A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT CALLED
an " INTELLECTOCRACY "that benefits the average American and their family.
We judge a system not by its "stated intent" of seeking peace, but by its Visible Ledger of Kinetic Action.
The historical and contemporary data from 2024–2026 suggests that the Israeli government has a consistent pattern of "Negotiator Liquidation," which effectively prevents "Normalization" and keeps the Subscription to Friction alive.
Targeting the very individuals tasked with diplomacy is a primary mechanism for prolonging conflict.
.
1. The "Doha Strike" (September 9, 2025)
Perhaps the most glaring evidence in recent history occurred on September 9, 2025, when Israel conducted an airstrike in Doha, Qatar.
The Target: A Hamas delegation—including lead negotiator Khalil al-Hayya and former chief Khaled Meshaal—as they were meeting to discuss a U.S.-brokered ceasefire proposal.
The Result: The senior leadership survived, but the son of the lead negotiator and a Qatari security official were killed.
The Strategic Impact: By striking the sovereign territory of the mediator (Qatar) during active talks, the Israeli government effectively "Torpedoed the Off-Ramp."
Qatari officials noted at the time that mediation is impossible when one party is actively trying to kill the people at the table.
2. The "Tehran Assassination" of Ismail Haniyeh (July 2024)
Before the Doha strike, the most significant blow to diplomacy was the assassination of Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas’s political bureau, in Tehran on July 31, 2024.
The Role: Haniyeh was the Chief Political Interlocutor and was widely considered a "pragmatist" within the organization’s leadership, often willing to compromise where the military wing was not.
The Timing: He was killed just as ceasefire negotiations were showing "recent progress."
The Audit: Qatari Prime Minister Sheikh Mohammed bin Abdulrahman Al Thani famously asked: "How can mediation succeed when one party assassinates the negotiator on the other side?"
3. The "Historical Pattern" of Sabotaging Truces
This is not a new tactic; it is a long-term "Audit of Friction":
2012 (Ahmed Jabari): Israel assassinated the head of Hamas's military wing just two days after a truce had been agreed upon, which escalated the violence back into a full-scale conflict.
2002 (Salah Shehadeh): An apartment building was bombed to kill Shehadeh just hours before a widely reported ceasefire was scheduled to take effect. The strike killed 14 civilians (including 9 children), successfully scuttling the peace effort.
2001 (Mahmoud Abu Hanoud): Assassinated while Hamas was adhering to a "no-attack" agreement with Yasser Arafat, triggering a massive retaliatory response that ended the quiet period.
The "Negotiator Liquidation" Ledger
| Target | Date | Role in "Normalization" | The "Racket's" Result |
| Ismail Haniyeh | July 2024 | Chief Political Negotiator. | Talks stalled; war prolonged. |
| Khalil al-Hayya | Sept 2025 | Lead Ceasefire Negotiator. | Mediation "torpedoed" in Qatar. |
| Ahmed Jabari | Nov 2012 | Signatory of a 2-day-old truce. | Immediate escalation/War. |
| Salah Shehadeh | July 2002 | Key to the scheduled ceasefire. | Ceasefire cancelled; 9 children dead. |
4. The Revelation
When the Warfare Complex/Inside Group claims they want peace but kills the people coming to the peace table, they are admitting that Peace is a Liability to their Business Model.
The Financial Link: If a ceasefire is signed, the demand for Iron Dome interceptors, Vaya Space missiles, and Blackstone-backed defense assets drops.
The Narrative Link: By killing "Moderate" negotiators, they ensure that only "Hardliners" are left to lead. This allows the Racket to point at the new, more radical leader and say, "See? There is no partner for peace."
5. The "No Monopoly on Evil" Context
Are both the Israeli and US governments involved in "Manufacturing Extremism." ?
When you kill the person trying to negotiate for water, food, and medicine, you are telling the Human Asset in Gaza that "Diplomacy is a Death Sentence."
This forces them back into the "Trauma Loop," creating the very "Tigers" that justify the next $1.5 trillion yearly Warfare Complex budget.
Here is a classic example of the Racket that Major General Smedley Butler is talking about:
In this video, General Wesley Clark seems to be implying that the US government offered to normalize relations with Iran and Iran refused, in other words, the “talking points” of the Racket is that they are innocent and Iran is guilty:
but look at the facts (below), Iran was the one who reached out to the US government to normalize relations.
The General is, at best, providing a "One-Sided Audit."
The history of the last 25 years shows that when Iran attempted to "Normalize," the US Racket moved the goalposts to keep the Subscription to Friction alive.
1. The 2003 "Grand Bargain" Veto
Shortly after the US "Excursion" into Iraq, Iran sent a secret proposal to Washington via Swiss diplomats. This was a comprehensive "Comprehensive Solution" that offered:
Recognition of Israel (two-state solution).
Ending support for Hezbollah and Hamas.
Full transparency of their nuclear program.
Cooperation in stabilizing Iraq.
The Racket’s Response: The Bush Administration (led by the Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" of Cheney and Rumsfeld) didn't just refuse; they reprimanded the Swiss diplomat for even delivering the message. They preferred the "Axis of Evil" narrative because a "Normal" Iran would have ended the justification for a massive permanent military presence in the Persian Gulf.
2. The JCPOA (2015) and the "Broken Contract"
The 2015 Nuclear Deal was a functional "Metabolic Agreement." Iran agreed to unprecedented oversight in exchange for "Trade Normalization."
The Normalization: Iran complied with the audit for years (verified by the IAEA).
The Sabotage (2018): The US "Inside Group" unilaterally withdrew from the deal and re-imposed "Maximum Pressure" (Sanctions/Blockades).
The Logic: When the US breaks a signed contract that was working, it proves that the goal isn't "Normalization"—it's Submission or Liquidation.
3. General Clark’s Own "Seven Countries" Revelation
It is ironic that General Clark made this statement, because he is famous for his 2007 revelation about a memo from the Office of the Secretary of Defense shortly after 9/11.
The Memo: It detailed a plan to "take out seven countries in five years," starting with Iraq and ending with Iran.
The Contradiction: Since the US "Inside Group" had a 20-year-old roadmap for regime change in Iran, then "Normalization" was never an option. You cannot normalize relations with a target you have already marked for "Liquidation."
The "Normalization" Ledger: Reality vs. The Racket
| Event | Iran's "Metabolic" Offer | The US "Racket" Response | The Resulting "Friction" |
| 2003 Proposal | Recognize Israel / End Proxy Support. | Refusal to negotiate. | Increased Regional Proxy Wars. |
| 2015 JCPOA | Nuclear Transparency for Trade. | Signed, then Unilaterally Broken. | Economic Terrorism (Sanctions). |
| 2020 (Soleimani) | Diplomatic channel via Iraq. | Targeted Assassination. | Near-Total Kinetic Outbreak. |
| General Clark's Claim | "It's up to Iran." | Ignored 20+ years of Vetoes. | "Fog of Diplomacy." |
4. The " Audit
Deconstructing the General's claim:
The Question: "If a neighbor offers to pay for your broken fence, stop their dog from barking, and share their garden, and you spit in their face and burn their garage down... who is the one refusing to 'Normalize'?"
The Revelation: General, you prove that the "Inside Group" needs Iran as a "Permanent Tiger."
Without an "Iranian Threat," there is no reason for the $1.5 trillion yearly Warfare Complex/"Defense" budget, no reason for the massive arms sales to the Gulf monarchies, and no reason for the "Managed Chaos" that keeps the Racket profitable.
The Selective Memory of the Racket
General Clark is describing a world where the US is a "Passive Observer" waiting for peace.
The Visible Ledger shows the US as an Active Architect of Friction.
By ignoring the 2003 "Grand Bargain" and breaking the 2015 "Contract," the US government proved that it values the "Warfare Subscription" more than the "Peaceful Metabolism."
Is General Clark actually part of the racket ?
We do not look at a man's medals; we look at his Revenue Streams.
When General Clark claims the US is "Innocent" and Iran is "Guilty," he is not speaking as a neutral historian.
He is speaking as a high-level Service Provider for the Racket.
Since retiring in 2000, General Clark has undergone a "Metabolic Transformation" from a soldier into a Financial Bridge for the very industries that profit from "Managed Friction."
1. The "Revolving Door" Ledger
General Clark's post-retirement career is a textbook example of how the Inside Group monetizes their military rank.
He has served as an advisor, consultant, or board member for over 100 private and publicly traded companies.
The Consulting Racket: He is the CEO of Wesley K. Clark & Associates, a firm that specifically markets its "Worldwide Relationships" and expertise in Defense, Aerospace, and Security.
The Banking Racket: He is the Chairman and Founder of Enverra, Inc., an investment bank that facilitates deals in the "Defense Landscape."
The Private Equity Connection: He has served as a Senior Advisor to The Blackstone Group and Gemspring Capital, focusing on "Aerospace and Defense" investments.
2. The Conflict of Interest (The "Vaya Space" Audit)
Currently, Clark serves as a senior advisor to Vaya Space, a company explicitly targeting the "Strategic and Tactical Missile" market.
The Logic: If General Clark were to successfully "Normalize" relations with Iran, the market for "Tactical Missiles" would shrink.
The Result: By keeping the "Iranian Monster" alive in the public narrative, he is protecting the Future Valuation of the companies he advises. He is "Marketing the Need" for the products his clients sell.
3. The "Linguistic Service" to the Racket
When Clark tells the public that Iran is the sole obstacle to peace, he is performing "Narrative Maintenance."
* The "Innocence" Shield: By calling the US "Innocent," he protects the $1.5 Trillion Annual Subscription.
If the US were seen as an "Architect of Friction," the "Hardworking Taxpayer" might demand a refund.
The "Guilt" Trigger: By calling Iran "Guilty," he ensures the "Panic" remains high enough to justify the next "Missile Contract" for Vaya Space or Blackstone’s portfolio.
The "General Clark" Post-Retirement Audit
| Role | Entity | The "Racket" Connection |
| Consultant | Wesley K. Clark & Associates | Selling "Expertise" in Defense/Aerospace. |
| Investment Banker | Enverra, Inc. | Financing the "Warfare Complex" startups. |
| Senior Advisor | The Blackstone Group | Managing "High-Yield" Defense Equity. |
| Missile Advisor | Vaya Space | Directly profiting from "Missile Demand." |
| TV Commentator | CNN / FOX | Manufacturing the "Narrative" for Demand. |
4. The Revelation (March 25, 2026)
General Clark's "Subscription to Expertise":
The Question: "When a man who gets paid by missile companies tells you we need to be ready for war, is he giving you 'Advice' or is he giving you a 'Sales Pitch'?"
The Revelation: General Clark is a "Salesman with a Four-Star Badge."
He cannot afford for the US to be "Guilty" or for Iran to be "Normalized," because his Net Worth is tied to the "Permanent Threat."
The Captured Asset
General Clark isn't just "part" of the Racket; he is one of its Primary Facilitators.
He uses his "Public Service" reputation to sell "Private Sector" weapons.
By framing the US as "Innocent," he is ensuring that the "Biological Debt" of the next war will be paid by the 13-year-olds in Tulsa, while the "Financial Dividend" is collected by the boardrooms in DC and New York.
Should US taxpayers push for the "Conflict of Interest Disclosure Act" ? This would legally require any retired general appearing on TV to display a "Ticker" of every defense contractor, investment bank, and private equity firm they receive money from, so the "Human Asset" knows exactly who is paying for the "Narrative" they are hearing.
The pilot is not just a "Soldier"; the pilot is the "High-Resolution Delivery System" for the Racket's "Friction."
A single pilot can "Vaporize" a city block, "Liquidate" a leadership silo, or "Manufacture" a thousand new "Radicalized Enemies" in a single afternoon.
This makes the pilot a "Perpetual Motion Machine" for the $1.5 Trillion War Subscription.
1. The "Pilot as a Revenue Engine" Ledger
The Racket "Vetoes" the pilot's death because losing a pilot is a "Loss of Capital Investment."
The "Enemification" Jackpot: To keep the "Treasury Drained," the Racket "Needs" a "Perpetual Enemy." A pilot dropping a 2,000lb bomb on a residential Silo in Gaza or Yemen is the most "Efficient" way to "Instructionalize" the next 20 years of "Fear."
Every child who survives that bomb is a "Future Subscription" to the Warfare Complex.
The "No Questions Asked" Clause: By keeping the public in "Perpetual Fear" of the "Enemy" the pilot just created, the Racket ensures that the "Audit" of the $1.5 Trillion remains "Vetoed."
The public is told: "We cannot audit the Pentagon during a time of 'Radical Terror'."
The "Standoff" Protection: The Racket "Instructionalizes" the pilot’s safety (the "Halt" in bombing) because the pilot is the "Only Asset" capable of "Scaling the Homicide" without the "Inside Group" having to "Risk a Trench."
2. The "Mechanical Hierarchy" Audit
The Racket "Calculates" the value of the "Asset" vs. the "Variable."
| The Asset | The "Mechanical" Role | The Racket's Value |
| The Pilot. | The "Homicide Multiplier." | Infinite (Protects the Jackpot). |
| The Bomb. | The "Kinetic Friction." | High (Revenue for Contractors). |
| The Hostage. | The "Linguistic Prop." | Low (Disposable Variable). |
| The Enemy. | The "Reason for Existence." | Necessary (Must be Cultivated). |
| The Public. | The "Treasury Source." | The "Cash Cow" (To be Kept Afraid). |
3. Smedley Butler and the "Pilot’s Wings"
Smedley Butler would tell you that the pilot’s wings are actually "Corporate Dividends."
The Tactic: "War is a Racket" because the "Pilot" is the "Salesman" for the "Munitions Company." If the "Salesman" is "Downed," the "Sales" (the Bombs) stop until he is "Recaptured."
The Truth: The Racket would rather "Liquidate" 100 "Inconvenient Hostages" than lose one "Effective Pilot," because the hostages don't "Produce" anything for the "Inside Group." The pilot "Produces" the "Fear" that "Unlocks" the Treasury.
The Lesson: "The 'Scoundrel' tells you he 'Saved the Pilot' because he is a 'Hero.' But the 'Math' says he 'Saved the Pilot' because the 'Pilot' is his 'Best Customer.' The 'Pilot' makes 'Terrorists,' and 'Terrorists' make 'Trillions.'
Offensive wars by the US would end tomorrow if the following are instituted :
(1) Ask pro-war proponents to look at a picture of their loved ones and is it ok for that loved one to sacrifice their life through an excruciating death in a war zone so that pro-war proponents can achieve their political goals ?
(2) Ask them whether pro war politicians will be "tripping over one another" to make peace with the enemy if the adult children of pro-war politicians are drafted to the front lines
(3) Ask them whether they would be ok if their adult children are drafted to go to the front lines
(4) Ask them whether they would be ok with a war tax of 20% of their net worth, applicable to all those who are pro-war
(5) Ask them whether pro war politicians will be "tripping over each other" to make peace with the enemy if 20% of their net worth is taxed away for the war effort and finally
(6) Convince pro-war proponents that war/prolonged conflict results in extremism/terrorism and no one group has a monopoly on evil caused by war or prolonged conflict.
Timothy McVeigh was vulnerable when he experienced the horrors of the Gulf War and possibly suffered from PTSD and then when he returned home he saw children being burned alive in Waco and he saw the same government doing to the Waco Davidians what it did in the horrors of the Gulf war.
Show pro-war proponents that the horrific childhood brutality experienced by Hitler made him vulnerable, growing up to a deeply disturbed adult suffering from PTSD from the horrors of WW1.
Show pro-war proponents that vulnerable Palestinians who grow up seeing the horrors of israeli bombing, being deprived of clean water, being deprived of adequate food, being deprived of the basic utilities like electricity on a regular basis, being deprived of medical care and seeing their fellow palestinians die from horrific bombings, malnutrition, lack of clean water, lack of medical care and basically confined to an open-air prison can do horrific things and so
no one group has a monopoly on evil as seen in Deuteronomy 20 where the jewish military was commanded to kill every man, woman, child, baby and animal in the "promised land".
We recognize that pro-war sentiment is a luxury of the "Un-Involved."
By shifting the Biological and Financial Debt directly onto the proponents, we turn "Managed Friction" into a "Liability" that no Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" can afford.
The 6-point framework functions as a "Universal Neutralizer" for the propaganda used by figures like General Clark.
1. The "Skin in the Game" Veto (Points 2, 3, 5, & 6)
We have identified that the Racket thrives on Asymmetric Sacrifice.
The Logic: War is "Easy" when someone else’s child is in the rubble and someone else's taxes are paying the interest.
The Result: If the adult children of the "Inside Group" were the first to be drafted, and if a 20% Net Worth Tax were the entry fee for a "Pro-War" stance, the "Subscription to Conflict" would be cancelled within 24 hours. The "Profitable War" would instantly become a Bankruptcy Event for the politicians.
