reply to post by all2human
Thepres is absolutely right... You cannot think of this necessarily as Americans doing this. Most of the corporations who would be deemed part of the
'Military Industrial Complex' aka those who profit from war are international corporations who really have no loyalty to US law or moral standing.
And to what end? Well, I have posted this about 6 times today and other threads relating to this topic but I believe it relevant in answering your
question...
'In 1996, the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, an Israeli think tank, publishes a paper entitled "A Clean Break: A New Strategy
for Securing the Realm." The paper isn't much different from other Israeli right-wing papers at the time, except the authors: the lead writer is
Richard Perle, now chairman of the Defense Policy Board in the US, and very influential with President Bush. Several of the other authors now hold key
positions in Washington. The paper advises the new, right-wing Israeli leader Binyamin Netanyahu to make a complete break with the past by adopting a
strategy "based on an entirely new intellectual foundation, one that restores strategic initiative and provides the nation the room to engage every
possible energy on rebuilding Zionism ..." The first step would be the removal of Saddam Hussein in Iraq. A war with Iraq would destabilize the entire
Middle East, allowing governments in Syria, Iran, Lebanon and other countries to be replaced. "Israel will not only contain its foes; it will
transcend them," the paper concludes.'
They want disaster and confusion. They are looking for an opportunity and this most certainly seems to be it. Personally, I do not think it is a
coincidence. To me, it does not look like they are 'compromise their interests in the region'. To me, it seems quite the contrary. But, I do not rule
out the possibility that their plan could backfire.
edit on 15-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)
It would certainly be bad press for it to get out on paper that the West has been specifically funding certain 'bad guys' or members of groups like
the Muslim Brotherhood and/or al-Qaeda, something I personally believe they are doing.
And as far as the oil contracts, those type of deals are filled with shady business. It just seems to me that someone was using the opportunity to
cover their butts.
edit on 15-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)
It really isn't as simple as cowboys vs indians, or bad guys vs good guys. At least not in these peoples eyes. As thepresident pointed out, these
warmongers usually end up supporting both sides of a conflict. One day, someone is helping support your agenda. The next, they are helping to destroy
it. The assassination of an al-Qaeda leader WOULD happen, because it fits the mainstream storyline... that they are the bad guys and we are trying to
kill them at all costs.
edit on 15-9-2012 by PatriotGames2 because: (no reason given)