USSR was regarded as unacceptable. It was viewed as a direct defiance to the Monroe Doctrine. These views and the failed invasion attempt made the East Germans and Soviets to consider western control over a portion of Berlin a grave threat to East Germany. Like Fidel Castro, Khrushchev felt that a US invasion of Cuba was imminent, and that to lose Cuba would do great harm to the communist cause, especially in Latin America. He said he wanted to confront the Americans "with more than words... the logical answer was missiles".
The confrontation ended on October 28, 1962, when Kennedy and United Nations Secretary-General U Thant reached an agreement with Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a US public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba. Secretly, the US agreed that it would dismantle all US-built Jupiter IRBMs, armed with nuclear warheads, deployed in Turkey and Italy. The Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the gravest examples of provocative political moves by the United States afforded by the Monroe Doctrine. It correlates with the US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield.
The correlation between the Cuban Missile Crisis and US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield can be found starting with the invasive political moves by the US that's led to the European Sovereign Debt Crisis and the political imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko whereas Russia is needing to respond... with the use of force (again)! Let's take a closer look at US National Missile Defense plans.
U.S. invasive political moves were revealed on 23 March 1983, President Ronald Reagan announced a new national missile defense program formally called the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) but soon nicknamed "Star Wars" by detractors. President Reagan's stated goal was not just to protect the U.S. and its allies, but to also provide the completed system to the USSR, thus ending the threat of nuclear war for all parties. SDI was technically very ambitious and economically very expensive. It would have included many space-based laser battle stations and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites designed to intercept hostile ICBMs in space, along with very sophisticated command and control systems. (I call this plan, "Washington DC gone Hollywood".)
A partisan debate ensued in Congress, with Democrats questioning the feasibility and strategic wisdom of such a program, while Republicans talked about its strategic necessity and provided a number of technical experts who argued that it was in fact feasible (including Manhattan Project physicist Edward Teller). Advocates of Reagan's initiative prevailed and funding was initiated in fiscal year 1984. The goal was to totally defend against a robust, all out nuclear attack by the USSR.
In the 1990s and early 20th century, the stated mission of the US National Missile Defense changed to the more modest goal of preventing the US from being subject to nuclear blackmail or nuclear terrorism by a so-called rogue state. The feasibility of this more limited goal remains somewhat controversial. Under President Bill Clinton some testing continued, but the project received little funding despite Clinton's supportive remarks, near the end of his term, that "such a system, if it worked properly, could give us an extra dimension of insurance in a world where proliferation has complicated the task of preserving peace."
On 16 December 2002 President George W. Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive 23 which outlined a plan to begin deployment of operational ballistic missile defense systems by 2004. The following day the US formally requested from the UK and Denmark use of facilities in Fylingdales, England, and Thule, Greenland, respectively, as part of the National Missile Defense program. The projected cost of the program for the years 2004 to 2009 was about $53 billion, making it the largest single line in the Pentagon's budget.
Since 2002, the US has been in talks with Poland and other European countries over the possibility of setting up a European base to intercept long-range missiles. A site similar to the US base in Alaska would help protect the US and Europe from missiles fired from the Middle East or North Africa. Poland's prime minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz said in November 2005 he wanted to open up the public debate on whether Poland should host such a base.
In February 2007, the US started formal negotiations with Poland and Czech Republic concerning placement of a site of Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System. The announced objective was to protect most of Europe from long-range missile strikes from Iran. Public opinion in both countries opposed. 57% of Poles disagreed, while 21% supported the plans; in Czech Republic it was 67% to 15% respectively. More than 130,000 Czechs signed a petition for a referendum against the base, which is by far the largest citizen initiative since the Velvet Revolution.
Russia threatened to place short-range nuclear missiles on Russia's border with NATO if the US refuses to abandon plans to deploy 10 interceptor missiles and a radar in Poland and the Czech Republic. In April 2007, Putin warned of a new Cold War if the Americans deployed the shield in Central Europe. Putin also said that Russia is prepared to abandon its obligations under a Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987 with the US.
In September 2009, President Barack Obama announced that plans for missile defense sites in Central Europe would be scrapped in favor of systems located on US Navy warships. On 18 September 2009, Russian Prime Minister Putin decided to welcome Obama's plans for stationing American Aegis defense warships equipped with the Aegis RIM-161 SM-3 missile system, which complements the Patriot missile systems already deployed by American units.
However, once USS Monterey was actually deployed to the Black Sea the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement voicing concern about the deployment... who knew that it would lead to Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment as opposed to seeking the end of nuclear war for all parties by providing access to the complete system to Russia. Remember, nuclear power equals political influence!