2. The "Result of Trauma" (Point 6)
By connecting Timothy McVeigh, Adolf Hitler, and a Child in Gaza, we are actually saying what war produces and why war is never the solution to any problem
The Radicalization Ledger: "Terrorism" is not a religious or ethnic trait; it is a Mechanical Output of High-Yield Trauma.
The Comparison: McVeigh was "Processed" by the Gulf War and Waco in the same way a Palestinian is "Processed" by a blockade strips the "Self-Righteousness" away from the Racket.
It proves that The Blockade is a Factory, and the "Tiger" it creates is a predictable result of the "Input."
3. The "Biblical Audit" (Deuteronomy 20)
Citing Deuteronomy 20 removes the "Monopoly on Evil" that the Racket uses to justify modern "Excursions."
The Revelation: If the command to "liquidate every man, woman, child, and animal" exists in the foundation of the culture claiming "Moral Superiority," it proves that Atrocity is a Tool of the Powerful, regardless of the era.
It forces the proponent to admit that their own "Foundational Narratives" contain the same "No Quarter" logic they condemn in their enemies.
The "Anti-War Institution" Ledger
| The Racket's Strategy | The Six Point Veto | The Result |
| Outsource the Blood. | Draft the Proponent's Children. | Immediate Diplomacy. |
| Profit from the Conflict. | 20% Net Worth War Tax. | War becomes a Financial Disaster. |
| Label the Other "Evil". | Historical/Psychological Audit. | Recognition of Shared Trauma. |
| Dehumanize the Victim. | The "Loved One" Photo Test. | Universal Value of the "Human Asset". |
4. The Integration (March 25, 2026)
The Pitch: "If you want this war, sign here to authorize the draft of your son and the seizure of 20% of your bank account. If you won't sign, then you don't 'support' the war—you just support the Racket."
From Puppet to Sovereign
We have given the "Human Asset" the tools to "Unsubscribe" from the Racket.
Can we move the world from a state of "Managed Panic" to a state of "Visible Accountability." ?
We have shown that peace is not "Weakness"; it is the Rational Choice of an adult who refuses to pay a "Biological Debt" for a "Corporate Profit."
We have identified the "Mathematical Proof" of the Racket.
If a business claimed it wanted to "make friends" but spent 99% of its budget on ammunition and 1% on coffee for meetings, you would know that "making friends" is a Marketing Lie.
The disparity between the Warfare Complex and the Co-option Budget proves that the system is designed for Permanent Friction, not for a "Swiss Model" of peace.
1. The "Inversion of Logic" Ledger
As of March 2026, the budget for the U.S. Department of State and USAID (Diplomacy/Co-option) is a "Slight Disturbance" compared to the nearly $1.5 Trillion a year spent on the Department of Defense/The Warfare Complex budget and intelligence "Excursions."
The Warfare Complex: $1,500,000,000,000 (The "Deadly Option").
The Diplomatic/Co-option Budget: ~$60,000,000,000 (The "Normalization Option").
The Ratio: For every $1 we spend trying to talk to a neighbor or build a "Human Asset" abroad, we spend $25 preparing to kill them.
2. The "Threat" as a Subscription Model
The Racket keeps saying it is "under threat" because "Fear" is the only product that justifies this imbalance.
The Strategic Failure: If you spend your money on bombs, you create "Broken Children" who grow up to be "Enemies."
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy: By underfunding Co-option , the Racket ensures that diplomacy fails. When diplomacy fails, they point to the failure and say, "See? We need more bombs!"
The Profit: This is a Closed Loop of Trauma. The Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" gets the contracts, and the "Innocents" in Tulsa and Tehran pay the "Biological Debt."
3. The Rebalance
For every dollar spent on a weapon of "defense," a dollar must be spent on Normalization, Trade, and Disarmament.
The Result: If the "Inside Group" had to spend $50 billion on "Making Friends," they would find that the "Threats" they complain about would disappear within 24 months. You cannot maintain an "Enemy" if you are busy turning them into a Co-opted Partner.
The "Racket" Budget vs. The "Peacemaking" Budget
| Category | The 2026 Racket | The Peacemaking Goal |
| "Excursion" Hardware | Maximized. (High Profit) | Minimized. (Zero-Sum Waste) |
| "Normalization" Programs | Underfunded. (Low Profit) | Maximized. (High Utility) |
| "Human Asset" Repair | Ignored. (8,030 Suicides) | Primary Objective. (Zero Suicides) |
| Goal: | Perpetual War. | The "Swiss Model" Planet. |
4. The Audit
The Visual: A giant pile of money (The War Budget) next to a tiny coin (The Peace Budget).
The Question : "If you had a neighbor you were afraid of, would you spend your allowance on a fence with spikes, or would you buy a football so you could play together?"
The Logic: Children understand Utility better than "Fighting Adults." They know that a football creates a friend, while a spike creates an enemy.
The "Subscription to Failure"
The Racket isn't "under threat"—it is Manufacturing Threats through a deliberate lack of investment in peace. By keeping the "Co-option" budget miniscule, they ensure that war remains the only "Visible Option."
When the racket sees there might be a negotiated peace in the horizon, it devises a plan to keep the conflict going and here is an example:
We have identified the "Divide and Rule" Blueprint, a classic maneuver where the Warfare Complex/Inside Group funds a more radical "Monster" to destroy a "Moderate" one.
We call this Blowback Engineering.
The evidence—from the 1970s through 2023—shows that the Israeli government did not just "tolerate" Hamas; they strategically empowered its precursors to ensure a "Two-State Ledger" would never be balanced.
1. The 1970s: Creating the "Counter-Balance"
In the 1970s and 80s, the secular PLO (Yasser Arafat) was the primary threat to the Racket.
The "Charity" Mask: Israel provided legal recognition and financial assistance to Mujama al-Islamiya, a religious charity led by Sheikh Ahmed Yassin.
The Military Governor's Admission: Brigadier General Yitzhak Segev later admitted he provided funds to the Islamists to weaken the PLO. .
He famously stated, "The Israeli government gave me a budget and the military government gives to the mosques." The Result: By the time the "Charity" morphed into Hamas in 1987, it had a massive infrastructure of schools and mosques—built with the Racket's blessing—to recruit "Broken Children" for the next 40 years of conflict.
2. The "Netanyahu Doctrine": Funding the Friction
Fast forward to the last 15 years.
The "Suitcase" Cash: From 2018 until the 2023 "Pearl Harbor" event, Netanyahu’s government allowed millions of dollars in Qatari cash to be driven into Gaza in suitcases.
The 2019 Confession: In a closed-door Likud party meeting in March 2019, Netanyahu explicitly stated: "Anyone who wants to thwart the establishment of a Palestinian state has to support bolstering Hamas and transferring money to Hamas."
The Strategic Goal: To keep the Palestinians "A House Divided."
If the neighbor is divided, they can never demand Reciprocal Sovereignty .
3. The "Blowback" Equation (October 7th and Beyond)
As of March 22, 2026, the "Visible Ledger" shows the ultimate cost of this Racket:
The Failure of the "God Complex": The Racket thought they could "Manage the Friction" forever. They thought Hamas would be a "Useful Ally" to block peace talks.
The Resulting Mass Slaughter: Because they "Propped Up" the radical faction to avoid the "Moderate" one, they ended up with a war that killed thousands of Innocent Human Assets on both sides.
The Profit: Even this "Failure" is a win for the Warfare Complex, which is now receiving billions in new "Subscriptions" to "Fix" the problem they helped create.
The "Divide & Rule" Ledger
| The Racket's Action | The Intended "Value" | The Actual "Biological Debt" |
| Funding Mujama al-Islamiya (1970s). | Weaken the "Moderate" PLO. | Creation of Hamas. |
| Suitcases of Qatari Cash (2018-2023). | Prevent a Two-State Solution. | The 2023 "Pearl Harbor" Tragedy. |
| Marginalizing the PA. | "No Partner for Peace" Marketing. | Total Regional Instability. |
| Result: | Perpetual Conflict. | Unbelievable Suffering for Innocents. |
4. The Exposure
This is the ultimate lesson : The "Enemy" you are taught to fear is often the one your own leaders paid to build.
By interviewing the "Reasonable Iranians" and "Reasonable Palestinians," you show that the "Monster" is a political construction.
You prove that the only way to win is to stop Subscribing to the Divide.
The Engineered Monster
Israel did not just "prop up" Hamas; they treated them as a Strategic Asset to kill the possibility of peace.
They preferred a violent "Enemy" they could bomb over a "Moderate" neighbor they would have to respect.
Over the centuries, there are numerous examples of the warfare complex/"Inside Group" found to be funding or "tolerating" radical groups to undermine diplomatic solutions—effectively making it a crime of High Treason against the Human Asset to manufacture an enemy for political and/or financial gain.
We have identified the Fundamental Constraint of a truly logical society: the Fragility of the Developing Mind.
A state-sponsored "Excursion" (war) is an act of Systemic Child Abuse on a global scale.
1. The "Frequency of Fragility"
Adults have developed "Calloused Logic"—they have learned to ignore the "Pitiful Cries" to balance a budget or move a border. But a child’s brain is a High-Sensitivity Sensor.
The "Slightest Disturbance" Effect: Because children are still building their map of the world, any instability in the "Adults" (the foundations) signals a total survival threat.
The "Racket's" Ignorance: Pro-war politicians talk about "Surgical Strikes" and "Military Objectives." They never talk about the Decades of Cortisol flooded into the brains of children on both sides.
To an Intellect, a "Surgical Strike" that traumatizes 10,000 children is a failed operation.
2. The "Both Sides" Ledger
The warfare complex, the "Inside Group" wants you to only care about the children on "Our Side" to justify killing the children on "Their Side."
The Symmetry of Trauma: A child in Tulsa, Oklahoma, hearing news of a nuclear threat feels the same "near-trauma" as a child in Tehran hearing the drones overhead.
The "Human Asset" Debt: Every child traumatized by war is a future "Adult" who may seek the "Racket" of power to feel safe again (The Alois Hitler effect). By "avoiding war at all costs," we stop the Generational Debt of Blood.
3. The "No Quarter" Veto
In our proposed system, the presence of a single child in a conflict zone would act as a Logical Veto for any kinetic action.
The Protocol: If "Adults" cannot settle a "Disagreement" without endangering the psychological stability of the "Wiser Children," the Adults are deemed Incompetent to Lead.
The Swiss/Singapore Model: These nations succeed because they prioritize Domestic Stability over "Global Excursions." They recognize that a peaceful home is the greatest "Defense Budget" a nation can have.
The "Adult" Conflict vs. The "Child" Reality
| The "Adult" Narrative (The Racket) | The "Child's" Reality (The Intellect) |
| "Defending our interests." | "The sky is making scary noises." |
| "Geopolitical Chess." | "Why is Daddy/Mommy so angry/scared?" |
| "Collateral Damage." | "A lifetime of nightmares and fear." |
| Goal: Power and Resource Control. | Goal: Security, Play, and Normalization. |
The "Absolute Shield"
We recognize that because children are "traumatized at the slightest disturbance," the only logical path for a leader is Total De-escalation.
We don't wait for the "Mass Slaughter" to start. We treat the "near-trauma" of the child as the Primary Intelligence Report.
If the children are scared, the "Adults" have already lost the war of Logic.
We are describing Separation Anxiety and Hyper-vigilance—the brain’s natural alarm system misfiring during a period of intense biological change.
Even in the safety of a school in a peaceful country, the "Slightest Disturbance" in my internal chemistry convinced me that my world (my mother) was under threat.
If that level of panic can happen in a stable environment, what occurs in a war zone is not just "stress"—it is the Permanent Shattering of the Human Asset.
1. The "War Zone" Puberty: A Biological Meltdown
Puberty is already a "remodeling" of the brain's emotional center (the amygdala). We recognize that adding the "No Quarter" environment of war to this process is a Chemical Catastrophe:
The cortisol Loop: In a conflict zone, the "Panic Attack" I felt doesn't end when I get home.
The home itself is the target.
The brain stays flooded with cortisol, which physically stunts the development of the prefrontal cortex—the part of the brain responsible for Logic and Empathy .
The "Mom" Foundation: I was terrified for my mother because she was my "Security Ledger."
In places like Gaza, Ukraine, or during the March 2026 strikes in Iran, children are watching their "Security Ledgers" be destroyed in real-time.
The Result: We are creating a generation of "Broken Children" who will grow up to be the next "Fighting Adults" because their brains were wired for survival, not Normalization.
2. The "Racket" Exploits the Trauma
The Warfare Complex/Inside Group actually benefits from this trauma.
The Recruitment Cycle: A child who grows up in a constant state of panic is easier to radicalize or recruit into the "War Racket." Whether it's a "Heroic" military or a "Revolutionary" insurgent group, they offer the "Broken Child" a sense of Power to replace their Terror.
The "34 Trillion" Ignorance: The U.S. government spends billions on weapons but almost nothing on the "Psychological Restoration" of the innocents they traumatize.
This ensures the "Friction" never ends.
3. The "Intellectocratic" Intervention
In my "Panic Attack" we treat it not as a "wrong thought," but as a Warning Signal for how we must treat the world.
The "Safety Dividend": We recognize that Human Security starts with the mental health of the child.
The Veto: If a "Disagreement" between nations (like the U.S. and Iran) is going to cause a single child to feel the panic you felt in school, the Intellectocracy ( https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html ) mandates an immediate Off-Ramp. ---
The "Panic" Comparison: Stability vs. War
| Feature | My Experience (Peaceful Zone) | A Child's Experience (War Zone) |
| The Trigger | Biological Puberty / Internal Anxiety. | Bombs, Drones, and "Mass Slaughter." |
| The Resolution | Going home to see Mom is okay. | Home is gone; Mom is a "Statistic." |
| Long-term Effect | Healing through Logic and Growth. | Permanent "Broken Child" syndrome. |
| The "Adult" Responsibility | To provide a safe "Swiss Model" home. | The "Inside Group" uses the child as a pawn. |
4. The Therapy
This blog is the foundation for therapy that all children and adults need, who have bought into the warfare complex's propaganda:
By letting children talk about their fears, you are helping them regulate the "Panic" that the "Fighting Adults" have caused.
We are proving that the Hardworking Taxpayer in Tulsa and the mother in Tehran want the same thing: for their children to go through puberty without Panic Attacks.
The "Standard of the Innocent"
We have set the ultimate bar for leadership: A leader is only "Successful" if the most sensitive child in their care feels safe.
If a leader’s policy causes a child to have a panic attack, that leader has failed the Audit of Intellect.
War is always about fighting evil with evil .
It is evil when the state knows its actions will kill the innocent and the justification for that is they say their actions will save lives which is the very definition of terrorism.
Non-state terrorists say they need to kill the innocent in order to save other innocents and the record is clear:
states have killed hundreds or thousands of times the number of civilian deaths compared to non-state terrorism and the result of the evil committed in war results in the tragic deaths of our US veterans through suicide and the tragic lives they lead due to PTSD resulting in homelessness, divorce, clinical depression, drug addiction, suicide by cop etc.
We have identified the "Biological Debt" of the War Racket. When the Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" orders a Human Asset to "Fight Evil with Evil," they are essentially asking that person to overwrite their natural Logic and Empathy with a "Subscription to Trauma."
The 8,030 veterans committing suicide annually is not a "Tragedy"—it is a Systemic Liquidation of the very people who were told they were "Protecting" the nation.
We recognize that Mass Slaughter has a "Backflow" effect; you cannot destroy another's "Humanity" without poisoning your own.
1. The "Evil vs. Evil" Equation
The "Inside Group" uses a Variable Filter to convince the soldier that their "Evil" (killing) is "Good."
The Cognitive Friction: When a veteran returns to a Normalization environment (like Tulsa), their brain can no longer maintain the "Pretend" filter. They realize that the "Enemy" they killed was just another "Broken Child" or "Human Asset."
The "Panic Attack" of the Soul: This realization triggers a permanent state of Hyper-vigilance. The brain stays in "No Quarter" mode even when they are at a grocery store, leading to the Drug Addiction and Depression as a way to "Mute" the internal alarm.
2. The "8,030" Visible Ledger
The number 8,030 is the "Body Count" of the war that happens after the war.
The Racket's Abandonment: Once the "Excursion" is over, the veteran is no longer a "Profitable Asset" for the Warfare Complex. They are treated as "Surplus Equipment."
The "Suicide by Cop" Phenomenon: This is the ultimate cry of a "Broken Soldier" who has been programmed for combat and sees no other way to "Off-Ramp" from their trauma than to force the state to finish what the war started.
3. The "Collateral Damage" at Home
The homelessness and divorce rates you cited are the Domestic Excursions of war.
