Who or What is Guiding Obama's New Military Focus on Asia??

Why the sudden focus on Asia and the shocking announcement that our military will be cut by half a million soldiers? Is the war on terror over or are we just about to wipe our hands clean and start the new year with a new focus? These surprise actions have me a little baffled and led me to look back at the Obama Doctrine and the groups steering it.

It's no secret that Obama and his fresh new Obama Doctrine are being steered by the Responsiblity to Protect Group and the UN. We got a small taste of it with our involvement in Libya. If you study the RTP group enough you will find their roots with another organization named the International Crisis Group, whose motto is Working to Prevent Conflict Worldwide. These groups are also behind Obama's recent deployment of 100 US Spec. Ops troops in Uganda. BTW Our current actions in Uganda were signed into law by Obama in May of 2010. Talk about calculated planning. (The Lord's Resistance Army Disarmament and Northern Uganda Recovery Act of 2009 ) www.reuters.com...

With just a couple of quick trips to the host websites of these two organizations, it all begins makes sense. Obama is modeling his action plans based on the focus of these groups based on their crisis maps and alert briefings. However, What caught my eye this morning on the ICG site is the announcement of new Crisis Group Briefings on Asia coming up in Jakarta and Singapore Next Month. The timing with Obama's new plan to Focus on Asia is highly suspect.

Join Crisis Group experts for Asia-focused briefings in Singapore and Jakarta on 21 and 23 February 2012. These high-level events will examine urgent issues and solutions concerning major conflict flashpoints across the region.

This is the Framework for the Crisis Group through 2014
www.crisisgroup.org...

Agenda of the Asia Briefings
www.crisisgroup.org...

A little necessary background and documentation regarding Obama's international road map as Pulished on the R2P web site.
National Security Strategy written in 2010
International Order

“As President of the United States, I will work tirelessly to protect America’s security and to advance our interests. But no one nation can meet the challenges of the 21st century on its own, nor dictate its terms to the world. That is why America seeks an international system that lets nations pursue their interests peacefully, especially when those interests diverge; a system where the universal rights of human beings are respected, and violations of those rights are opposed; a system where we hold ourselves to the same standards that we apply to other nations, with clear rights and responsibilities for all.”
—President Barack Obama, Moscow, Russia, July 7, 2009

Those words from Obama echos the core focus of the R2P group that was founded in January 2009

1. The State carries the primary responsibility for the protection of populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.

2. The international community has a responsibility to assist States in fulfilling this responsibility.

3. The international community should use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means to protect populations from these crimes. If a State fails to protect its populations or is in fact the perpetrator of crimes, the international community must be prepared to take stronger measures, including the collective use of force through the UN Security Council.

www.responsibilitytoprotect.org...


Back to the Strategy and International Order ... Kind of sounds like NWO

The United States will protect its people and advance our prosperity irrespective of the actions of any other nation, but we have an interest in a just and sustainable international order that can foster collective
action to confront common challenges. This international order will support our efforts to advance security, prosperity, and universal values, but it is also an end that we seek in its own right. Because without such an international order, the forces of instability and disorder will undermine global security.
And without effective mechanisms to forge international cooperation, challenges that recognize no borders—such as climate change, pandemic disease, and transnational crime—will persist and potentially spread.

International institutions—most prominently NATO and the United Nations—have been at the center of our international order since the mid 20th century. Yet, an international architecture that was largely forged in the wake of World War II is buckling under the weight of new threats, making us less able to seize new opportunities. Even though many defining trends of the 21st century affect all nations and peoples, too often, the mutual interests of nations and peoples are ignored in favor of suspicion and self-defeating competition.

What is needed, therefore, is a realignment of national actions and international institutions with shared interests. And when national interests do collide—or countries prioritize their interests in different ways—those nations that defy international norms or fail to meet their sovereign responsibilities will be denied the incentives that come with greater integration and collaboration with the international community.
No international order can be supported by international institutions alone. Our mutual interests must be underpinned by bilateral, multilateral, and global strategies that address underlying sources of insecurity and build new spheres of cooperation.