Note: Due to the amount of market manipulations evident between the US/UK special relationship... feel free to visit www.soulfreeinvestments.blogspot.com for The Truth - Online Financial Forum (OFF)
Next, we know that Yulia Tymoshenko is in prison because of her efforts to deliver unto Europe a European and Independent Ukraine. The question now becomes... what happened when she was confronted with (through her political rival) US post-World War II foreign policy that led to the Cold War and now has the European Union facing a total collapse through the systematic debt known as the European Sovereign Debt Crisis? We discussed, in Part III of Meet the War Criminals, how this situation forms the foundations of Cold War 2. We will now reveal the truth about US foreign policy by discussing the following:
- The correlation between the Cuban Missile Crisis and the European Missile Defense Shield
- The current Syrian Conflict
- The correlation between George W. Bush's "Axis of Evil" and the Monroe Doctrine
The Cuban Missile Crisis - known as the October crisis in Cuba and the Caribbean crisis in the
USSR - was a 13-day confrontation between the Soviet Union and Cuba on one side, and the US on the other, in October 1962. It is one of the major confrontations of the Cold War, and is generally regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to turning into a nuclear conflict. It is also the first documented instance of the threat of mutual assured destruction (MAD) being discussed as a determining factor in a major international arms agreement. Note: Meet the War Criminals has been created so that there is a zero chance of any mutual assured destruction (MAD) by known war criminals and thieves!
After provocative political moves and the failed US attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime (Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose), in May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles on Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt by the US. Cuba, a Latin American country, allying openly with the USSR was regarded as unacceptable. It was viewed as a direct defiance to the Monroe Doctrine. These views and the failed invasion attempt made the East Germans and Soviets to consider western control over a portion of Berlin a grave threat to East Germany. Like Fidel Castro, Khrushchev felt that a US invasion of Cuba was imminent, and that to lose Cuba would do great harm to the communist cause, especially in Latin America. He said he wanted to confront the Americans "with more than words... the logical answer was missiles".
The confrontation ended on October 28, 1962, when Kennedy and United Nations Secretary-General U Thant reached an agreement with Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a US public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba. Secretly, the US agreed that it would dismantle all US-built Jupiter IRBMs, armed with nuclear warheads, deployed in Turkey and Italy. The Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the gravest examples of provocative political moves by the United States afforded by the Monroe Doctrine. It correlates with the US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield.
The correlation between the Cuban Missile Crisis and US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield can be found starting with the invasive political moves by the US that's led to the European Sovereign Debt Crisis and the political imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko whereas Russia is needing to respond... with the use of force (again)! Let's take a closer look at US National Missile Defense plans.
U.S. invasive political moves were revealed on 23 March 1983, President Ronald Reagan announced a new national missile defense program formally called the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) but soon nicknamed "Star Wars" by detractors. President Reagan's stated goal was not just to protect the U.S. and its allies, but to also provide the completed system to the USSR, thus ending the threat of nuclear war for all parties. SDI was technically very ambitious and economically very expensive. It would have included many space-based laser battle stations and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites designed to intercept hostile ICBMs in space, along with very sophisticated command and control systems. (I call this plan, "Washington DC gone Hollywood".)
A partisan debate ensued in Congress, with Democrats questioning the feasibility and strategic wisdom of such a program, while Republicans talked about its strategic necessity and provided a number of technical experts who argued that it was in fact feasible (including Manhattan Project physicist Edward Teller). Advocates of Reagan's initiative prevailed and funding was initiated in fiscal year 1984. The goal was to totally defend against a robust, all out nuclear attack by the USSR.
In the 1990s and early 20th century, the stated mission of the US National Missile Defense changed to the more modest goal of preventing the US from being subject to nuclear blackmail or nuclear terrorism by a so-called rogue state. The feasibility of this more limited goal remains somewhat controversial. Under President Bill Clinton some testing continued, but the project received little funding despite Clinton's supportive remarks, near the end of his term, that "such a system, if it worked properly, could give us an extra dimension of insurance in a world where proliferation has complicated the task of preserving peace."
On 16 December 2002 President George W. Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive 23 which outlined a plan to begin deployment of operational ballistic missile defense systems by 2004. The following day the US formally requested from the UK and Denmark use of facilities in Fylingdales, England, and Thule, Greenland, respectively, as part of the National Missile Defense program. The projected cost of the program for the years 2004 to 2009 was about $53 billion, making it the largest single line in the Pentagon's budget.
Since 2002, the US has been in talks with Poland and other European countries over the possibility of setting up a European base to intercept long-range missiles. A site similar to the US base in Alaska would help protect the US and Europe from missiles fired from the Middle East or North Africa. Poland's prime minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz said in November 2005 he wanted to open up the public debate on whether Poland should host such a base.
In February 2007, the US started formal negotiations with Poland and Czech Republic concerning placement of a site of Ground-Based Midcourse Defense System. The announced objective was to protect most of Europe from long-range missile strikes from Iran. Public opinion in both countries opposed. 57% of Poles disagreed, while 21% supported the plans; in Czech Republic it was 67% to 15% respectively. More than 130,000 Czechs signed a petition for a referendum against the base, which is by far the largest citizen initiative since the Velvet Revolution.