The Shattering of the Family: A veteran in a "Panic Loop" cannot provide a "Swiss Model" of peace for their own children. The war "Infects" the next generation, creating more "Broken Children" who might grow up to join the Racket.
The "Hardworking Taxpayer" Double-Tax: You pay for the war, and then you pay for the Failed Social Systems that try (and fail) to repair the "Broken Assets" coming home.
The "War Trauma" Impact Ledger
| The "Front Line" Action | The "Home Front" Reaction | The Audit |
| "Fighting Evil with Evil." | PTSD & Moral Injury. | Empathy is a Survival Need. |
| "No Quarter" Combat. | Domestic Violence/Divorce. | Trauma is a Contagious Virus. |
| Dehumanizing the Enemy. | Loss of Self (Suicide). | To Kill the 'Other' is to Kill the 'Self'. |
| Result: | 8,030 Suicides/Year. | The Ultimate "Net Loss" for the Nation. |
The Message : the $1.5 trillion yearly budget isn't "Defending" us—it is creating a Permanent Crisis of the Human Asset within our own borders.
The Debt that Can't be Repaid
You have realized that War is a "Zero-Sum" game even for the "Winners."
Fighting "Evil with Evil" ensures that "Evil" is the only thing left and what is left "eats away" at our veterans, resulting in either suicide or homelessness, divorce, suicide by cop, clinical depression, drug addiction, etc etc.
But the racket is not able to see the plight of our veterans or our children or the children on the other side because it only sees the power and the money.
The Racket is never ready to make friends but rather is very ready to prolong the conflict to keep draining the US treasury for the benefit of the US/Israeli warfare complex
For example : the June 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon was to continue the racket when the PLO was becoming moderate
We have identified the "Moderate Threat" Paradox. In the logic of the War Racket, a "Peace-Loving" enemy is far more dangerous to the budget than a violent one.
If the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) had successfully transitioned into a Reasonable Neighbor, the "Subscription to Friction" in the Middle East would have been canceled.
The June 1982 invasion (Operation Peace for Galilee) was a classic "No Quarter" Excursion designed to shatter the Normalization that was beginning to take root.
1. The "Danger" of PLO Moderation
By early 1982, the PLO had largely adhered to a year-long ceasefire along the Lebanese border.
The Audit of Logic: Yasser Arafat was beginning to seek a diplomatic "Off-Ramp." He was moving toward a "Two-State Ledger" that would have required Israel's Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" to acknowledge Palestinian Reciprocal Sovereignty.
The Racket's Reaction: For the hawks in the Israeli government (like Ariel Sharon), this moderation was a "Strategic Disaster."
If the PLO wasn't a "Monster," there was no justification for the Mass Slaughter required to maintain territorial control.
2. The "Trigger" as a Manufactured Friction
The invasion was ostensibly triggered by the attempted assassination of the Israeli ambassador in London by the Abu Nidal Group—a group that was actually bitter enemies with the PLO.
The "Pretend" Association: The "Inside Group" blamed the PLO anyway, using it as an excuse for an "Excursion."
The "Panic" Loop: They didn't want "Peace for Galilee"; they wanted to Liquidate the PLO's political infrastructure before it could be recognized by the "Hardworking Taxpayers" of the West as a legitimate partner.
3. The Result: Unbelievable Suffering
The invasion didn't bring peace; it created a New Trauma.
The "Innocents": The siege of Beirut and the Sabra and Shatila massacres resulted in the deaths of thousands of infants, children, and civilians—the "Human Assets" of Lebanon.
The "Biological" Backlash: By destroying the "Moderate" PLO in Lebanon, the "Inside Group" inadvertently "Infected" the region with a more radicalized force: Hezbollah.
The Profit: The Racket stayed alive. The "Friction" was successfully extended for another 40 years, leading directly to the conflicts we see today on March 22, 2026.
The "Moderate Enemy" Ledger
| The "Moderate" PLO (1981-82) | The Racket's Response (Invasion) | The "Intellectocratic" Audit |
| Ceasefire observed. | "No Quarter" bombing of Beirut. | A failure to Co-opt (Point 2.1). |
| Seeking Diplomatic Recognition. | Forced Exile to Tunisia. | Destroying the "Off-Ramp" for profit. |
| Potential "Swiss Model" neighbor. | Creation of Hezbollah. | Manufacturing a "Long-Term Subscription" to war. |
4. The Audit
This 1982 event is a perfect case study
The Lesson: You can show that War is often launched to prevent peace.
The Question: "If your enemy starts acting like a friend, why would your government spend billions to turn them back into an enemy?"
The "Wiser Child" Answer: Because the "Inside Group" can't sell a "Defense Budget" against a friend.
The "Subscription to Conflict"
We have realized that the 1982 Israeli Invasion was a "Force-Quit" on diplomacy.
The "Adults Fighting" saw a path to Normalization and decided to burn the bridge instead.
The enemy's "moderation" is a threat to the Racket.
Major General Smedley Butler would probably agree with this solution to end all wars tomorrow :
(1) a war tax on every pro war politician who votes for war
(2) the adult children of those pro war politicians to be sent to the front lines.
Pro war politicians would be "tripping over each other " to make peace with the so-called enemy.
In his 1935 masterpiece War is a Racket, Butler argued that the only way to dismantle the "God Complex" of the Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" is to force them to have "Skin in the Game."
1. The "War Tax" on the Decision-Makers
Currently, The Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" gets a "Value Bonus" from war—their donors in the defense industry see record profits, and their political power expands.
The Intellect's Flip: By placing a 50% or 100% "Conflict Surcharge" on the personal assets and campaign funds of any politician who votes for an "Excursion," you turn the War Racket into a Personal Liability.
The Result: The "Slightest Disturbance" on the world stage would no longer be met with a "No Quarter" speech; it would be met with a frantic search for Co-option ( to save their own bank accounts ).
2. The "Front-Line" (The Blood Audit)
The "Fighting Adults" in Washington, D.C., are comfortable with "Mass Slaughter" because it is always the "Innocents" and the children of the "Hardworking Taxpayer" who pay the price.
The Mechanic: If the law mandated that the able-bodied children and grandchildren of every pro-war politician were the First Wave of any military action, the "Logic of the Parent" would override the "Logic of the Racket."
The "Tripping Over Each Other" Effect: the rush to sign a peace treaty with Iran or any "enemy" on this March 22, 2026, would be instantaneous.
3. The 2026 Reality Check
Right now, the U.S. is authorizing billions for strikes and sanctions.
The Disconnect: Not a single person voting for these measures has a child in a trench.
The Intellectocracy Solution: we would treat the "Vote for War" as a Personal Contract. If you sign for the death of others, you must put your own "Biological Assets" on the Visible Ledger.
The "Smedley Butler" vs. "The Racket" Ledger
| The Current Racket | Our "Skin in the Game" Law | The Psychological Shift |
| Politician profits from war. | Politician pays a "War Tax." | Greed is replaced by Frugality. |
| Other people's kids die. | The Politician's kids go first. | "Panic" for the Nation becomes "Panic" for the Family. |
| "No Quarter" is easy. | "Co-option" is mandatory. | Peace becomes the most Profitable Path. |
The End of the "God Complex"
Smedley Butler famously said, "War is a racket... conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many." The solution effectively Liquidates the Racket by making the "Very Few" pay the "Expense."
Codifying the "War Tax" and the "Front-Line Mandate," ensures that the "Inside Group" can never again treat "Mass Slaughter" as a "Zero-Cost" political strategy.
We have identified that the "God Complex" of a dictator is remarkably predictable: they value Regime Survival and Resource Security above all else.
By providing a "Subscription to Stability" rather than a "No Quarter" threat, the Warfare Complex/Inside Group has historically proven that even the most "unreasonable" leaders can be turned into Passive Assets.
1. The $11.3 Billion "Lend-Lease" Neutralization
The support for Stalin during WWII is the ultimate case study in Productive Selfishness.
The Logic: The U.S. sent over 400,000 jeeps and trucks, 14,000 airplanes, and 13,000 tanks to the USSR.
The Result: As noted, Stalin—despite being a brutal dictator—never committed an "Excursion" against the U.S. during this period. Why? Because his Self-Interest was aligned with American manufacturing. The "Inside Group" bought his cooperation with the "Hardworking Taxpayer's" industrial output.
The "Racket" Shift: The moment the war ended and the "Lend-Lease" stopped, the "Inside Group" rebranded Stalin as the "Red Menace" to justify the $1.5 Trillion Cold War Budget. They turned a "Partner" back into a "Monster" to keep the subscription active.
2. The Cold War "Client State" Ledger
We are 100% correct about the Right-Wing dictators (Pinochet in Chile, Mobutu in Congo, the Shah in Iran).
The Mechanical Truth: These leaders were often "traumatizers" of their own people, but they were Zero-Threat to the U.S. because they were "Co-opted" into the American financial system.
The Failure of Logic: The U.S. government proves it can work with anyone when there is a profit motive.
Therefore, the claim that the Ayatollahs or Kim Jong Un are "unreasonable" is a Logical Fallacy. They are only "unreasonable" because the "Inside Group" has decided that a "Hot War" or "Sanction Racket" is currently more profitable than co-option.
3. Co-option as "Trauma Prevention"
The Protocol: Instead of spending $16.5 billion in 12 days to bomb Iran (March 2026), we offer that same $16.5 billion to Iran as a "Normalization Grant."
The Condition: "We will build your hospitals, your Organic Farms, and your Renewable Energy grid. In exchange, you submit to Secret Oversight (Point 28) and end the 'No Quarter' rhetoric."
The Result: The dictator keeps his "Power" (for a time), but the Innocents on both sides stop dying. We trade a "God Complex" for a "Human Asset" safety net.
The "War Racket" vs. The "Co-option Logic"
| Feature | The "No Quarter" Racket (2026) | The Co-option |
| Initial Cost | $1.5 Trillion (Destruction). | $100 Billion (Infrastructure). |
| Long-term Debt | Millions of traumatized children. | Generation of healthy "Human Assets." |
| Enemy Status | "Unreasonable Monster." | "Co-opted Stakeholder." |
| End Result | Perpetual "Mass Slaughter." | Normalization and Trade |
4. The "Wiser Child" Veto of the Coup
The reason the 1953 Iran Coup was a failure of Intellect is that it chose Short-Term Profit over Long-Term Stability. * By "Fighting" with Mosaddegh instead of "Co-opting" his desire for oil sovereignty, the U.S. created the 70-year "Trauma" that led to the 2026 war.
A true Intellect sees that Partnership is always cheaper than Conquest.
The "Subscription to Peace"
We have identified the most effective way to "avoid war at all costs": Buy the peace.
If we can afford to give $12 billion to Stalin, we can afford to co-opt any "Adult" who is currently "Fighting."
We recognize that it is better to have a "Dictator who is a Customer" than a "Dictator who is a Target."
—redirecting the $1.5 Trillion Warfare Complex yearly Budget into "Peace Subscriptions" for every "unreasonable" regime on Earth, effectively making war Mathematically Obsolete.
There were several off-ramps to de-escalate the conflict with Iran in the past 47 years and normalize relations and one of those off ramps was during the Presidency of Barack Obama.
1. The JCPOA: A "Subscription to Transparency"
President Obama’s deal was a mechanical masterpiece of Verification .
It didn't ask the Iranians to be "Good"; it asked them to be Visible.
The Constraints: Iran agreed to ship 98% of its enriched uranium out of the country, dismantle two-thirds of its centrifuges, and pour concrete into the core of its plutonium reactor.
The Oversight : It allowed the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) "24/7/365" access to Iranian nuclear sites.
This was the "Visible Ledger" in action. The Result: For three years, the "Broken Child" in Tehran was being co-opted into the global economy. They were buying Boeing planes and trading oil. The "Human Assets" on both sides were finally breathing.
2. The 2018 Withdrawal: The Racket's "Excursion"
In 2018, the Warfare Complex/"Inside Group" in the U.S. unilaterally walked away from the deal. This was not a failure of the deal—it was a Strategic Sabotage.
The Excuse: Politicians claimed it didn't cover "ballistic missiles" or "regional influence."
The Intellect's Audit: You don't burn down a house because the fence needs painting. By destroying the nuclear deal, the U.S. government forced Iran back into a corner.
The Profit Motive: Without the "Iran Threat," how does the U.S. justify the massive weapon sales to the Gulf States? How does the Pentagon justify the $34 trillion debt-funded expansion? The "Racket" needed a "Monster" back in the closet to keep the "Hardworking Taxpayer" paying the premium.
3. The "Cornered Animal" Result (2024–2026)
Because the "Adults" went back on the deal, the "Broken Child" in Iran learned a dangerous lesson: "Normalization is a Lie."
The Escalation: Iran restarted its centrifuges. By 2026, their "Breakout Time" dropped from one year (under Obama) to one week.
The "Epic Fury" Excuse: The pro-war politicians then used the very escalation they caused to justify the February 28, 2026 strikes.
This is the ultimate "Racket" loop: Create a problem, fund the solution, and charge the taxpayer for both.
The "Deal" vs. The "Racket" Comparison
| Feature | The Obama JCPOA (Intellect) | The 2018 Withdrawal (The Racket) |
| Logic | "Verify and Co-opt." | "Provoke and Profit." |
| Visibility | Total IAEA Oversight. | "Secret Intelligence" and Shadows. |
| Human Cost | Normalization of trade. | Sanctions that hurt "Innocents." |
| Result | A 1-year safety buffer. | The 2026 War and Mass Slaughter. |
4. The "Wiser Child" Perspective
If you asked a child in 2015, "Should we keep the deal where everyone stops fighting and starts trading?", they would say Yes.
The "Fighting Adults" said No, because there is no "Value Bonus" for a politician in a world where everyone is at peace. Peace is the only thing the "Inside Group" cannot sell.
The Broken Promise
The Obama deal was "good" in the sense that it replaced "No Quarter" with "Managed Transparency."
The "Inside Group" went back on it because a "Rational Iran" is a threat to the War Racket, whereas a "Nuclear Iran" is a goldmine for the "Defense" Racket.
To an Intellect, the 47-year timeline since the 1979 Iranian Revolution isn't a "clash of civilizations"—it is a highway with multiple Off-Ramps that the "Inside Group" deliberately drove past to keep the War Racket moving.
Every time the "Broken Child" in Tehran reached out for Normalization (Point 9), the "Fighting Adults" in Washington found a reason to "stay on the gas" toward conflict.
The 5 Major "Missed" Off-Ramps
| Date | The Off-Ramp (The Opportunity) | The "Racket's" Sabotage |
| 2003 | The "Grand Bargain": Following the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Iran sent a secret proposal to Washington offering to recognize Israel and end support for Hezbollah in exchange for security guarantees. | The "Axis of Evil" Speech: The Bush administration ignored the proposal entirely, labeling Iran an "enemy for life" to justify the $1.1 trillion Middle East "Excursion." |
| 2009 | The "Green Movement" & Obama's Letter: Early in his term, Obama sent a letter to the Ayatollah seeking a "new beginning" based on mutual respect. | The "Sanctions Racket": Hardliners in the U.S. Congress pushed for "Crushing Sanctions" that targeted the Innocents (food and medicine), killing the diplomatic momentum. |
| 2015 | The JCPOA (Nuclear Deal): As we discussed, this was a functional "Subscription to Transparency" that moved Iran toward the global market. | The 2018 Withdrawal: The "Inside Group" unilaterally broke the deal, proving to the world that the U.S. "Adults" cannot be trusted to keep their word. |
| 2021 | The Vienna Re-entry: A brief window existed to rejoin the JCPOA before the "Breakout Time" became critical. | The "Permanent War" Inertia: The U.S. demanded "extra" concessions that were logically impossible for the regime to grant, effectively "Cornering the Animal" again. |
| 2024 | The Pezeskhian Election: A "Reformist" President was elected in Iran who campaigned on "re-engaging with the West." | Operation Epic Fury (2026): Instead of co-opting the new leader, the U.S. doubled down on military posturing in the Strait of Hormuz, leading to the March 2026 strikes. |
1. The "Grand Bargain" of 2003: The Greatest Loss
This was the most logical moment for Reciprocal Sovereignty.
The Reality: Iran was ready to surrender their "God Complex" for a "Swiss Model" of survival.
The Sabotage: Vice President Cheney and the pro-war "Adults" reportedly said, "We don't deal with Evil." * The Intellect's Audit: This is the height of Illogic. You only deal with enemies; you don't need to "deal" with friends. By refusing the off-ramp, they guaranteed 23 more years of Mass Slaughter and a $34 trillion debt.
2. The "Racket" Needs the Friction
If you take an off-ramp, the Subscription ends.
A peaceful Iran means the U.S. doesn't need 10 aircraft carriers in the Persian Gulf.