Again this is from 2010 regarding Asia

Asian Allies: Our alliances with Japan, South Korea, Australia, the Philippines, and Thailand are the bedrock of security in Asia and a foundation of prosperity in the Asia-Pacific region. We will continue to deepen and update these alliances to reflect the dynamism of the region and strategic trends of the 21st century. Japan and South Korea are increasingly important leaders in addressing regional and global issues, as well as in embodying and promoting our common democratic values. We are modernizing our security relationships with both countries to face evolving 21st century global security challenges and to reflect the principle of equal partnership with the United States and to ensure a sustainable foundation
for the U.S. military presence there. We are working together with our allies to develop a positive security agenda for the region, focused on regional security, combating the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, climate change, international piracy, epidemics, and cybersecurity, while achieving balanced growth and human rights.

In partnership with our allies, the United States is helping to offer a future of security and integration to all Asian nations and to uphold and extend fundamental rights and dignity to all of its people. These alliances have preserved a hard-earned peace and strengthened the bridges of understanding across the Pacific Ocean in the second half of the 20th century, and it is essential to U.S., Asian, and global security that they are as dynamic and effective in the 21st century.

This next part is key because it correlates directly with how the US describes leaders in question and how we deal with them.

Continued... eg. Mubarek, Gaddafi, Assad etc a new leader in N. Korea and the leadership in China

The United States and all member states of the U.N. have endorsed the concept of the “Responsibility to Protect.” In so doing, we have recognized that the primary responsibility for preventing genocide and mass atrocity rests with sovereign governments, but that this responsibility passes to the broader international community when sovereign governments themselves commit genocide or mass atrocities, or when they prove unable or unwilling to take necessary action to prevent or respond to such crimes inside their borders.

Anyway, I could go on forever. You just have to read it all and see how this has played out since this document was written in 2010. Then use it as a roadmap to the future.

responsibilitytoprotect.org...



Mods: Please move this thread if need be. I couldn't decide where to put it because it crosses the line with modern politics and NWO theories.

Awesome stuff there....a lot of interesting terminology to process. Good job looking this up! I have been wondering why such a shift in DOD policy ever since I saw the press conference about it yesterday. I think you are moving in the right direction with this info thanks for posting this!

Just a snippet that disturbed me....and there were many others but for starters what does this sound like to you?

Because without such an international order, the forces of instability and disorder will undermine global security

Every 10 years the cycle repeats

1940's WW2
1950's Korea
1960s Vietnam
1970s Vietnam
1980s Panama, libya
1990s Iraq
2000s Iraq, afghanistan, libya, somalia, pakistan

Corresponds with the solar cycle of worship and paganism and satanism that the higher ups unknowingly worship.

reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL


I have to agree with you on your post except please do not link Paganism up with Satanism.

While I do not want to get in trouble for side tracking this thread, Paganism and Satanism are two totally different Religions altogether.

They are going there in an attempt to steal the gold.

www.divinecosmos.com...

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Every 10 years the cycle repeats
Corresponds with the solar cycle of worship and paganism and satanism that the higher ups unknowingly worship.

Could you explain how that works?

reply to post by Mkoll


They want to make mass sacrifices by killing people every solar cycle and they worship the sun, which is blasphemy.

They worship the False sun god Ra

When ever I hear some one ask something like this I always say
Read unrestricted warfare ideally try to find the original NSA translation
Then apply it to world events and look a little into some more background about everything you think you know and apply what's in this book
Even if the US was only a little suspicious of this
That may explain a lot of the last 20 years
Sorry to be a bit vague and not post links ( spent weeks looking into this - haven't kept any liks or preferred sources)
But with a subject like this and what I KNOW I wouldn't want to push you to biased sources to promote my angle
But I emplore you to look DEEP
One day should I get the time I may do a thread but in the meantime if you want to pm me with theories regarding this pls do

reply to post by jibeho


I don't have a lot of details, but I think the changes in china and india have threatened our policy of exploiting third world resources before tapping into our own. In order to deal w this we are rewriting our priorities for asia.