Russia threatened to place short-range nuclear missiles on Russia's border with NATO if the US refuses to abandon plans to deploy 10 interceptor missiles and a radar in Poland and the Czech Republic. In April 2007, Putin warned of a new Cold War if the Americans deployed the shield in Central Europe. Putin also said that Russia is prepared to abandon its obligations under a Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987 with the US.
In September 2009, President Barack Obama announced that plans for missile defense sites in Central Europe would be scrapped in favor of systems located on US Navy warships. On 18 September 2009, Russian Prime Minister Putin decided to welcome Obama's plans for stationing American Aegis defense warships equipped with the Aegis RIM-161 SM-3 missile system, which complements the Patriot missile systems already deployed by American units.
However, once USS Monterey was actually deployed to the Black Sea the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement voicing concern about the deployment... who knew that it would lead to Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment as opposed to seeking the end of nuclear war for all parties by providing access to the complete system to Russia. Remember, nuclear power equals political influence!
USS Monterey
On 4 February 2010, Romania agreed to host the SM-3 missiles starting in 2015.
In 2009, several US Navy ships were fitted with SM-3 missiles to serve this function, which complements the Patriot systems already deployed by American units. Also, warships of Japan and Australia have been given weapons and technology to enable them to participate ion the American defense plan as well.
On 12 November 2009, the Missile Defense Agency announced that six additional US Navy destroyers would be upgraded to participate in the program. In fiscal 2012, USS Carney (DDG-64), USS Ross (DDG-71), and USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) would be upgraded. USS Cole (DDG-67), USS McFaul (DDG-74) and USS Porter (DDG-78) will be upgraded in fiscal 2013. The goal of the program is to have 21 ships upgraded by the end of 2010; 24 in 2012; and 27 around 2013.
The US is now facing game changing circumstances daily. Be very mindful of the ever-increasing amount of Defense Department budget cuts made from American debt reaching its ceiling limits. US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was forced to create a defense strategy within the confines of a dwindling budget. On 23 August 2012, the Wall Street Journal reported that the US is planning a major expansion of missile defenses in Asia. According to American officials this move is designed to contain threats from N. Korea, but one that could also be used to counter China's military. The planned buildup is part of a defensive array that could cover large swaths of Asia, with a new radar in southern Japan and possibly another in Southeast Asia tied to missile-defense ships and land-based interceptors.
US Defense officials told the Wall Street Journal that the core of the new anti-missile shield would be a early-warning radar, known as an X-Band, sited on a southern Japanese island. Discussions between Japan and the US are currently underway. The new X-Band would join an existing radar that was installed in northern Japan in 2006 and a third X-Band could be placed in S. East Asia. The resulting radars would cover N. Korea, China and possibly even Taiwan. According to US Navy officials and the Congressional Research Service the US Navy has drawn up plans to expand its fleet of ballistic missile-defense-capable warships from 26 ships today to 36 by 2018. Officials said as many as 60% of those are likely to be deployed to Asia and the Pacific.
Some US officials have noted that defenses built up against N. Korean missiles would also be positioned to track a Chinese ballistic missile. A land-based radar would also free the Navy to reposition its ship-based radar to other regional hot-spots, officials said. A US team landed in Japan in September 2012 to discuss where the second facility will be located, according to a US defense official. Officialshave said they want to locate the radar, formally known as AN/TPY2, in the southern part of Japan, but not on Okinawa, where the US military presence is deeply controversial. On 16 October 2012 two US service members were charged with rape of a 12-year old Okinawa girl.
One word we must remember when dealing with US National Defense is feasibility. The US has poured billions of dollars designing inferior systems. US missile capabilities reflect the scenes of a Hollywood movie! Let's consider the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD). As of 2006, this system is operational with limited capability. It is designed to intercept a small number of nuclear-armed ICBMs in the mid-course phase, using interceptor missiles launched from within the US in Alaska. The problem here is that these interceptor missiles are not designed to destroy ICBMs that can indicate as many as 40 targets in the mid-course phase. Furthermore, a sea-based attack within the Gulf of Mexico would prove that current defense plans are futile. So far, the only thing the Gulf of Mexico has yielded is a gigantic BP oil spill in terms of environmental disasters and an undetected Russian Submarine!
US Defense officials told the Wall Street Journal that the core of the new anti-missile shield would be a early-warning radar, known as an X-Band, sited on a southern Japanese island. Discussions between Japan and the US are currently underway. The new X-Band would join an existing radar that was installed in northern Japan in 2006 and a third X-Band could be placed in S. East Asia. The resulting radars would cover N. Korea, China and possibly even Taiwan. According to US Navy officials and the Congressional Research Service the US Navy has drawn up plans to expand its fleet of ballistic missile-defense-capable warships from 26 ships today to 36 by 2018. Officials said as many as 60% of those are likely to be deployed to Asia and the Pacific.