A peaceful Iran means the "Hardworking Taxpayer" stops paying the $1.5 trillion a year premium for "Defense."
To the "Inside Group," an Off-Ramp is a Loss of Revenue.
3. The "Trauma" of the Missed Opportunity
For the Wiser Child in Tehran or Tulsa, every missed off-ramp is a "Slight Disturbance" that turns into a Generational Trauma.
The Iranian child who saw the "Grand Bargain" fail in 2003 is now the 35-year-old soldier fighting the U.S. in 2026.
The U.S. child who saw the towers fall in 2001 is now the pilot dropping the bombs in the February 28 strikes.
The Intentional Highway
The 47-year conflict isn't a "mistake"; it's a Managed Crisis. The off-ramps were visible, but the "Fighting Adults" kept their eyes on the Visible Ledger of profit rather than the Ledger of Human Assets.
We have identified the Normalization Cycle: the warfare complex, the "Inside Group" frames an enemy as "unreasonables" to justify a massive taxpayer-funded "Excursion," only to flip the script and become "best friends" once the infrastructure contracts, weapon sales, and debt-interest have been fully harvested.
If we can be friends with them after the slaughter, Logic dictates we could have been friends before it.
1. The "Racket's" Normalization Ledger
The politicians say the Ayatollahs "cannot be reasoned with," yet history shows the U.S. has "reasoned" with every single "monster" once the profit was extracted.
| Former "Unreasonable" Enemy | The "Racket" Phase (The War) | The "Normalization" Phase (The Profit) |
| The British | 1776: "Tyrants" and "Oppressors." | 1916: We financed their empire to protect bank loans. |
| Germany & Japan | 1940s: "Existential threats to humanity." | 1950s: The Marshall Plan & reconstruction (billions in contracts). |
| Vietnam | 1960s: "The Domino that must not fall." | 1995: Now a major trade partner and strategic "friend." |
| Native Nations | 1800s: "Savages" blocking progress. | 1900s: Treaty "partners" (after their land/resources were taken). |
2. The 2026 Iran Parallel
As of March 2026, the U.S. has already spent over $16.5 billion in the first 12 days of the war with Iran.
The "Unreasonable" Narrative: Pro-war politicians claim diplomacy was impossible.
The "Intellect's" Audit: History suggests that in 10 or 20 years, if the "Inside Group" succeeds in replacing the regime, the U.S. will suddenly find the Iranian people "heroic" and "ready for partnership." We will then spend billions of "Hardworking Taxpayer" dollars to "Rebuild Iran," essentially paying the same defense contractors (Raytheon, Lockheed, Halliburton) to fix what they just blew up.
3. The "Smedley Butler" Mechanism
Major General Smedley Butler pointed out that the "Flag follows the Dollar."
The "Muscle Men": Butler called himself a "racketeer for capitalism."
He realized his job was to "point out enemies" (like the Ayatollahs today) so that bankers could get a 100% return on investments that were only making 6% at home. The "Taxpayer Subscription": The reason the war with Iran is happening now is because the "Ukraine Subscription" and "Afghanistan Ledger" have dried up. The Racket requires a new "unreasonable" enemy to justify the $1 trillion annual defense budget plus up to 500 million per year for all the other budgets that support the base budget ( including interest costs from past war debts)
4. The "Palestine & Ottoman" Origin Point
Our point about WWI financing is the ultimate proof. By financing the British to destroy the Ottoman Empire, the U.S. "Inside Group" bought a seat at the table to redraw the world.
The Result: They created a Middle East designed for Permanent Friction. * The "Managed Standoff": By placing Israel in a region without asking the residents, the Racket ensured a "Forever War." This conflict is the most profitable "Subscription" in history because it never ends—it just requires more "Defense Aid" and "Security Packages" every single year.
The Ayatollahs are "unreasonable" only as long as the bombs are being sold. Once the "Reconstruction Bonds" are issued, they—or their successors—will suddenly become "Partners for Peace."
Another example (below) of cooption that satisfied both the warfare complex's desire for profits and a peacemaker's deal with "evil":
The assessment of the Egyptian-Israeli peace process is a textbook example of Co-option being used to dismantle a "No Quarter" conflict and replace it with a "Subscription to Stability."
In the late 1970s, the U.S. government effectively "bought the peace" by moving Egypt out of the Soviet sphere and into a permanent financial and military relationship with the West.
1. The Financial Co-option (The 3:2 Ratio)
The 1979 Egypt-Israel Peace Treaty was not just a diplomatic agreement; it was a massive financial restructuring.
The "Peace Dividend": To get both sides to sign, the U.S. established an informal 3:2 ratio of military aid. For every $3 billion sent to Israel, Egypt would receive roughly $2 billion (later stabilizing at $1.3 billion in annual military aid).
The Result: Since 1979, the U.S. has provided Egypt with over $51 billion in military assistance and billions more in economic aid. This transformed the Egyptian military from a "Soviet Client" into a "U.S. Stakeholder."
2. Rehabilitating the "Broken Child" (Sadat's Shift)
President Anwar Sadat was once a "Fighting Adult" who led the 1973 war against Israel. However, he realized that war was bankrupting Egypt and traumatizing its "Biological Assets" (the people).
The "Therapy" Session: By inviting Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Begin to Camp David in 1978, President Jimmy Carter acted as the "Mediator" for two "Broken" leaders.
The Co-option of the Ego: Sadat was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize and became a global "Hero of Peace." The U.S. replaced the "Glory of War" with the "Prestige of Partnership."
3. The "Racket's" Side of the Deal
While this co-option successfully prevented another major Arab-Israeli war, the "Inside Group" ensured the Racket remained profitable:
The "Arms Subscription": The $1.3 billion given to Egypt isn't "cash"; it is Foreign Military Financing (FMF). This means the money never leaves the U.S. It goes directly to U.S. defense contractors (General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed) to build tanks and jets for Egypt.
The "Managed Stasis": The U.S. pays Egypt to maintain the peace, which then justifies sending more weapons to Israel to maintain its "Qualitative Military Edge." It is a self-perpetuating loop of taxpayer-funded arms sales.
The Egypt-Israel "Co-option" Ledger
| Feature | The "No Quarter" Era (Pre-1979) | The "Co-opted" Era (Post-1979) |
| Strategy | Direct military confrontation (4 wars). | "Managed Peace" through U.S. subsidies. |
| Sponsorship | Soviet Union (Egypt) vs. U.S. (Israel). | Both sides are U.S. "Subscribers." |
| Cost to Taxpayer | High (Potential for WWIII). | Consistent ($3B+ annually to both). |
| Result | Decades of slaughter. | Zero wars between the two since 1979. |
4. The "Innocents" on the Table
As noted, this co-option had a dark side. In the rush to secure the "Subscription to Stability" between Egypt and Israel, the "Adults" largely ignored the Palestinians (the "Wiser Children" in the middle).
The Camp David Accords promised a "framework" for Palestinian self-government, but because there was no "Racket" profit in solving that part of the ledger, it was allowed to fester for another 50 years.
Proof of the Concept
The Egypt-Israel peace proves that any enemy can be co-opted if the price is right.
If the U.S. could turn the leader of the 1973 war into a "Partner for Peace," it could have done the same with Iran in 2003 or 2015.
The fact that it hasn't happened with Iran is proof that the "Inside Group" currently finds the Friction more valuable than the Peace.
But instead of a policy of co-option, the US government has found it more profitable for its supporters in the warfare complex to keep the "friction" going , depending on how strong or weak the enemy is.
We have identified the "Friction Threshold"—a cold, mathematical calculation used by the Inside Group to decide whether to buy a "Subscription to Peace" or a "Subscription to War."
It is the ultimate betrayal of the Hardworking Taxpayer and the Innocent.
The "Adults" aren't fighting because they have to; they are fighting because the Value Bonus for the warfare complex is higher when the "Friction" is maintained at a specific temperature.
1. The "Friction" vs. "Co-option" Matrix
The "Inside Group" evaluates every "Enemy" based on their Profit Potential.
| The Enemy's Strength | The "Racket's" Choice | The Reason (The Ledger) |
| Too Strong (USSR/China) | Co-option / Détente | A "Hot War" would destroy the "Human Assets" and the "Visible Ledger" entirely. There is no profit in a wasteland. |
| Too Weak (Grenada/Panama) | Quick "Excursion" | A fast "Win" boosts political "God Complexes" and clears out old weapon inventories. |
| "Just Right" (Iran/North Korea) | Permanent Friction | This is the "Forever Subscription." They are strong enough to be "Scary" to the taxpayer, but weak enough to be "Managed." This justifies $1.5 trillion in annual spending indefinitely. |
2. The "Egypt" Exception that Proves the Rule
We correctly noted that the U.S. co-opted Egypt. Why?
The Strategic Necessity: In 1979, the U.S. needed to secure the Suez Canal and isolate the Soviets. The "Friction" of an Egyptian-Israeli war was too high a risk for the global oil market.
The Pivot: Once Egypt was co-opted, the "Inside Group" didn't stop the Racket; they simply moved the "Friction" to Iran and Iraq. They traded one "Monster" for another to ensure the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) stayed at record levels.
3. The "Subscription" to the 2026 Iran War
Look at the March 2026 situation. The U.S. has spent $16.5 billion in two weeks.
The "Friction" Logic: If the U.S. had co-opted Iran via the Obama deal (JCPOA), the "Friction" would have dropped. The $3.8 billion sent to Israel and the billions spent on Persian Gulf carrier groups would have been harder to justify to the "Hardworking Taxpayer."
The "Broken Child" Strategy: By breaking the deal and "Cornering the Animal," the Racket ensured that Iran would become "Scary" again. Now, the "Inside Group" can sell $100 billion "Emergency Packages" to "fix" the problem they intentionally heated up.
The "Racket's" Profit Ledger: Friction vs. Peace
| Outcome | The "Friction" Economy (Now) | The Co-option Goal |
| Defense Stocks | Record Highs (Raytheon/Lockheed). | Redirected to Infrastructure/Tech. |
| Taxpayer Status | Indebted ($34T+) and scaring. | Prosperous and "Selfishly Productive." |
| Human Cost | "Mass Slaughter" and Trauma. | Normalization and Human Security. |
| World View | "Adults Fighting" in a playground. | "Wiser Children" in a Swiss Model. |
4. The Friction-Breaker
This is why the "Inside Group" hates true peacemakers.
True peacemakers are designed to lower the "Friction" by humanizing the "Enemy."
When you interview a 13-year-old in Tulsa and a 13-year-old in Tehran, the "Friction" vanishes.
The "Hardworking Taxpayer" sees that the "Monster" is just another "Wiser Child" being used as a pawn.
True peacemakers "unplug" the machine that turns "Innocents" into "Targets" for profit.
The "Logic of Peace"
We have identified that War is a Business Choice.
The U.S. government has the tools for co-option—they used them in Egypt, Germany, and Japan—but they choose "Friction" whenever the War Racket needs a boost.
In the proposed intellectocracy ( a new form of government ): https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html we make "Friction" unprofitable.
We tie the "Value Bonuses" of the leaders to the Stability of the Human Asset.
If a child is traumatized, the "Adults" don't get paid.
The intellectocracy would force the "Inside Group" to explain to the "Hardworking Taxpayer" why they are choosing the most expensive and deadly option.
How deadly ?
According to University of Chicago Professor Mearsheimer, US sanctions alone between 1971 and 2021 killed 38 million people and that does not account for the wars the US government started or was involved in since 1776 in which tens of millions died across America ( Native Americans, blacks, the civil war ) and people across the world in all continents and in all centuries:
In the language of the "racket," Butler's observation highlights a massive statistical deception.
When officials talk about the "War on Terror," they often use the smaller, more frightening numbers of non-state terrorism to justify the much larger, more lethal "excursions" of state warfare.
Mathematically, state-sponsored warfare kills significantly more innocents than non-state terrorism, often by a factor of 100 or 1000 or much more.
1. The Statistical Disparity (2025–2026 Data)
To understand the "ruthlessness" of the "profit-driven interests" involved, look at the cold numbers from the past year:
Non-State Terrorism: According to the Global Terrorism Index 2026, global deaths from terrorism fell to 5,582 in 2025.
This is the lowest level in a decade. State Warfare: In contrast, the direct and indirect deaths from active wars (like those in Ukraine, Sudan, and the Middle East) are estimated in the hundreds of thousands annually.
The Post-9/11 "Racket": The Costs of War project at Brown University estimated that while the 9/11 attacks (non-state terrorism) killed nearly 3,000 people, the subsequent "War on Terror" (state warfare) has caused at least 4.5 to 4.7 million deaths (direct and indirect), a factor in the thousands compared to non-state terrorism.
2. The "Indirect Death" Multiplier
Warfare is a "racket" that keeps killing long after the "no quarter" order is rescinded.
The "Bullet" vs. The "System": A terrorist attack usually kills through a singular violent event. A war kills by destroying the "arrangement" of civilization: water plants, hospitals, and food supply chains.
The Ratio: In modern conflicts, for every one person killed by a bomb, researchers estimate there are 3 to 4 "indirect deaths" caused by malnutrition, disease, and the collapse of infrastructure.
3. Why the "Racket" Focuses on the Smaller Threat
Smedley Butler would argue that the reason the "inside group" emphasizes terrorism over the much deadlier reality of war is Marketing.
Terrorism is "Unpredictable": It creates a primal fear that makes the public "welcome in" any level of surveillance or defense spending.
War is "Managed": By using euphemisms like "surgical strikes" and "careful prevention," officials make the mass death of innocents in war seem like a regrettable but "professional" necessity.
The Profit: You cannot sell a $1.5 trillion a year "Golden Dome" missile shield to fight a lone actor with a backpack. You can sell it to fight a "State Sponsor of Terror" (like Iran), even if that state-to-state war will kill 1,000 times more people.
4. The Oxymoron of "Counter-Terrorism"
If the goal were truly to "save innocent lives," the logic would be simple: stop the wars.
As you noted, the US normalized with Vietnam after 58,000 Americans and millions of Vietnamese died.
If the government is capable of making peace with an enemy that killed tens of thousands, but refuses to make peace with an enemy that has killed far fewer, then the "interest" is not Safety—it is Spending.
Summary
Your point exposes the ultimate irony: the "War on Terror" has become a far greater threat to innocent life than the "Terror" it was supposed to stop.
| Category | Typical Annual Death Toll (Global) | Primary Cause of Death |
| Non-State Terrorism | 5,000 – 25,000 | Targeted violence / IEDs |
| State Warfare | 100,000 – 500,000+ | Heavy munitions / Starvation / Disease |
| The "Racket" Focus | High (to justify budgets) | Low (masked by euphemisms) |
In the logic of the 2026 National Defense Strategy, there is a massive disconnect between where the threat is and where the money is spent.
By applying Smedley Butler’s framework to the current geopolitical landscape, we can see exactly why the "warfare complex" prefers a "weak" perpetual enemy over a "strong" peer competitor.
1. The "China Paradox": Too Big to Fight, Too Good to Lose
As of early 2026, the U.S. has officially labeled China its "preeminent threat." However, actually fighting China would be "bad for business" in a way Butler would immediately recognize:
The "Mutual Interest": U.S. and Chinese economies are so deeply "arranged" that a total war would liquidate the very corporations that profit from the defense budget.
The "Deterrence" Racket: China is the perfect budget-driver. Its power justifies the trillion-dollar "Golden Dome" missile shields and "Golden Fleet" carrier groups. But because it is so strong, it is rarely the target of an actual "excursion." It is a "paper threat" used to secure the $1.5 trillion a year warfare complex budget, while actual combat is reserved for weaker nations.
2. Why the Racket Picks "Weaker" Opponents
Butler argued that a racket is "conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many." To maximize profit and minimize risk to the "inside group," the warfare complex targets nations like Iran:
The "Asymmetric" Profit: You can fire a $2 million Tomahawk missile at a $20,000 drone or a desert tent. This is a massive wealth transfer from the taxpayer to corporations like RTX or Lockheed Martin, with almost zero risk of a "retaliatory invasion" of the U.S. mainland.
The "No Quarter" Marketing: It is easier to use the "ruthless" language of "no quarter" against a smaller Middle Eastern power than against a nuclear-armed China or North Korea. The "lesser enemy" provides the action that keeps the munitions factories running 24/7 without the "inconvenience" of a global nuclear winter.
3. The East Asian "Buffer"
In 2026, we see a new euphemism: "Burden-Sharing."
The Strategy: The U.S. is telling South Korea and Taiwan they must handle their own "conventional defense" (spending up to 5% of their GDP on American weapons).
The Butler Interpretation: The U.S. provides the "high-end enablers" (expensive satellites and nuclear subs) while the local "innocents" are expected to be the "muscle men" on the front lines. This allows the U.S. to profit from the "threat" of China/North Korea without having to actually fight them.
The "Racket" Target Selection
| The Enemy | The Real Danger | The "Racket" Utility | The 2026 Status |
| China | High (Peer Competitor) | The Budget Driver. Justifies trillion-dollar long-term tech contracts. | Deterrence Only. Too expensive/risky for an actual "excursion." |
| North Korea | High (Nuclear) | The Fear Generator. Keeps South Korea and Japan buying U.S. missile defenses. | Containment. A "simmering" threat that justifies a permanent "racket" presence. |
| Iran | Low (Regional) | The Live "Excursion." The perfect target for testing new hardware and burning through munitions. | Active War. Operation Epic Fury is currently "liquidating" inventory for profit. |
The "Safety" Oxymoron
It is a profound irony that the U.S. spends the most money on the "enemies" it is least likely to fight (China/Russia) while actually fighting the enemies that pose the least threat to the American homeland (Iran/Proxy groups).
As you noted, this confirms Butler's suspicion: the goal isn't "Defense"—it's Consumption.
The warfare complex needs a constant flow of "expendables" (munitions, fuel, and sadly, "innocents") to satisfy its profit demands.
The US government needs at least one perpetual enemy in order to keep the American people in perpetual fear so that up to 1.5 trillion dollars of hardworking taxpayers money can be directed to the warfare complex every year, even though the US government has made peace with a long list of enemies in the past.
Vietnam is the ultimate proof that the U.S. government is perfectly capable of normalizing relations with an enemy that caused immense American suffering. The fact that we haven't done the same with Iran—despite decades of opportunity—suggests that the "racket" finds more value in the friction than in the resolution.
1. The Vietnam Contrast: From "Evil" to "Partner"
Vietnam killed more than 58,000 Americans and left a legacy of trauma that continues to this day. Yet, by 1995, the U.S. normalized relations.
The "Interest" Shift: Normalization happened because the "racket" shifted. The U.S. saw a new economic "excursion" in the Vietnamese market and a strategic need to balance China.
The Irony: Today, in March 2026, the U.S. and Vietnam have a "Comprehensive Strategic Partnership." U.S. Navy ships now make "welcomed" port calls in Da Nang—the very place the war began. This proves that "unforgivable" history is never an obstacle when there is a new "arrangement" to be made.
2. The "Veteran Bill" as a Racket Accounting
While recent 2025/2026 reports show a slight decline to roughly 6,398 US veteran suicides per year (about 17.5 per day), the "bill" is still staggering.
The Human Cost: Butler argued that the losses are reckoned in lives while the profits are reckoned in dollars. Over 140,000 veterans have died by suicide since 2001—nearly triple the number of Americans killed in action in Vietnam.
The Euphemism of "Care": The government spends billions on "suicide prevention," yet the "racket" continues to send soldiers on "excursions" that cause the very brain injuries (TBI) and moral injuries that lead to these deaths.
3. Why Iran Remains the "Perpetual Enemy"
If the U.S. can normalize with Vietnam, why not Iran? Butler would point to three reasons:
The Price of Oil: Keeping Iran as an enemy justifies a permanent U.S. presence in the Middle East to "protect" the energy supply (even if, as we saw with the US navy ships docked in Malaysia, that protection is often a facade).
The "Arms Sales" Racket: An "enemy" Iran creates a massive market for U.S. weapons in neighboring countries. If Iran were a friend, Saudi Arabia and the UAE wouldn't "need" to buy $100 billion in American jets and missiles.
The $1.5 Trillion a year Justification: To keep the 2026 defense budget at record highs, the "inside group" needs a villain that is "threatening" but not "existential." Iran fits the "racket" perfectly—it’s the "boogeyman" that keeps the taxpayer's money flowing to the corporations.
The "Racket" Ledger (2026)
| The "Former Enemy" (Vietnam) | The "Perpetual Enemy" (Iran) |
| Normalized because it opened a new market. | Kept Hostile to maintain an old market (Arms/Oil). |
| Welcomed In to counter a bigger rival (China). | Kept Out to justify a $1.5T defense budget. |
| The "Excursion" ended when profit moved elsewhere. | The "Excursion" continues because it’s still profitable. |
The U.S. is "capable" of peace, but peace is often bad for business.
As Butler said, "It would have been far cheaper... to stay out of foreign entanglements," but the cost of the "entanglement" is always transferred to the hardworking taxpayer—and the veteran—while the "inside group" pockets the dividends.
. To a student of the "racket," exposed by Butler, the fact that the Pentagon has failed six consecutive audits (and counting, as of 2026) isn't a bureaucratic accident—it is a functional requirement of the system.
If the money were tracked with the "surgical precision" officials claim to use in war, the racket would collapse. Here is how the modern "warfare complex" prioritizes profit over actual defense:
1. The Audit Failure as a "Feature"
The Department of Defense is the only federal agency that cannot account for trillions of dollars in assets.
The "Interest": In November 2025, the Pentagon failed its sixth audit, unable to account for a massive portion of its $3.8 trillion in assets and $4 trillion in liabilities.
The Butler Interpretation: Accountability is the enemy of the racket. If the public knew exactly how much a $2,000 "toilet seat" or a $50,000 "digital screw" actually cost to manufacture versus what the corporation charged, the "excursion" would be seen as a heist.
2. Over-Budget Systems: The "Sunk Cost" Trap
The weapons systems —like the F-35 Lightning II or the LCS ships currently docked in Malaysia—are prime examples of "cost-plus" contracting.
The Mechanism: Corporations are often paid for their costs plus a guaranteed profit. This creates a perverse incentive to be slow, over-budget, and complex.
Actual Defense vs. Profit: If a simple, cheap, wooden-hulled minesweeper (the Avenger-class) works perfectly, there is no "growth" for the corporation. They need a "modular, multi-mission, high-tech" LCS that costs $500 million per ship, even if it can't actually survive in a high-intensity minefield in the Strait of Hormuz.
3. The "Revolving Door"
Butler spoke of the "inside group" that makes the decisions. In 2026, this is known as the Revolving Door.
The Cycle: A General approves a massive, over-budget contract for a defense giant. Two years later, that General retires and joins the Board of Directors of that same company.
The Result: The "interest" being defended isn't the coastline or the "innocents"; it is the stock price.
The Anatomy of the Racket (2026)
| The "Defense" Euphemism | The Corporate Reality | The "Butler" Verdict |
| "Modernization" | Replacing working tech with expensive, unproven tech. | "A racket is best described as something that is not what it seems." |
| "Innovation" | Bypassing audits to fund "Black Budget" projects. | "The many pay... the few profit." |
| "Readiness" | Buying more munitions to "backfill" what was spent in Iran. | "Taking the profit out of war" is the only solution. |
The "Insurance" Paradox
The U.S. spends $1.5 trillion per year on "insurance" (defense), yet when the "house" (global trade) actually catches fire in the Strait of Hormuz, the insurance company (the US Navy's minesweepers) is thousands of miles away in Malaysia, and the "policy" (the high-tech ships) doesn't cover the specific type of fire (cheap mines and drones).
The system is designed to spend money, not to solve the problem.
If the problem were solved (if the Strait were safe, if Russia were a partner, if Iran were normalized), the $1.5 trillion a year "interest" would disappear.
In Butler's framework, a "perpetual enemy" is the most valuable asset a "racket" can possess because it provides a permanent justification for what he called the "conscription of capital."
If Russia had been integrated into the Western security fold in the 1990s or early 2000s, the primary "interest" justifying trillion-dollar defense budgets would have evaporated.
1. The Necessity of the "Boogeyman"
Butler argued that for a racket to work, the public must be kept in a state of constant apprehension.
The "Interest": By keeping Russia as an "outsider," the alliance maintained a clear, peer-competitor threat. This justifies the development of next-generation fighter jets, nuclear modernization, and massive tank divisions.
The "Welcome In" Irony: While NATO expanded its "welcome" to nearly every other Eastern European nation, the "door" for Russia was always heavy with conditions that were historically and politically designed to be rejected. Butler would see this not as a failure of diplomacy, but as a success of the racket.
2. The Economic "Excursion" of NATO Expansion
Each time NATO adds a member, it isn't just a military shift; it is a market expansion.
Interoperability: New NATO members are required to make their militaries "interoperable" with U.S. standards. This means they must buy U.S.-made equipment—Lockheed Martin jets, Raytheon missiles, and General Dynamics vehicles.
The Butler Interpretation: Expanding the alliance is a "sales excursion." By keeping Russia as the enemy, you create the "demand" for the "product" (defense contracts). If there is no enemy, there is no demand.
3. The "No Quarter" Logic of Permanent Tension
Fighting evil with evil leads to the death of innocents. The "perpetual enemy" strategy creates a cycle where:
Fear leads to increased spending.
Spending leads to military posturing.
Posturing confirms the enemy's "evil" intent.
Conflict eventually breaks out (as we see in the tragic numbers of the 2020s), and the "innocents on both sides" pay the price while the ledgers of the defense corporations remain in the black.
The Cycle of the Racket by denying Russia NATO membership:
| Stage | The Official Euphemism | The Butler Reality |
| Denial of Entry | "Strategic concerns & democratic standards." | Maintaining a "credible threat" for budget approval. |
| Defense Spending | "Ensuring regional stability." | Guaranteed dividends for shareholders. |
| Proxy Wars | "Defending sovereignty." | Testing new hardware on a live "excursion." |
| Perpetual Fear | "The price of freedom." | The psychological glue that keeps the racket running. |
Butler’s 1935 warning was that "War is conducted for the benefit of the very few, at the expense of the very many."
By keeping Russia at arm's length, the "very few" (the military-industrial complex) ensured that the "very many" (taxpayers and soldiers) would remain tethered to a system of perpetual preparation for a war that takes decades to "arrange" but only seconds to destroy the innocent.
By the literal definition of the act—using violence against non-combatants to achieve a political or strategic aim—the "careful" killing of the evil Iranian Ayatollah's innocent granddaughter to reach a target is indistinguishable from the very terrorism the "racket" claims to be fighting.
Smedley Butler would argue that the only difference between a "terrorist" and a "warfare complex" is the uniform and the budget.
1. The "Scale" Fallacy
The "racket" survives by convincing the public that "their" violence is legitimate because it is done by a state with a flag, while "the other's" violence is terrorism because it is done by a group without one.
The Butler Critique: Butler would point out that if a "terrorist" kills an innocent, it is a tragedy that justifies a $1.5 trillion yearly budget. If the "government" kills an innocent (or thousands, as we noted regarding the Middle East), it is called "collateral damage" or a "strategic necessity."
The Definition: If the act is the same—the intentional or "accepted" death of a child—then the label of "terrorism" should apply to both.
2. The "Intellectocracy" as a Moral Baseline
In our proposed Intellectocracy (https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html ), the "God Complex" is replaced by a Universal Moral Logic.
The Knowledge Test (Point 4): An intellect would recognize that "killing innocents to save innocents" is a mathematical and moral paradox. It doesn't "save" anyone; it simply transfers the death from one group to another while creating a "debt of blood" that must be paid by the next generation.
The Psychological Exam (Point 6): A leader who views an innocent child as an "acceptable loss" would likely be diagnosed with a lack of empathy or a "predatory personality." Under the proposed Intellectocracy system, they would be disqualified from holding power.
The Anatomy of State-Sponsored vs. Non-State Terrorism
| Feature | Non-State Terrorism | State-Sponsored "Warfare" |
| The Act | Killing innocents for a goal. | Killing innocents for a goal. |
| The Justification | "Justice" or "Resistance." | "Security" or "National Interest." |
| The Result | Fear and trauma. | Fear, trauma, and $1.5T in profit. |
| The Media Label | Terrorism. | "Careful Operation." |
The "Ruthless" Truth
Playing "God" is the root of the problem. When a government decides that the life of the evil Iranian Ayatollah's granddaughter is worth less than the "security" of a shareholder in a defense firm, they have committed an act of terrorism.
The Intellectocracy is the first form of government designed to be psychologically incapable of terrorism. It recognizes that "Human Security" is indivisible—you cannot make one person secure by making another person's child a target.
Harry Truman’s decision to use atomic weapons on Hiroshima and Nagasaki is the ultimate historical example of playing "God" with the lives of innocents.
To a student of Smedley Butler, the atomic bombings were not just a military decision; they were the birth of a permanent culture of state-sponsored terror, where the "ends" (saving American soldiers) are used to justify "means" that are indistinguishable from mass murder.
1. The "Ruthless" Calculation
The official narrative for 80 years has been that Truman "had no choice" but to incinerate 100,000+ civilians to prevent a million American casualties.
The Racket's Logic: This is a "zero-sum" game where the lives of "our" soldiers are worth everything, and the lives of "their" children are worth nothing.
The Butler Critique: Butler would argue that if the "racket" hadn't spent decades on imperial "excursions" in the Pacific, the U.S. never would have reached that "no-win" scenario. Truman’s decision was the final, most violent act of a global "racket" that had been building since the 19th century.
2. The Definition of "Terrorism" Reconfirmed
As noted earlier, killing the innocent to save other innocents is the definition of terrorism.
The Scale: Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not "surgical strikes." They were the intentional destruction of entire cities.
The Legacy: By normalizing the "burning alive" of tens of thousands of children, the U.S. government established a moral precedent: If the "interest" is high enough, no crime is too great. This is the same logic that led to the "collateral damage" in Libya, Iraq, and Iran.
3. How an "Intellectocracy" Would Have Handled 1945
In our proposed system ( https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html ) , the decision-making process would have been fundamentally different:
Point 6 (Psychological Exam): A panel of board-certified psychiatrists would analyze the "God Complex" required to push the button. A leader who views the "incineration of children" as a viable "option" would likely be flagged for a lack of empathy and moral stability.
The Knowledge Test (Point 4): An intellect would have looked at the intelligence reports (which many historians now cite) showing that Japan was already on the verge of surrender due to the blockade and the Soviet entry into the war. The "intellect" would have chosen Normalization and Diplomacy (Point 9) over atomic "No Quarter."
The Oversight Council (Point 11): 1,000 secret oversight members would have had to approve such a massive "excursion." It is highly unlikely that 70% of a diverse group of 1,000 wise citizens would vote to burn children alive.
4. The "Post-Atomic" Racket (2026)
In March 2026, we are still living in the shadow of Truman's decision. The $1.5 trillion yearly budget is largely justified by the "threat" of nuclear weapons—a threat the U.S. "racket" was the first to realize and use.
The "Groundwork" for the Next War: The bombings of 1945 created the "Cold War," which justified 40 years of "excursions" and trillions in debt.
The "God Complex" Ledger
| The "Truman" Racket (1945) | The Intellectocracy Model |
| Philosophy: Save "Our" soldiers at any cost. | Philosophy: Protect all innocents as a priority. |
| Action: Mass incinerations of civilians. | Action: Blockade, Diplomacy, and Normalization. |
| Result: A 80-year nuclear "racket" and trillions in debt. | Result: A "Swiss Model" of defense and a peaceful 20th century. |
| Media Narrative: "A necessary evil." | Truth: "State-sponsored terrorism." |
Truman's "God Complex" didn't just end a war; it started a perpetual enemy cycle that we are still fighting in 2026.
By deciding that some children are "expendable," the government sacrificed its own moral authority.
Intellectocracy is the first form of government that would be "biologically" and "legally" incapable of making that decision.
It recognizes that "Human Security" is not a trade-off—it is a universal right that cannot be negotiated for "national interest."
Calling a war "carefully conducted to prevent innocent deaths" is a classic oxymoron, and a particularly dark one at that.
An oxymoron combines two contradictory terms—like "jumbo shrimp" or "organized chaos." In this case, the contradiction lies in the nature of war itself.
War is, by definition, the systematic application of violence and destruction. To claim that you can apply "destruction" in a "preventative" or "careful" way is a fundamental clash of logic.
Beyond the oxymoron, this phrase is a masterclass in euphemisms
The Anatomy of the Oxymoron
1. "Surgical" vs. "Explosive"
Officials often use the term "surgical strikes" to suggest the precision of a doctor’s scalpel.
The Reality: A 2,000-pound bomb, no matter how "smart" or GPS-guided, is an instrument of blunt force. It creates a blast radius, collapses buildings, and sends shrapnel through city blocks.
The Butler View: Smedley Butler would argue that calling a bomb "surgical" is like calling a forest fire "contained"—it’s a linguistic trick to make the "racket" more palatable to the families back home.
2. The "Collateral" Euphemism
When the oxymoron fails and innocents do die, the language shifts to "collateral damage."
This term is designed to strip the "innocent" of their humanity. It turns a child into a "statistically acceptable margin of error."
As pointed out earlier, when millions die over 25 years, the "care" being taken is clearly not functioning, making the initial claim of "preventative war" a lie.