Some US officials have noted that defenses built up against N. Korean missiles would also be positioned to track a Chinese ballistic missile. A land-based radar would also free the Navy to reposition its ship-based radar to other regional hot-spots, officials said. A US team landed in Japan in September 2012 to discuss where the second facility will be located, according to a US defense official. Officialshave said they want to locate the radar, formally known as AN/TPY2, in the southern part of Japan, but not on Okinawa, where the US military presence is deeply controversial. On 16 October 2012 two US service members were charged with rape of a 12-year old Okinawa girl.
One word we must remember when dealing with US National Defense is feasibility. The US has poured billions of dollars designing inferior systems. US missile capabilities reflect the scenes of a Hollywood movie! Let's consider the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD). As of 2006, this system is operational with limited capability. It is designed to intercept a small number of nuclear-armed ICBMs in the mid-course phase, using interceptor missiles launched from within the US in Alaska. The problem here is that these interceptor missiles are not designed to destroy ICBMs that can indicate as many as 40 targets in the mid-course phase. Furthermore, a sea-based attack within the Gulf of Mexico would prove that current defense plans are futile. So far, the only thing the Gulf of Mexico has yielded is a gigantic BP oil spill in terms of environmental disasters and an undetected Russian Submarine!
What's left of the correlation between the Cuban missile crisis and the US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield is awaiting Russia's final response! Let's now take a closer look into the current Syrian conflict.
America's reputation of persistent invasive provocative political moves is evident within the Syrian Conflict. The Syrian uprising, is an ongoing armed conflict in Syria between forces loyal to the Syrian Ba'ath Party government and those seeking to oust it. The conflict began on 15 March 2011 with nationwide demonstrations, as part of the wider Arab Spring movement. Protesters, have now formed the Syrian National Coalition and has demanded the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad and the end to nearly five decades of Ba'ath Party rule.
To review, the wider Arab Spring movement began in December 2010 with mass anti-government protests in Tunisia and has spreaded across the Arab world, particularly into Syria. By February 2011, revolutions occurred in Tunisia and Egypt, while Libya began to experience a civil war. Numerous other Arab countries also faced protests, with some attempting to calm the masses by making concessions and governmental changes.
As the uprising began, the Syrian government waged a compaign of arrest that had caught tens of thousands of people, according to lawyers and activists in Syria and human rights groups. In response to the uprising, Syrian law had been changed to allow the police and any of the nation's 18 security forces to detain a suspect for eight days without a warrant. Arrests focused on two groups: political activists, and men and boys from the towns that the Syrian Army would start to beseige in April.
Even before the uprising began, the Syrian government conducted numerous arrests of protestors, political activists and human rights campaigners, many of whom were labeled "terrorists" by Assad. In early February, authorities arrested several activists including political leaders Ghassan al-Najar, Abbas Abbas, and Adnan Mustafa.
As the protests and unrest continued, the Syrian government began launching major military operations to suppress resistance, signaling a new phase in the uprising. On 25 April 2011, Daraa, which had become a focal point of the uprising, was one of the first cities to be besieged by the Syrian Army. An estimated hundreds to 6,000 soldiers were deployed, firing live ammunition at demonstrators and searching house to house for protestors, arresting hundreds. Tanks were used for the first time against demonstrators, and snipers took positions on rooftops. Mosques used as headquarters for demonstrators and organizers were especially targeted. Security forces began shutting off water, power and phone lines, and confiscating flour and food. Clashes between the army and opposition forces, which included armed protestors and defected soldiers, led to the death of hundreds. By 5 May 2011, most of the protests had been suppressed, and the military began pulling out of Daraa, with some troops remaining to keep the situation under control.
During the crackdown in Daraa, the Syrian Army also besieged and blockade several towns around Damascus. Throughout May, situations similar to those that occurred in Daraa were reported in other besieged towns and cities, such as Baniyas, Homs, Talkalalch, Latakia, and several other towns. After the end of each siege, the violent suppression of sporadic protests in the area continued throughout the following months.
On 29 July 2011, a group of defected officers announced the formation of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which would become the main opposition army. Composed of defected Syrian Armed Forces personnel and civilian volunteers, the rebel army seeks to remove Bashar al-Assad and his government from power. This began a new phase in the conflict, with more armed resistance against the government crackdown. The FSA would grow in size, to about 20,000 by December, and to an estimated 40,000 by June 2012.
On 23 August 2011, a "coalition of anti-government groups" formed the Syrian National Council. The group, based in Turkey, attempted to organize the opposition. However, the opposition, including the FSA, remained a fractious collection fo political groups, longtime exiles, grass-roots organizers and armed militants, divided along ideological, ethnic or sectarian lines.