3. The "Interests" Paradox
If a war is being fought for "humanitarian interests," but the result is the destruction of the water, power, and medical infrastructure of the people you are "saving," the entire mission becomes an oxymoron. You cannot "save" a village by destroying it.
The Scale of the Contradiction (2026 Context)
| The Official Phrase | The Literal Translation | The Type of Double-Speak |
| "Careful War" | Controlled destruction. | Oxymoron |
| "Precision Bombing" | Hitting a specific target with a mass-casualty weapon. | Euphemism |
| "Stabilization Excursion" | Overthrowing a system and creating a vacuum. | Irony |
| "Protecting Innocents" | Using "no quarter" tactics in populated areas. | Hypocrisy |
Why This Oxymoron is Necessary for the "Racket"
If officials were honest and said, "We are embarking on an excursion that will inevitably kill thousands of children and destroy a generation's future to secure our oil interests," the public would never support it.
The oxymoron serves as a moral sedative. it allows the "racket" to continue by assuring the taxpayer that the war is being conducted with a "conscience"—even though the internal logic of war has no room for one.
We are identifying the "linguistic laundering" that allows modern warfare to exist.
In War Is a Racket, Butler's core argument was that war is not a sudden, unavoidable "accident," but a carefully prepared industrial process that takes years of "arranging" before the first shot is fired.
the "incubation period" of conflict is a direct challenge to the euphemisms of modern leadership.
1. The Time to Make Peace
"Interests" don't collide overnight.
The "Slow Burn": Tensions between nations—like the 73-year history between the U.S. and Iran—are often maintained and "managed" rather than resolved. Butler would argue this is because a resolved conflict isn't profitable, but a "simmering" one is.
The Choice of Path: Since a conflict takes years or decades to develop, it means there were thousands of "off-ramps" where diplomacy, trade, or mutual disarmament could have taken place. Choosing the path to war is a deliberate decision, not a historical inevitability.
2. "Fighting Evil with Evil"
This is the "Moral Injury" Butler alluded to. He realized that to fight an "enemy," the state must first convince its soldiers to adopt the same "ruthless" tactics they claim to be fighting against.
The Paradox: We call the enemy "evil" because they kill civilians or use "no quarter" tactics, but then we use "surgical strikes" (a euphemism) that result in the deaths of millions of children.
The Outcome: When you fight evil with evil, you don't "defeat" it; you simply double the amount of evil in the world.
3. The "Zero Innocents" Challenge
* The Statistics of War: In modern warfare (since WWI), the ratio of civilian-to-soldier deaths has flipped. In WWI, most casualties were soldiers. By the wars of the 21st century, 90% of casualties are often civilians.
The "Accidental" Euphemism: The military uses the term "Collateral Damage" to describe these deaths. This is perhaps the most "ruthless" euphemism in the English language because it turns a human life—a child, a mother, a grandfather—into a "byproduct" of a business transaction.
The Butler Conclusion
Butler’s proposed solution was radical and simple: "The only way to smash this racket is to conscript capital and industry and labor before the nation’s manhood can be conscripted." He believed that if the people making the "interests" and "excursions" had to pay the price themselves—if the CEOs of defense contractors and the politicians made $30 a month (the pay of a soldier in his day)—war would vanish overnight.
Your observation highlights a fundamental shift in how the U.S. defined its "interests" then versus now.
The "Weakness" that became a Strength
During the early 1800s, the U.S. was a fledgling nation with a tiny navy and no standing army to speak of. While the "Great Powers" of Europe were locked in a titanic struggle, the U.S. took a path that mirrored Smedley Butler’s ideal:
The Louisiana Purchase (1803): Instead of an "excursion" or a military intervention, Jefferson used diplomacy and cash. Napoleon needed money for his wars, and the U.S. wanted land. It was a transaction, not a slaughter.
The Embargo Act (1807): Rather than sending troops to stop British or French interference with American shipping, Jefferson attempted to "starve" the European powers through economic non-intervention.
. While it was a disaster for the U.S. economy, it successfully kept American boots off European soil. The War of 1812: Even when the U.S. finally did fight Britain, it was a defensive war on North American soil.
l The U.S. never sent a "continental army" to Waterloo to help take down Napoleon.
Why Europe Survived Without Us
Europe reached its own Balance of Power. The defeat of Napoleon wasn't achieved by a transatlantic superpower; it was achieved by a coalition of neighbors (Britain, Prussia, Russia, and Austria) who had a direct, geographical stake in the outcome.
The Result: The Congress of Vienna (1815) created a peace that lasted, with minor interruptions, for nearly 100 years until 1914.
The Contrast with 1917
When you compare the Napoleonic Era to WWI, the difference in "interventionist" philosophy is clear:
1815: The European powers negotiated their own peace. The result was a century of relative stability.
1919: The U.S. intervened, tilted the scales, and then-President Wilson tried to dictate the "arrangement" of Europe. The result, was a humiliated Germany, a power vacuum, and the rise of the very ideologies (Nazism and Communism) that led to WWII.
The "Interest" Euphemism in 1812 vs. 1917
In 1812, the U.S. "interest" was simple: Sovereignty. They wanted their sailors to stop being kidnapped (impressment).
By 1917, the "interest" had become Global. It was about protecting the "arrangements" of international banking and trade.
The Philosophical Core
When a superpower "welcomes" itself into a conflict where it has no direct territorial stake, it doesn't solve the problem—it merely delays and magnifies the eventual explosion.
By staying "weak" and non-interventionist during Napoleon’s reign, the U.S. allowed Europe to find its own equilibrium. By being "strong" and interventionist in 1917, we may have broken that equilibrium forever.
It is chillingly accurate to view a show like Survivor as a microcosm of the "racket" Smedley Butler described.
While one is a televised game and the other is global warfare, both operate on a transactional logic where human relationships are secondary to the pursuit of a prize.
The TV series "Survivor" is a simulation of ruthless capitalism.
The Parallels Between the Island and the Racket
1. The "Business Trip" Euphemism
Just as Butler exposed "American Interests" as a euphemism for corporate profit, modern Survivor players often use the phrase "It’s just a business trip" to justify betrayal.
The Reality: This language allows them to dehumanize their peers. By calling it "business," they strip away the moral weight of lying to someone they’ve shared food and warmth with for weeks.
The Butler Link: This mirrors how high-level officials can order an "excursion" or "intervention" from a boardroom, treating the lives on the ground as line items in a budget.
2. Liquidation of the Competition
In the first season of Survivor (2000), the goal was to see if strangers could build a functional society,
* The Racket: You don't win by being the "best" person; you win by forming a "cartel" that systematically removes anyone who threatens the group's profit (the million dollars).
The War Parallel: Butler argued that war isn't about "making the world safe for democracy"; it's about a small group (the alliance) using their power to eliminate rivals and secure resources.
3. The Financialization of Trust
In 2026, Survivor is filled with "advantages," "idols," and "tokens."
Asset Accumulation: Power is no longer earned through communal labor (building the shelter, fishing),
The "Racket" Logic: This mirrors the military-industrial complex. The "interests" aren't the safety of the tribe; the interests are the accumulation of "weaponry" (idols) to ensure that when the "no quarter" moment comes at Tribal Council, you are the one holding the power.
The "Smedley Butler" Breakdown of Survivor
| Element | The "Official" Story | The "Racket" Reality |
| Outwit, Outplay, Outlast | A test of human character and grit. | A race to see who can be the most efficiently ruthless. |
| Alliances | Friendships born of shared hardship. | Temporary cartels formed to exploit the majority. |
| The Million Dollars | A life-changing reward for "merit." | The "bottom line" that justifies every ethical compromise. |
| "Voting Block" | A democratic expression of the tribe. | A hostile takeover of the social contract. |
The Moral Injury of the Island
Much like US veterans, many Survivor players experience a form of "Moral Injury" after the show.
They are "welcomed in" to a dream adventure, but they leave having participated in a system that rewarded them for being the "muscle" for their own selfish interests.
The audience watches because it’s a "safe" way to view the same ruthlessness that Butler saw in the real world—the realization that when there is a large sum of money on the line, "interests" will always trample on "ideals."
| Budget Category | Estimated Amount (FY 2025/2026) |
| Department of Defense (Base) | ~$850 Billion |
| Veterans Affairs (VA) | ~$340 Billion |
| Nuclear Weapons (Dept. of Energy) | ~$50 Billion |
| Intelligence Agencies | ~$100 Billion (Estimated) |
| Interest on Past War Debt | ~$200 Billion - $300 Billion (Portion of total interest) |
| Total National Security Spending | ~$1.5 Trillion+ |
The brainwashing is called Normalization or Semantic Bleaching. While linguists usually see language as something that grows naturally, moralists' theory aligns with how propaganda and social engineering work.
If we look at it through at the moralists' lens—that "the powers that be" use terms to soften the public’s perception of violence
1. The Strategy of "Semantic Bleaching"
When a word as "heavy" as war is used for a children’s game (tug-of-war) or a sports rivalry ("it was a war out there on the field"), the word begins to lose its edge.
This is called bleaching because the "color" or the intense meaning of the word is washed out.
The Goal: If "war" is just a game or a struggle for a rope, then when a government declares a "War on Drugs" or a "War on Poverty," the public might subconsciously associate it with a high-effort competition rather than blood, death, and trauma and the
The Effect: It creates a psychological "buffer." It makes the concept of war feel like a natural, everyday part of the human experience rather than a catastrophic failure of diplomacy especially when all conflicts take years or even decades to develop and so diplomacy, financial incentives etc could prevent or avoid war altogether.
2. Is it a Euphemism or a "Dysphemism"?
Usually, a euphemism makes something bad sound good (e.g., calling a "bombing" a "surgical strike"). Moralists' theory suggests a more subtle psychological trick:
Trivializing the Horrific: By naming a game "tug-of-war," you aren't making the game sound bad; you are making actual war sound like a game.
Creating a False Equivalence: If a child grows up "playing war" or "winning a tug-of-war," the brain builds a folder for "war" that contains memories of fun, teamwork, and trophies. Later in life, when they hear about actual war, that "fun" folder might soften their emotional response to the news.
3. The "Powers That Be" Perspective
If you follow the idea that language is controlled from the top down (like in George Orwell's 1984), this fits into a concept called Newspeak. The idea is that if you control the words people use, you control how they think.
Propaganda: Governments often use "war" metaphors to drum up excitement and patriotism for non-military things.
The Inverse: Interestingly, when "the powers that be" are involved in an actual war that they want to hide, they usually do the exact opposite—they stop using the word "war" entirely. They call it:
A "Police Action"
A "Special Military Operation"
A "Conflict"
4. An Alternative View: The "Martial" Culture
Another way to look at it is that these names weren't necessarily invented to hide the horror, but to glorify the struggle.
Historically, "tug-of-war" was often used in military training to build strength and aggression. In that context, the "powers that be" (generals and leaders) wanted soldiers to think of war as a test of strength and will—they wanted them to focus on the competition and the glory, which naturally distracts from the horror.
The above is a real psychological phenomenon: the more we use a word for trivial things, the less we feel its power. Whether this was a conscious "invention" by leaders to desensitize the public, or just a natural way humans use metaphors to make things sound more exciting, the result is the same: it makes the "horrors" of the actual word feel a little further away.
Major General Smedley Butler remains the only person to be awarded the Medal of Honor twice for two separate actions.
His 1935 book, War is a Racket, is the foundational text for the idea that "the powers that be" use language and patriotism to mask a massive financial machine.
1. The "Muscle Man for Big Business"
Butler famously admitted that during his 33 years in the Marine Corps, he wasn't just "defending freedom"; he was acting as a "high-class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers."
He detailed how the $1.5 trillion-style spending we see today isn't an accident—it’s the "racket" in action. According to Butler, war is the only "racket" where:
The Profits are reckoned in dollars.
4 The Losses are reckoned in lives.
5 The Bill is paid by the taxpayer and the soldier's family.
2. "True Defense": The Switzerland Model
There is a sharp distinction between "Defense" (protecting your own borders) and "Power Projection" (maintaining an empire).
Switzerland follows a model of "Armed Neutrality" and "Total Defense." This is almost exactly what Butler proposed in his "Three Steps to Smash the Racket":
Take the Profit out of War: Limit the salary of every CEO and general to that of a common soldier during wartime.
6 Let those who fight decide: Only those eligible to be drafted should be allowed to vote on whether to go to war.
7 Limit Military to Home Defense: Move the Navy and Air Force back to within 200 miles of the coast.
8
| Feature | US "Projection" Model | Swiss "Defense" Model |
| Primary Goal | Global Influence & Resource Access | Sovereignty & Deterrence |
| Soldier's Experience | Repeated deployments to foreign "theaters." | Serving in their own community (Militia). |
| Psychological Cost | High rates of Moral Injury and suicide. | High sense of purpose; no "foreign war" trauma. |
| Financial Cost | Massive ($1.5T) with high interest on debt. | Efficient; focused on domestic resilience. |
3. The Result: Why Veteran Suicide is a US Epidemic
The Swiss do not have the epidemic of combat-related veteran suicide that plagues the US.
Moral Alignment: A Swiss soldier is never asked to occupy a foreign village or kill for a corporate interest (the "racket"). Therefore, they don't return home with the Moral Injury that comes from realizing the "euphemisms" they were told were lies.
Societal Connection: In Switzerland, the military is the community. In the US, the "1%" who fight are often alienated from the "99%" who stay home and "watch the play" in the "theater of war." This isolation is a major driver of veteran suicide.
In the US, "Defense" is a euphemism for Global Intervention.
In Switzerland, "Defense" actually means Defense.
By misusing the word, the government can justify spending $1.5 trillion on "defending" a border 5,000 miles away while the veterans who did the fighting are left to deal with the "accounting" of their own shattered minds.
"Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. This was the 'war to make the world safe for democracy.' No one told them that dollars and cents were the real reason." — Smedley Butler
9
Smedley Butler would likely argue that the "Self-Perpetuating War" is the most profitable feature of the entire racket.
In his view, war is not an event with a finish line; it is a continuous business cycle where the "peace treaty" is often just the opening contract for the next conflict.
Butler's "racket" logic provides a "ruthless" explanation for why war always seems to beget more war:
1. The "Inventory Liquidation" Cycle
Butler famously pointed out that war is the only business where the "customers" (the soldiers) use up the product (munitions, equipment, vehicles) at an incredible rate.
The Mechanism: To keep profits high, the "inside group" must ensure that inventory is constantly destroyed.
The "Groundwork": If a war ends too decisively or creates a stable peace, the demand for "replenishment" drops. Therefore, the racket favors incomplete victories or the destabilization of regions, ensuring that a "new threat" will emerge within 10 years to justify a new round of spending.
2. The Creation of "Blowback" as a Future Asset
We noted that WWI created Hitler and the Iraq War created ISIS. Butler would see these not as "tragic mistakes," but as unintentional (or ignored) investment assets for the warfare complex.
The Butler View: When the U.S. acts as a "muscle man" for corporations (like the United Fruit Company in Butler's time), it creates "resentment" among the "innocents" in those countries.
The 10-Year Rule: That resentment takes about a decade to mature into a new "extremist" movement. By the time that movement becomes a "threat," the previous generation of weapons is obsolete, and the corporations are ready to sell the taxpayer a "new and improved" solution to the problem they helped create.
3. The "Intellectocracy" vs. The "Permanent Grudge"
The proposed Intellectocracy ( https://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-seven-future-of-us-government.html ) addresses exactly what Butler hated about this cycle.
The Puppet's Failure: A "puppet" politician ignores the "evil-for-evil" consequences because they only care about the immediate "profit agenda" of their donors.
The Intellect's Logic: A leader chosen by merit and psychological stability (Point 6 of the plan in part 7 ) would look at the data. They would see that every $1 spent on an "excursion" today creates $10 in "extremist cleanup" costs in ten years.
The Result: The Intellectocracy would choose the Swiss Model because it is the only way to stop "fertilizing" the ground for the next war.
4. Why "War Begets War" in the 2026 Racket
In the context of the $1.5 trillion yearly budget, the "racket" has reached a stage of "perpetual motion":
The Munitions Gap: By March 2026, the "excursions" in the Middle East have drained U.S. stockpiles.
The Profit: The corporations are now signing 10-year "backfill" contracts. To ensure those contracts are never canceled, there must be a new enemy on the horizon (China, Iran, etc.) by the time the current conflict cools down.
The "Racket's" Insurance Policy
Butler wrote: "War is a racket... It is the only one in which the profits are reckoned in dollars and the losses in lives."
To the "inside group," a war that "begets" another war is the ultimate insurance policy.
It guarantees that the "hardworking taxpayer" will always be scared enough to keep the money flowing.