The conflict in Syria has received significant international attention. The Arab League, European Union, the United Nations, and many Western governments condemned the Syrian government's violent response to the protests, and many expressed support for the protesters' right to exercise free speech. Initially, many Middle Eastern governments expressed support for Assad, but they switched sides as the death toll mounted. Both the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation suspended Syria's membership.
The US and its NATO allies have pressed for al-Assad's departure, but Russia and China have consistently blocked any United Nations resolution that would impose sanctions on Syria. Russian officials stated that plans for Syria's political future should not be forced on it from outside and claimed that "terrorists" are present within the opposition's ranks.
In 2012, the US, UK, and France provided opposition forces with non-lethal military aid, including communications equipment and medical supplies. The UK was also reported to have provided intelligence support from its Cyprus bases, revealing Syrian military movements to Turkish officials, who then pass on the information to the Free Syrian Army. The CIA was reported to be involved in covert operations along the Turkish-Syrian border, where agents investigated rebel groups, recommending arms providers which groups to give aid to. Agents also helped opposition forces develop supply routes, and provided them with communications training. The majority of the weapons provided to rebel forces by Saudi Arabia and Qatar have ended up in the hands of hardline Islamic jihadists, who it is feared will create problems elsewhere once the Syrian conflict comes to a close.
Turkey, once an ally of Syria, has condemned Assad over the violent crackdown and has requested his departure from office. In October 2011, Turkey began sheltering the Free Syrian Army, offering the group a safe zone and a base of operation. Together with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Turkey has also provided the rebels with arms and other military equipment. Following border clashes between Turkey and Syria in late 2012, Turkey requested American Patriot missile batteries to help defend its borders against Syrian aggression; the missiles were delivered by NATO in January 2013.
Russia, whose Tartus naval base, electronic surveillance facility in Latakia, and airbase facilities at Tadmur (Palmyra) are its only military outposts outside the former Soviet Union, has supplied the Syrian government with arms as part of a business contract signed before the uprising began. Most Syrian military equipment such as tanks, missiles, and artillery was acquired from Russia which continues sales and support. Russian-built air defense systems and anti-aircraft missile batteries purchased by Syria have been upgraded by installation of new equipment and modification of existing systems by Russian suppliers during the civil war; sometimes these installations are manned by Russian military advisers. According to Russian Ground Forces Air Defense commander Major General Alexander Leonov Syria's Russian-supplied air defenses are sophisticated and effective. Overcoming them, as would be required in the event of threatened intervention should Syria use chemical weapons, would be a major challenge to US and NATO forces. Western diplomats have frequently criticized Russia's behavior, but Russia denied its actions have violated any international law.
Iran, which sees Syria as a key regional ally, has not only provided the Assad regime with arms and technical support, but has also sent combat troops, specifically the Revolutionary Guards, to support Syrian military operations. Technical support has reportedly included unmanned aerial vehicles to guide Syrian military planes and gunners in their bombarding of rebel positions. It has been reported that Iran also trained personnel from Hezbollah, a militant group based in Lebanon which has deployed pro-Assad fighters to Syria. In January 2013, during a prisoner swap between the Syrian rebels and the Assad regime, 48 Iranians were reportedly released by the rebels in exchange for nearly 2,130 prisoners held by the Syrian government. Rebels claimed the captives were linked to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.
We will now reveal how George W. Bush's "Axis of Evil" term and the Monroe Doctrine has led to the Arab Spring movement and the Syrian uprising. It's called the "New World Order". Keep in mind that the US/NATO European Missile Defense Shield is targeted at the governments that are referenced by this term.
Annuit Coeptis - "He approves (has approved) of the undertakings".
This leads us into Cold War 2. Arab Spring is a movement designed to overthrow governments started by the US decision to rage war against the so-called "Axis of Evil" (beginning with Afghanistan and the War on Terror). Jihadist, however, realize that the US is only trying to control a global opium market (through Afghanistan) as a result of the wars against the so called "Axis of Evil"! We will now look at the correlation between the "Axis of Evil" and the Monroe Doctrine. Remember, the Monroe Doctrine led to the started the Cold War.
Axis of Evil is a term initially used by the former US President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address on 29 January 2002, and often repeated throughout his presidency, describing governments that he accused of helping terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction. Iran, Iraq, and North Korea were portrayed by George W. Bush during the State of the Union as building nuclear weapons. The Axis of Evil was used to pinpoint these common enemies of the US and ally the country in support of the War on Terror. The term has stirred controversy, as it turned out Iraq did not actually possess any weapons of mass destruction at the time of his speech or anytime afterwards.