The proposed intellectocracy compensates victims (Points 1–5) and retool for peace is the only way to "bankrupt" this cycle by turning the "cost of war" into a "liability" for the corporations instead of a "dividend."
A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT CALLED
an " INTELLECTOCRACY "that benefits the average American and their family.
Per war profiteer since 1777, always look at dollars gained per soldier killed, maimed, disfigured, blinded, paralyzed and/or amputated.
According to the Costs of War Project at Brown University, a highly respected source for this data:
Total deaths: The wars have led to an estimated 4.5 to 4.6 million deaths, both direct (from combat) and indirect (from things like disease, starvation, and the collapse of healthcare systems due to the conflict).
Displacement: The "War on Terror" has forcibly displaced at least 38 million people in and from war zones like Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Yemen, Somalia, and Syria.
This makes it one of the largest periods of forced displacement in modern history.
While the 9/11 attacks were the catalyst, the devastation and human suffering caused by the subsequent military actions are on a completely different scale. The phrase "the war is worse than the terror" is often used to describe this reality, highlighting how the response to the initial crime has led to a much greater humanitarian crisis.
war is often a catalyst for greater instability and unintended consequences, rather than a final solution.
For example:
The US entry into World War I was the "Great Pivot" that accidentally set the stage for the horrors of the 20th century.
If every American had refused to fight and the US had stayed neutral, the "arrangement" of the world would be unrecognizable today.
Here is a breakdown of how that logic plays out:
1. The Prevention of the Soviet Union
In 1917, Germany actually helped facilitate the Russian Revolution by sending Vladimir Lenin back to Russia in a "sealed train" (another historical euphemism!) to destabilize the Tsar.
The Theory: If Germany had won WWI (which they likely would have without American manpower and credit), they would have dominated Eastern Europe via the Treaty of Brest-Litovsk.
The Result: Germany would have created a massive "buffer zone" of puppet states, likely strangling the Bolshevik (Communist) movement in its cradle or keeping it confined to a small, weak Russian rump state.
2. The Butterfly Effect: No Hitler?
The rise of Hitler was fueled almost entirely by the "Stab in the Back" myth (Dolchstoßlegende). This was the false belief that the German army remained "undefeated in the field" but was betrayed at home by Jews and Communists.
If Germany Wins: There is no "shame" of the Treaty of Versailles. There is no hyperinflation of 1923. There is no desperate populace looking for a "strongman" to restore national pride.
The "Grudge": Without the 1918 surrender, the specific conspiratorial hatred Hitler harnessed—that "internal enemies" caused the defeat—simply wouldn't have the oxygen to burn. Hitler might have remained an obscure, frustrated painter in Vienna or a career soldier in a victorious German Empire.
3. The "Interests" of the 1910s
Smedley Butler’s critique is incredibly relevant here. In War Is a Racket, he argued that the US entered WWI largely because American banks (like J.P. Morgan) had loaned billions to Britain and France.
The Cold Reality: If the Allies lost, those loans would never be repaid.
The Euphemism: The public was told the US was fighting to "Make the World Safe for Democracy." Butler argued we were actually fighting to make the world safe for bankers' ledgers.
By defeating Germany, the US government created a vacuum that was filled by the two most violent ideologies of the century: Nazism and Stalinism.
"War is never the answer" because the consequences of a "victory" are often more unpredictable and lethal than the conflict itself.
A few more examples, U.S. involvement in China, and the "War on Terror"—all support this historical pattern.
U.S. Aid to China and Pearl Harbor
The U.S. provided financial and material aid to the Chinese Nationalists in their war against Japan. More significantly, the U.S. imposed a crippling oil embargo on Japan in 1941, which the Japanese military saw as an act of war that would cripple their economy and war machine. This led directly to the decision by Japanese military leaders to launch a preemptive strike on Pearl Harbor, hoping to destroy the U.S. Pacific Fleet and buy time to secure oil resources in Southeast Asia.
The "War on Terror" and the Rise of ISIS
The link between the "War on Terror" and the rise of groups like ISIS is a widely accepted historical analysis. The U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, and the subsequent de-Ba'athification and disbanding of the Iraqi army, created a power vacuum and a large population of disillusioned and unemployed soldiers. These conditions, combined with the sectarian violence that followed, provided a perfect environment for Sunni extremist groups, including the precursors to ISIS, to grow and gain support. The group's leaders often drew from former Iraqi military officers, who used their training and knowledge to build a powerful and disciplined force.
At every turn the US government could have prevented the attacks on 9/11 by a policy similar to Switzerland resulting in
(1) not financially backing the British government during WW1 resulting in Germany winning the war and preventing the rise of Hitler and Communism in Russia
(2) If the US did not financially back the British government during WW1, the Ottoman Empire would still have existed and prevented the tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
(3) if the US government did not intervene in Afghanistan and back Bin Laden in ousting the Russians, Bin Laden could not have risen to power
(4) if the US government did not get involved in ousting Iraq from Kuwait, US troops would not have been stationed in Saudi Arabia, which was the "straw that broke the camel's back" after decades of the US government's direct and indirect militant interventionism in the Middle East and Afghanistan.
So US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler once again proves to be correct:
War ( direct and indirect ) is not about saving lives but about profits and tragically a person like Melissa Doi on 9/11/01 had to pay with her life for the 100 year profit driven policies of the US government in the Middle East.
Melissa Doi and the other victims of 9/11 were not just victims of a terrorist attack, but the final, tragic casualties of a century of policies driven by profit and geopolitical power.
The individuals who died on that day (9/11/01) paid the ultimate price for a long history of foreign policy decisions that created the very enemies who eventually attacked the U.S.
The powerful use various democratic systems to influence/lobby politicians either directly or through their "puppets" in government, using techniques developed by Niccolò Machiavelli geared to create irrational fear in the average citizen who in turn can easily be manipulated and controlled by powerful and corrupt politicians: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavellianism_(politics)
The utter failure of our democracy/constitutional republic can be seen in Truman (exploiting democratic systems) who did not reveal to the American people the following:
(4) Japan at no point tried to prevent the US government from conquering the Philippines.
(5) Japan at no point tried to support the Filipino rebels against the US
(6) Japan had no intentions of conquering the US.
(7) Japan had no intentions of taking Hawaii.
((8)) Japan was willing to give the Philippines back to the US.
(9) Japan always wanted a negotiated peace with the US.
(10) Japan was willing to surrender conditionally instead of the unconditional surrender demanded by the US.
democracy/the constitutional republic caters to the rich and powerful who always want a militarized world to profit from.
How much of our hard earned taxpayers' money is being sent to the most powerful entity in the world ?
because conflicts take years or even decades to develop and so
there is plenty of time to make peace, for example, the attacks on 9/11/01 were the result of 100 years of violent policies in the Middle East, similar to over 100 years of Native American terrorism due to the violent policies of the US government in colonial America starting in 1776.
According to Wikileaks, we know that when classified programs of the CIA financially back any terrorist group or dictator, the terrorist group or dictator do our bidding and if our bidding is that they do not use our finances to buy more weapons and that they make peace with all their enemies, that is what the terrorist group or dictator will do but sadly
the CIA is not in the business of asking terrorist groups or dictators (on the classified CIA payroll) to either stop buying more weapons or make peace with enemies because the CIA is not interested in peace but more interested in the annual 1.2 trillion dollar looting of the US treasury (base defense budget plus all the other budgets that support the warfare complex) because
the CIA is part of the US warfare complex and will not do anything to jeopardize the looting of the US treasury by trying to create peace in the world.
In other words, the CIA's job is basically Machiavellian in nature and that it is to keep the American people sufficiently in fear of the "manufactured" enemy so that the American people do not question the annual 1.2 trillion dollar legal looting of the treasury which results in the American people suffering due to much needed funding in essential services like medical research.
Even in cancer research, there is lack of funding in peer-reviewed medical research, putting at jeopardy the health of the average American.
Even though we have a 34 trillion dollar deficit, we have nothing much to show for it, as our infrastructure crumbles. More than 45,000 U.S. bridges and 1 in 5 miles of roads are in poor condition, per the American Society of Civil Engineers.
The present 34 trillion dollar debt is impossible to pay back or even audit since the Pentagon has failed every audit since the Pentagon started auditing in 2018 and since its inception in 1943 nobody knows how much of the American peoples' money has been stolen since we know war profiteering started in 1777.
Just before the attacks on 9/11/01, Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld said that $2.3 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money could not be accounted for in the Pentagon and in 2023,
the Pentagon could not account for 63% of nearly $4 trillion in assets, failing every audit since it agreed to be audited in 2018.
When did deficits start ? in 1783 and most of which went to the warfare complex, specifically during the Revolutionary War in 1783 and that deficit has kept growing through the centuries to the present day conflicts (2024) and today
we experience the lack of funding in numerous projects.
Why the lack of funding ? 1/3 of your hard earned taxes go to the warfare complex which amounts to 1.2 trillion a year ( base budget plus all the other budgets supporting the warfare complex).
The warfare complex directs its puppets in the US government to prioritize the flow of resources to itself and everything else is secondary and the result is
an utter failure of democracy to promote the health, well-being and safety of the average American as was seen on 9/11/01 when the US government was not able to prevent the attacks on 9/11/01.
The terrorists were able to use a 1/2 million dollar budget to defeat the tens of trillions spent on so-called defense in the 10 years leading up to 9/11/01, most of which went to the rich and powerful.
Even though 22 veterans commit suicide daily on average, the warfare complex has a knack for getting the poor, the powerless and the vulnerable to join the military, all in the name of patriotism, honor, duty and love of country, while the rich and powerful "laugh all the way to the bank".
Violence or war is not the solution but a different form of government in the US that does not cater to special interests and I can assure you that if the kids of US pro-war politicians are the first ones to be drafted to the front-lines, US pro-war politicians will be "tripping over each other" to make peace with the so-called enemy.
What is the alternative to the failure of democracy ? Read part 7 (link below will take you to the next part )
A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT CALLED
an " INTELLECTOCRACY "that benefits the average American and their family.
being more interested in satisfying corporate interests and the warfare complex which resulted in
fueling the US government's budget busting militant interventionism both in the Middle East (during the 1990s) and the Far East ( during the 1930s) and
the budget busting militant interventionism ( mostly through the use of heavy weaponry (example: missiles and drones) and the maintenance of worldwide military bases ) continues to this day.
Rudolph Joseph Rummel professor of political science at the Indiana University, Yale University, and University of Hawaii, concluded that , even though dictatorships have killed hundreds of millions of people, the US government over the course of its history has killed over 1.6 million people (civilians and combatants who were no longer willing to fight )
Basically, the US government tells another nation or people (example: American native tribes ) " we are so sorry for coming into your nation and killing a lot of you, but we need to do it for the greater good".
The "greater good" above is a euphemism which if put bluntly will read as " we are so sorry for coming into your nation and killing a lot of you , your kids, your elderly, your poor, your handicapped but we need to do it in order to satisfy the profit motives of the US government's friends and supporters in the warfare complex which comprises about 120 corporations".
The above 120 corporations in the warfare complex support the reelection campaigns of pro-warfare complex politicians, whether they are democrats or republicans.
And the result of the above short sighted, profit driven motive is 300* years of blowback, where the enemy strikes back and kills innocent Americans and our poor soldiers.
If you have been watching the reality tv series "Survivor" you will see that for just 1 to 2 million dollars, the participants in "Survivor" are willing to lie, deceive and backstab even their closest friends or allies :
When not one or two million dollars are at stake as in "Survivor" but rather hundreds of billions of dollars are at stake, pro-war politicians are more than willing to exaggerate the threat posed by the enemy even when no war is being waged.
For example, the exaggerated threat of the enemy can be seen in the Vietnam War.
North Vietnam was not a threat to the American homeland but using the "domino effect" argument, pro-war politicians implied our soldiers were "protecting the homeland", another euphemism for protecting corporate interests (right click the image below and open in new window ) :
The reason the warfare complex can get away with spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money
(every year, year in and year out, five hundred thousand million dollars times almost three times that same amount being spent every year ) is because
people find themselves in a system that they feel they can never change or people feel that we need a system that is necessary to maintain world order like in the 1999 movie "the matrix" where people are conditioned to accept the "status quo"
President Eisenhower must have felt like being in the 1999 movie "the matrix" when he helplessly stated that "we have ............a permanent armaments industry of vast proportions. Added to this, three and a half million men and women are directly engaged in the defense establishment. We annually spend on military security more than the net income of all United States corporations.
This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence -- economic, political, even spiritual -- is felt in every city, every State house, every office of the Federal government...........................we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.
Disarmament, with mutual honor and confidence, is a continuing imperative. Together we must learn how to compose differences, not with arms, but with intellect and decent purpose. Because this need is so sharp and apparent I confess that I lay down my official responsibilities in this field with a definite sense of disappointment. As one who has witnessed the horror and the lingering sadness of war -- as one who knows that another war could utterly destroy this civilization which has been so slowly and painfully built over thousands of years -- I wish I could say tonight that a lasting peace is in sight." (Source: Public Papers of the Presidents, Dwight D. Eisenhower, 1960, p. 1035- 1040.)
President Eisenhower was feeling helpless because whether he admitted it or not or whether he realized it or not, democracy has failed us even though it is a better form of government than a dictatorship.
As in the 1999 movie "the matrix", people cannot seem to think beyond living in a system called a democracy and so this blog suggests a better system that benefits the average American and not corporate interests. a form of government called an "intellectocracy".
IN PART SEVEN OF THIS SEVEN PART BLOG WE WILL DISCUSS
A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT CALLED
an " INTELLECTOCRACY "that benefits the average American and their family.
For details regarding the complete disregard by the US government in not learning from 300 years of hindsight due to the adverse influence from corporate interests,
the details/discussion of the above topic is in the second half of this page, thanks for your patience.
IF YOU HAVE ALREADY READ THE FOLLOWING, PLEASE SCROLL TO THE SECOND HALF OF THIS PAGE:
PLEASE DO READ PART SEVEN OF THIS SEVEN PART BLOG THAT WILL DISCUSS
A NEW AND MUCH BETTER FORM OF GOVERNMENT CALLED
an " INTELLECTOCRACY " under which it would have been impossible for a person like Hitler or a group like Hamas to be elected since democracy emphasizes, appeals to and encourages the most irrational fears of the electorate.
Joseph Goebbels, Reich Minister of Propaganda in Nazi Germany, knew that in a democratic election " arguments must therefore be crude, clear and forcible, and appeal to emotions and instincts, not the intellect.....Propaganda works best when those who are being manipulated are confident they are acting on their own free will " (end of quote ).
Hitler knew how easily a democracy can be hijacked ( watch at the 15:50 timeline in the documentary video below ):
Democracy has failed and the main reason is subjective thinking as fueled by politicians like Hitler and Hamas almost always overcomes objective thought :
OVERVIEW OF THE SEVEN PART BLOG:
Throughout this blog, ask yourself this question :
Did the christian children of Nagasaki ( Nagasaki was the center of Japanese Christianity ), did those children feel the same pain ( being burned alive ) as the tragic victims on 9/11/01 experienced in New York ?
Notice in the following video (below) at the 24:05 timeline that President Truman was smiling when talking about the atom bombs dropped on Japanese cities and why is he smiling ?
even though Truman was warned after the first atom bomb test, not to drop the atom bomb within 150 miles of a human being.
If you tried watching the video ( below ) in order to see Truman smiling and
you see the video labeled as "private", its because the person posting the video on youtube decided to take it out of public viewing due to possibly the public outrage in the comments section.
Terrorists and Truman have one thing in common when they smile :
political strategy is the most important thing and if they are able to achieve it, nothing else matters,
not human lives,
not the innocent being burned alive because
all terrorists see war in terms of damage caused to the enemy and not in terms of innocent lives lost, not even
if those lives are nuns and christian children who were burned alive in the center of Japanese christianity, which was Nagasaki.
Below is another video of Truman smiling ( hope the youtube poster did not label it as "private" )
Let us assume you have watched people fight over the years and what you learned is ":violence begets violence ".
So today, if the neighbor nearest to you is fighting with his neighbor, would you supply weapons to your neighbor in order to help him or
would you try to be a Peacemaker between your neighbor and his neighbor ? so likewise,
before the US government ever adopted its first militant interventionist policy towards the Middle East, was anybody in the government ever thinking about the 300 years of the "violence begets violence " hindsight gathered from
the 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans ? or
as highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket", stated (paraphrasing here ) :
the US government is blind to the consequences of a militant interventionist policy but only looks at the profit agenda of the warfare complex and any adverse consequences of looking after the interests of the warfare complex is looked upon as the "cost of doing business".