The phrase was attributed to former Bush speechwriter David Frum, originally as the axis of hatred and then evil. Frum explained his rationale for creating the phrase axis of evil in his book The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush. Essentially, the story begins in late December 2001 when head speechwriter Michael Gerson gave Frum the assignment of articulating the case for dislodging the government of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in only a few sentences for the upcoming State of the Union address. Frum says he began by rereading President Franklin D. Roosevelt's "date which will live in infamy" speech given on December 8, 1941, after the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor. In order for the Axis of Evil term to fit within the 2002 State of the Union script as infamous, it needs expansion. Today, the phrase has developed into another phrase called "The New World Order" - here's how!
On May 6, 2002, then-Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton gave a speech entitled "Beyond the Axis of Evil". In it he added three more nations to be grouped with the already mentioned rogue states: Cuba, Libya, and Syria. The criteria for inclusion in this grouping were: "State sponsors of terrorism that are pursuing or who have the potential to pursue weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or have the capability to do so in violation of their treaty obligations". The speech was widely reported as an expansion of the original axis of evil.
In January 2005, at the beginning of Bush's second term as President, the incoming Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, made a speech regarding the newly termed outposts of tyranny, a list of six countries deemed most repressive. This included the two remaining Axis members, as well as Cuba, Belarus, Burma, and Zimbabwe.
In January 2006, Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz implicated the axis of terror that operates between Iran and Syria following a suicide bomb in Tel Aviv. In April 2006 the phrase axis of terror earned more publicity. Israel's UN Ambassador, Dan Gillerman, cautioned of a new axis of terror - Iran, Syria and the Hamas-run Palestinian government; Gillerman repeated the term before the UN over the crisis in Lebanon. Some three months later Israeli senior foreign ministry official Gideon Meir branded the alleged alliance an axis of terror and hate.
The name or reference to the term axis has been critized as incorrect. One criticism is that the Axis Powers of World War II signed diplomatic treaties with one another, such as the Pact of Steel and the Tripartite Pact, that created a military alliance between them, none of the nations that make up the axis of evil have taken similar steps publicly, nor have they done so secretly according to present intelligence records.
Furthermore, Iran and Iraq fought the long, Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s under basically the same leadership as that which existed at the time of Bush's speech leading some to believe the linking between the nations under the same banner as misguided. Others argue that each of the three have some special characteristics which are obscured by grouping them together. Note: The President of the United States calling Arab Nations evil terms such as Axis of Evil could very much lead to Arab Spring which aims to overthrow these same governments. Let's take a closer look using the Monroe Doctrine as a guide!
The Monroe Doctrine was a policy of the US introduced on December 2, 1823. It states that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring US intervention. The Doctrine noted that the US would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries. The Doctrine was issued at a time when nearly all Latin American colonies of Spain and Portugal had achieved independence from the Spanish Empire (except Cuba and Puerto Rico) and the Portuguese Empire. The US, working in agreement with Britain, wanted to guarantee no European power would move in.
President James Monroe first stated the doctrine during his seventh annual State of the Union Address to Congress. It became a defining moment in the foreign policy of the US and one of its longest-standing tenets, and would be invoked by many US statesmen and several US presidents, including Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan and many others.
The intent and impact of the Monroe Doctrine persisted with only minor variations for almost two centuries. Its primary objective was to free the newly independent colonies of Latin America from European intervention and control that would make the New World a battleground for the Old. The doctrine put forward that the New World and the Old World were to remain distinctly separate spheres of influence, for they were composed of entirely separate and independent nations.
The full document of the Monroe Doctrine is long and couched in diplomatic language, but its essence is expressed in two key passages; the first is the introductory statement:
The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the US are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.The second key passage, a fuller statement of the Doctrine, is addressed to the allied powers of Europe (that is, the Holy Alliance); it clarifies that the US remains neutral on existing European colonies in the Americas but is opposed to interpositions that would create new colonies among the newly independent Spanish American republics:
We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the US and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the US.Because the US lacked both a credible navy and army at the time, the doctrine was largely disregarded internationally. The Doctrine, however, met with tacit British approval, and the Royal Navy mostly enforced it tacitly, as part of the wider Pax Britannica, which enforced the neutrality of the seas. This was in line with the developing British policy of laissez-faire free trade against mercantilism. Fast-growing British industry was ever seeking outlets for its manufactured goods, and were the newly independent Latin American states to become Spanish colonies once more, British access to these markets would be cut off by Spanish mercantilist policy. Therefore, the Monroe Doctrine was viewed as a precursor to the US/UK Special Relationship. Similar to the UK's proposal to the US of a League of Nations nearly 100 years later, Canning's proposal "defected ideas into the American decision-making process in such a manner that they imperceptibly seemed to be a part of Washington's own". No wonder the monument London Eye resembles a bicycle wheel: symbolizing the close of the US West Coast Exchange. In other words, "How special is the US/UK relationship once Gay Pride influences the UK's sight?"
Note: The US produced a film in 1986 entitled: Quicksilver that depicted a market maker that "blew out" his trading account and redeemed himself by becoming an infamous bicycle messenger that would lead to the close of the exchange!
We now know the answer to the question of how Europe became entangled in the Sovereign Debt Crisis! It's all because of US led crimes against humanity. The proof lies within one more US political term: Big Brother!
The Big Brother policy was an extension of the Monroe Doctrine formulated by James G. Blaine in the 1880s that aimed to rally Latin American nations behind US leadership and to open their markets to US traders. Blaine served as Secretary of State in 1881 in the cabinet of President James A. Garfield and again from 1889 to 1892 in the cabinet of President Benjamin Harrison. As a part of the policy, Blaine arranged and led the First International Conference of American States in 1889.
The Special Relationship, Big Brother, and Monroe Doctrine policies form the political foundation and gives evidence to the well defined geographic trail between North America, South America, and Europe that the US chose to use for crimes against humanity and pursue same-sex marriages. Now, the US is attempting to expand to the Middle East and Asia with pursuit of control of the world's natural resources (or OPEC) and even the opium market. This becomes more evident when we review The Roosevelt Corollary and Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment.
As the US began to emerge as a world power, the Monroe Doctrine came to define a recognized sphere of control that few dared to challenge. Before becoming president, Theodore Roosevelt had proclaimed the rationale of the Monroe Doctrine in supporting intervention in the Spanish colony of Cuba in 1898. After he became president, and following the Venezuala Crisis of 1902-1903, Roosevelt added the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine in 1904. This corollary asserted the right of the US to intervene in Latin America in cases of "flagrant and chronic wrongdoing by a Latin American Nation".
The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was invoked to intervene militarily in Latin America to stop the spread of European influence. (This again, is the foundations of today's New World Order being fought now in Syria!)
The Roosevelt Corollary was the most significant amendment to the original doctrine and was widely opposed by critics, who argued that the Monroe Doctrine was originally meant to stop European influence in the Americas. This amendment was designed to preclude violation of the doctrine by European powers that would ultimately argue that the independent nations were "mismanaged or unruly". Critics, however, argued that the Corollary simply asserted US domination in that area, essentially making them a "hemispheric policeman".
In other words, any independent nation formed by European Powers were considered "mismanaged or unruly"! What does this say about the European Union? This belief is what led to Yulia Tymoshenko's imprisonment. It all begins with the Cold War.
During the Cold War, the Monroe Doctrine was applied to Latin America by the framers of US foreign policy. When the Cuban Revolution (1953-1959) established a Communist government with ties to the Soviet Union, after trying to establish fruitful relations with the US, it was argued that the spirit of the Monroe Doctrine should be again invoked, this time to prevent the further spreading of Soviet-backed Communism in Latin America.
The US thus often provided intelligence and military aid to Latin and South American governments that claimed or appeared to be threatened by Communist subversion. This, in turn, led to some domestic controversy within the US, especially among some members of the left who argued that the Communist threat and Soviet influence in Latin America was greatly exaggerated.
The debate over this new spirit of the Monroe Doctrine came to a head in the 1980s, as part of the Iran-Contra affair. Among other things, it was revealed that the US Central Intelligence Agency had been covertly training "Contra" guerrilla soldiers in Honduras in an attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista revolutionary government of Nicaragua and its President, Daniel Ortega. CIA director Robert Gates vigorously defended the Contra operation, arguing that avoiding US intervention in Nicaragua would be "totally to abandon the Monroe Doctrine". Note: US covert training, as we've already mentioned, is what's fueling the Syrian Uprising! All of this is made possible by war in Afghanistan and the EU Missile Defense Shield talks.
The Monroe Doctrine is often related with the idea of American "isolationism" - the idea that America keeps to itself and does not get involved with other countries. However, according to historian Hilde Restad and other dissenters from the "old paradigm", America has never been isolationist. It was around the Presidency of James K. Polk that the idea of Manifest Destiny in relation to the Monroe Doctrine developed. Polk attached Manifest Destiny to the Monroe Doctrine used it to support expansion westward. People do not tend to commonly think of western expansion as taking foreign lands, however, the land was not America's and therefore by definition was foreign. Polk was able to keep the Europeans out of America under the Monroe Doctrine while he could grab lands westward with less competition. Westward expansion was interventionist not isolationist.
Today we face globalization, the Bio-Age, and a "New World" Order (which was set in place by George W. Bush's use of Axis of Evil)! We must now ask, "What does US dollar devaluation have in common with our Meet the War Criminals series? " Well, realize that US investors are selling gold to foster their New World Order hopes by targeting global inflation. Yet, at this moment in time, the US is depending on increased tax revenue from the wealthy as they invest in Asia's exporting rich nations like Japan! This is known as the Buffett Rule. Without it, the US would have went right over into a financial cliff! Now, how long do we allow the US to borrow?
Furthermore, it's becoming quite evidentas to what led to Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment. She led a Russian-backed Ukraine into a Monroe Doctrine fed Europe! We will cover this issue even more! Stay tuned for Part V of Meet the War Criminals - "The Ukraine Factor"! We will discuss the hand the EU Missile Defense Sheild has played in Ukrainian Politics. As for now, we hope that everyone sees that Cold War 2 will be about the US's attempt to overthow governments behind the veil of the Monroe Doctrine! Be adviced, the Global Financial Crisis was the first step in this process. Arab Nations are calling this The New World Order! The Government of Russia is standing ready to meet the challenges facing globalization and the Bio-Age namely: The New World Order sparked by the US's use of the term Axis of Evil! So let's move forward starting with getting hold of more gold as the US takes the debt plunge.
The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was invoked to intervene militarily in Latin America to stop the spread of European influence. (This again, is the foundations of today's New World Order being fought now in Syria!)
The Roosevelt Corollary was the most significant amendment to the original doctrine and was widely opposed by critics, who argued that the Monroe Doctrine was originally meant to stop European influence in the Americas. This amendment was designed to preclude violation of the doctrine by European powers that would ultimately argue that the independent nations were "mismanaged or unruly". Critics, however, argued that the Corollary simply asserted US domination in that area, essentially making them a "hemispheric policeman".
In other words, any independent nation formed by European Powers were considered "mismanaged or unruly"! What does this say about the European Union? This belief is what led to Yulia Tymoshenko's imprisonment. It all begins with the Cold War.
During the Cold War, the Monroe Doctrine was applied to Latin America by the framers of US foreign policy. When the Cuban Revolution (1953-1959) established a Communist government with ties to the Soviet Union, after trying to establish fruitful relations with the US, it was argued that the spirit of the Monroe Doctrine should be again invoked, this time to prevent the further spreading of Soviet-backed Communism in Latin America.
The US thus often provided intelligence and military aid to Latin and South American governments that claimed or appeared to be threatened by Communist subversion. This, in turn, led to some domestic controversy within the US, especially among some members of the left who argued that the Communist threat and Soviet influence in Latin America was greatly exaggerated.
The debate over this new spirit of the Monroe Doctrine came to a head in the 1980s, as part of the Iran-Contra affair. Among other things, it was revealed that the US Central Intelligence Agency had been covertly training "Contra" guerrilla soldiers in Honduras in an attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista revolutionary government of Nicaragua and its President, Daniel Ortega. CIA director Robert Gates vigorously defended the Contra operation, arguing that avoiding US intervention in Nicaragua would be "totally to abandon the Monroe Doctrine". Note: US covert training, as we've already mentioned, is what's fueling the Syrian Uprising! All of this is made possible by war in Afghanistan and the EU Missile Defense Shield talks.
The Monroe Doctrine is often related with the idea of American "isolationism" - the idea that America keeps to itself and does not get involved with other countries. However, according to historian Hilde Restad and other dissenters from the "old paradigm", America has never been isolationist. It was around the Presidency of James K. Polk that the idea of Manifest Destiny in relation to the Monroe Doctrine developed. Polk attached Manifest Destiny to the Monroe Doctrine used it to support expansion westward. People do not tend to commonly think of western expansion as taking foreign lands, however, the land was not America's and therefore by definition was foreign. Polk was able to keep the Europeans out of America under the Monroe Doctrine while he could grab lands westward with less competition. Westward expansion was interventionist not isolationist.
Today we face globalization, the Bio-Age, and a "New World" Order (which was set in place by George W. Bush's use of Axis of Evil)! We must now ask, "What does US dollar devaluation have in common with our Meet the War Criminals series? " Well, realize that US investors are selling gold to foster their New World Order hopes by targeting global inflation. Yet, at this moment in time, the US is depending on increased tax revenue from the wealthy as they invest in Asia's exporting rich nations like Japan! This is known as the Buffett Rule. Without it, the US would have went right over into a financial cliff! Now, how long do we allow the US to borrow?
Furthermore, it's becoming quite evidentas to what led to Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment. She led a Russian-backed Ukraine into a Monroe Doctrine fed Europe! We will cover this issue even more! Stay tuned for Part V of Meet the War Criminals - "The Ukraine Factor"! We will discuss the hand the EU Missile Defense Sheild has played in Ukrainian Politics. As for now, we hope that everyone sees that Cold War 2 will be about the US's attempt to overthow governments behind the veil of the Monroe Doctrine! Be adviced, the Global Financial Crisis was the first step in this process. Arab Nations are calling this The New World Order! The Government of Russia is standing ready to meet the challenges facing globalization and the Bio-Age namely: The New World Order sparked by the US's use of the term Axis of Evil! So let's move forward starting with getting hold of more gold as the US takes the debt plunge.