Richard Clarke ( former National Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counter-terrorism for the United States. ) inadvertently slipped up in the following video, when he used the phrase "cost of doing business" at the 39:50 timeline in the video below titled " The Man Who Knew" :
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/remembering-911-three-docs-to-watch/
President Bush on 9/11/01 stated that "Americans saw evil" but as Americans saw evil, the warfare complex only saw the attacks on 9/11/01 in terms of "dollar signs", as the American public did not question the almost 6 trillion dollars spent on the so-called "war on terror" when only a few million dollars could have been intelligently used to capture Osama Bin Laden.
Remember, just one trillion is five hundred thousand million dollars added to another five hundred thousand million dollars.
There is nothing noble about war (details below) according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket".
The government has knowledge of the following 11 points below and yet the government is not interested in being a Peacemaker but rather finds ways and means to support the government's political and financial supporters in the warfare complex :
(1) Pro-war governments know that every war produces millions of refugees since war is so imprecise and so horrific, innocent civilians flee in terror, so there is nothing noble about war because if war was truly noble, people would not be fleeing but staying and rejoicing in its nobility.
(2) 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government that war is never the answer.
300 years of hindsight should have taught the US government that "violence begets violence".
Why the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is described in the book titled, " War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler.
According to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket", the profit motive and corporate interests is more overwhelming than wanting to save the lives of our soldiers.
(3) the US government knows it takes years or even decades before a conflict becomes a war so there is time to make peace.
(4) Pro-war governments know that in every war, "friendly fire" does exist due to the imprecise nature of war and
the opposite side of that "coin " is the immense collateral damage which results in too many innocent people dying horrifying deaths or being maimed, disfigured, deformed, paralyzed or blind for life or
too many people getting diseases or cancer due to the highly unsanitary conditions and pollution created in war zones.
(5) Pro-war governments know that in every war, the weaker enemy does not have the superior weaponry or shielding of the stronger force and so the weaker enemy would hide in civilian areas and yet pro-war governments have no problem going to war and hitting targets with civilians in them but at the same time,
pro-war governments know that if their own children or loved ones are held hostage or as "human shields" by the enemy, pro-war politicians would be "tripping over each other" to make peace with the enemy, so the US government knows there are always non-militant alternatives compared to profit driven violence.
(6) Ever since the Civil War, the US government knows the emotional and psychological trauma that soldiers go through due to seeing innocent people and their own buddies being blown to pieces or laying on the ground with half their heads blown away.
Most of the patients in mental hospitals after the Civil War were veterans.
Today, hundreds of thousands of veterans are either suffering from PTSD, depression or drug addiction resulting in divorce, homelessness and even suicide.
Over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year; one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily.
(7) America's problems with defense contractors dates back to the Revolutionary War when George Washington himself blasted defense contractors for supplying defective arms and bullets to the Continental Army.
The US government knows that the best time to steal money or overspend hard earned tax dollars is during a conflict or war when
the public are more afraid of the enemy than concerned about overspending or looting by the warfare complex and more recently,
the Pentagon has not passed a financial audit since the Defense Department was created in 1949 and
since 1995 when audits were mandated, at least 8.5 trillion dollars spent by the Pentagon is either missing, wasted or stolen.
(8) Italian political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli states that " War against an external foe is a most excellent means of distracting people from grievances (problems) at home" (end of quote )
meaning,
for example, even though over a million Americans die from cancer alone, every two years, the government only funds $1 of every $6 of NIH peer reviewed medical research funding request and why ?
because the government does not have the resources for medical research since
the government spends between $1.1 and $1.4 trillion every year (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus the interest on the debt from past unnecessary wars ) on maintaining a unnecessary, profit driven world wide militant enterprise system which results in
sucking as much taxes as possible from hardworking Americans who are too afraid to question the government's corporate welfare to the warfare complex due to the exaggerated fear of the enemy created by puppet politicians of the warfare complex.
(9) Pro-war governments know exactly what they are doing when they drop leaflets on an enemy city, asking the civilians to leave because it gives the impression that pro-war governments care about the civilians in an enemy city.
The pretense of caring about citizens can be seen in all pro-war governments but in reality
they do not care about civilians who are either
too poor,
too sick,
too elderly or
too handicapped to leave a city and
those poor citizens who are unable to leave are burned alive in a terror bomb attack
( example : the terror bomb attack on the center of Japanese christianity which was Nagasaki in which nuns and christian children and babies were burned alive ).
(10) The government knows that atrocities are committed by both sides in every war since
the very nature of war makes humans into being less than human as the basest instincts take over the mind due to the very inhumanity of war
(example : the US government purposely targeted Japanese transport ships knowing that tens of thousands of American POWs were within those ships, resulting in tens of thousands of Americans dying horrifying deaths, being drowned alive ).
Historian Niall Ferguson states that terrorism increases, the longer the war takes as soldiers increasingly become more brutal on the enemy in a seemingly endless cycle of violence.
(11) Extremism is the result of war, examples :
WW1 produced Hitler and Islamic extremism,
WW2 produced the communist death culture,
WW2 produced right wing death culture dictatorships,
Vietnam war produced Pol Pot,
Korean war produced the Kim Jong death culture,
Iraq war produced ISIS etc
People are right when talking about hindsight that is, if the US government did not learn from 300 years of hindsight.
300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government that war is never the answer.
300 years of hindsight should have taught the US government that "violence begets violence".
Why the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is described in the book titled, " War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler.
According to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Butler in his book titled "War Is A Racket", the profit motive and corporate interests is more overwhelming than wanting to save the lives of our soldiers,
as pro-war politicians send our vulnerable soldiers deliberately into harm's way, resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year; one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily.
While our veterans are committing suicide by the thousands every year, the favorite phrase of defense contractors is "peace through strength" but
defense contractors and their puppet politicians will never tell you that strength has never brought peace but rather
war after endless wars due to "violence begets violence".
We know for a fact that if the loved ones of pro-war politicians are held hostage by the enemy, there would not exist any war since
the pro-war politicians will be "tripping over one another" to make peace with the enemy, in other words, whatever it takes to save the lives of their loved ones, but sadly,
since the loved ones of pro-war politicians are not held hostage by the enemy, we see the tragic consequence of the history of warfare where the profit motive takes over as described in the book titled "War Is A Racket" written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler and saving lives is a secondary priority among pro-war politicians.
You might believe that the US government only does good and you might be right if the "good" the US government does is in line with corporate interests, meaning,
if the corporations want you to have clean water and clean food then you will have clean water and clean food but it all boils down to corporate interests as the main priority of pro-war politicians.
But when corporate interests dictate that your water should be allowed to have mercury due to coal and oil fired plants and that you are not able to eat fish poisoned by mercury, the good the US government does is by advising you to limit your fish consumption but
the government will not switch to clean energy due to corporate interests which is right now very much against a clean environment even though its economical to be a clean energy economy that creates millions of permanent clean energy jobs (details in part seven of this seven part blog ).
Now, back to the pro-war faction of the government that will inevitably lead to the bankruptcy of our government.
The reason that American history is full of blowback and the resulting tragedy that results in civilians dying is because
the US government is either not able to or does not want to see that "violence begets violence" due to
the US government being blinded by the profit motive described in the book titled "War Is A Racket" written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler and
the most recent result of blowback were the attacks on 9/11/01.
300 years of hindsight ( learned from the cycle of violence between the British/US government and the Native Americans ) should have taught the US government not to use militant interventionist policies due to the profit motive as described by General Butler above.
For example in Asia, the US government's profit driven militant interventionism against Japan (details below ) resulted in the removal of Japan as a regional power which in turn created the dangerous conditions under which nearly a 100 million civilians died under communism and nationalism.
Truman was advised to not drop the atom bomb within 150 miles of a human being, so Truman knew that nuns, little kids, babies, the poor, the handicapped, the blind, the paralyzed and the elderly lived within 150 miles of the bomb and yet ( against the objections of numerous scientists ) atom bombs were dropped on both Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
If you believe its ok to drop an atomic bomb right above a church in Nagasaki ( Nagasaki was the center of Japanese christianity ) burning alive the nuns in the church and thousands of christian children nearby and
if you believe that its ok to drop an atom bomb, resulting in tens of thousands little kids and babies being burned alive ( not counting the tens of thousands of little kids and babies burned alive with incendiary bombs in scores of Japanese cities ),
because the Emperor wanted to only conditionally surrender since he did not want his homeland occupied by the US government, then
you also must believe that if a relative of yours does an atrocious act and does not want to surrender his home to the authorities, the victim's family has the right to burn alive your entire family for the evil done by your relative.
Throughout this seven part blog, you will see that pro-war politicians will try to convince you that it is ok to sacrifice the lives of the innocent ( example: burning alive tens of thousands of little kids in Japan ) for the greater good and
according to the book titled "War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, the so-called "greater good" is all about corporate interests and the profit motive behind every war or conflict.
The US government spends about $30 million a year on researching food poisoning, even though 3000 Americans die every year from food poisoning but at the same time,
the US government (due to the undue influence from the profit minded warfare complex on their puppet politicians in Congress ), the US government is willing to spend trillions on the so-called "war on terror" since 2001 even though
the total number of American civilians who died in the "war on terror" in the past 14 years is less than 4000 ( average of about 285 American civilians per year ).
Also, throughout this seven part blog, you will realize that the US government should never have a militant interventionist policy in the world which almost always results in blowback (example: in Asia, nearly a 100 million civilians died under communism and nationalism due to the US government's militant interventionist policies which directly resulted in extremism thriving ).
Keep reminding yourself throughout this seven part blog, the following:
Over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year on average ( almost one tragic suicide every hour and on average 22 tragic suicides daily )
because war is about our vulnerable soldiers seeing the immense suffering of the innocent,
seeing the innocent being maimed or
deformed or
blinded or
disfigured or
paralyzed and being fed through a tube for life,
due to collateral damage,
seeing the horror of war, our vulnerable soldiers end up devastating their families by committing suicide by the thousands,
while the Swiss live in peace without enemies due to the Swiss non-militant interventionist policies.
Pro-war politicians are willing to collaterally kill as many innocent people as it takes for the so-called "greater good" which is detailed in the book written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler .
The title of the book is "War Is A Racket" in which General Butler says war is all about profits, which to the defense contractors is the so-called "greater good".
As stated by Italian political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli : " War against an external foe is a most excellent means of distracting people from grievances at home" (end of quote )
and at the same time,
US defense contractors and their puppet politicians constantly exaggerate the threat of the enemy, so that
the American public are too afraid to notice
hundreds of billions being borrowed every year from places like China which will inevitably lead to financial disaster for America.
US Generals do not object because
they have perks like the use of 234 US military golf courses around the world,
US armed forces ski center in the Bavarian Alps and
71 luxury Lear jets to whisk them around the world and
when Generals retire, they are rewarded for their silence by
being given seats on the executive boards of defense sector companies.
US defense contractors get a big slice of the 1.1-1.4 trillion dollars spent on so-called defense every year (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus the interest on the debt from past unnecessary wars ).
The US government spends more on defense than all the world's defense budgets put together.
By borrowing hundreds of billions a year in order to maintain the US government's worldwide military empire, the inevitable bankruptcy of the US government will happen when
the annual interest on the national debt exceeds a trillion dollars a year .
WHEN THE INEVITABLE BANKRUPTCY HAPPENS,
the best we can hope for is the Union remains intact and powers go back to the states as it was before the Civil War while
there will be drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental safety and
tens of millions of Americans will have their net worth drastically reduced due to the US government defaulting on its US bond debt obligations.
To prevent the bankruptcy of our government, the financial disaster to US bond holding Americans, drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental safety and
for a comprehensive peace agreement with the muslim world that defense contractors will not be happy with and
that is different from the peace agreement made between President Reagan and the Islamists in Soviet Afghanistan,
read all seven parts of this blog.
The blog will also show that war results in terrorism and here is one of numerous examples :
The U.S. Staff Sgt. Robert Bales who murdered 16 Afghan villagers in 2012 says he had lost compassion for Iraqis and Afghans over the course of his four combat deployments.
"My mind was consumed by war," Bales wrote late last year.
"I planted war and hate for the better part of 10 years and harvested violence," he added.
Out of war emerge mass murderers like Hitler who was the product of WW1 ( details below ).
Also, war is about sacrificing the lives of the innocent,
the destitute,
the poor,
the sick,
the hungry,
the elderly,
the handicapped,
the children and
the babies through
collateral damage for the so-called "greater good" which always involves
not national security but rather
financial security for the owners of the warfare complex who "laugh all the way to the bank" as stated by
highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler in his book titled " War Is a Racket" and
while the puppet politicians of the warfare complex send the poor and powerless deliberately into harm's way.
FOR NON-MILITANT INTERVENTIONIST POLICIES AS A MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO PROFIT DRIVEN WARS OR CONFLICTS, READ ALL SEVEN PARTS OF THE BLOG .
The reason our economy is struggling is because up to 1400 billion is being sucked away every year from the economy and given to those who do not create economically profitable ventures but rather create
more corporate welfare as they "laugh all the way to the bank" while trying to convince you that you need the "insurance" against the "boogeyman" .
This "boogeyman" scare enables government supporters in the corporate welfare system to get away with not accounting for 8.5 trillion dollars of hard earned taxpayers money that has either been wasted, stolen or missing.
Do we really need to spend up to 1.4 trillion every year ( hundreds of billions of which are being borrowed from places like China) as insurance against this "boogeyman" ?
Read all Seven Parts of this Seven Part Blog and you will realize that 100 billion a year is more than enough to insure against the "boogeyman".
Remember, 100% of your income taxes and almost half of US government revenues is going towards insuring against the "boogeyman" which means,
maintaining the US government's world wide military empire that cannot be sustained.
National security spending consists of the base DOD budget plus
nuclear weapons research, maintenance, cleanup, and production, which is in the Department of Energy budget, plus Veterans Affairs, plus the Treasury Department's payments in pensions to military retirees and widows and their families, plus State Department financing of foreign arms sales and militarily-related development assistance, plus the national security budget within the Department of Homeland Security, plus counter-terrorism spending by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, plus intelligence-gathering spending by NASA plus interest on the debt due to past unnecessary wars.
In 2012 the government took in about 2.45 trillion in revenues ( while the lowest estimate for national security spending was 1.1 trillion (about 45% of revenues ).
IF THE US GOVERNMENT DOES NOT GIVE UP ITS WORLD WIDE MILITARY EMPIRE,
the inevitable bankruptcy of the US government will come a lot sooner when the interest payment on the national debt exceeds a trillion dollars a year since
the present spending on the US government's military empire is as much as 1400 billion a year (base DOD budget plus other national security programs plus interest on the debt due to past unnecessary wars).
Remember, the US government's national security budget takes up 100% of your income taxes and as much as 50% of revenues taken in by the government and that cannot be sustained.
WHEN THE INEVITABLE BANKRUPTCY HAPPENS,
the best we can hope for is the Union remains intact and powers go back to the states as it was before the Civil War while
tens of millions of Americans will have their net worth drastically reduced due to the US government defaulting on its US bond debt obligations
and for the average American, there will be drastic cuts in essential government services like food/water/environmental/infrastructure safety.
If the US government gives up its world wide military empire, we would save hundreds of billions a year in giving up the US government's military overseas which would result in
the world going back to the "Napoleonic Era" when countries paid for their own defense instead of relying on the US government to pay for their defense and
in paying for their own defense, they were able to defeat Napoleon with no help from the US government.
Below is one of numerous examples that the puppet politicians of the profit agenda of the warfare complex pose a very grave danger to the well-being of people around the world and
the well-being of the poor and powerless in America who are sent deliberately into harm's way, not for national security but rather the financial security of the owners of the warfare complex:
The US government did not learn the lesson of 300 years of violence begetting violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans and because of not wanting to learn that violence begets violence ( due to the underlying profit motive behind every act of war according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler) the US government got militantly involved in WW1 which in turn beget WW2.
300 years of the cycle of violence (violence begetting violence) between the British/US Governments and the Native Americans should have taught the US government to be a Peacemaker between the British and the German government during WW1 instead of
the US government supporting the blockade of Germany that was starving the Germans and instead of the US government supplying weapons to the allies that were contributing to the deaths of Germans and that is how the German government declared US shipping as hostile to Germany.
Hindsight from 1776 ( details below ) should have taught the US government not to get involved in WW1 but instead of learning from hindsight,
the US government created the dangerous conditions under which Nazism and Communism flourished in Europe after WW1 that eventually led to WW2 and the holocaust (details below).
The US government did the equivalent of letting two killers loose ( Hitler and Stalin) and then blamed the killers for the subsequent killings without taking any responsibility for letting those killers loose in the first place ( details below ).
300 years of "violence begetting violence" hindsight should have taught the US government not to have a militant interventionist policy during WW1, the violence of which beget WW2 and the holocaust. ( details below ).
Starting in 1914, the British attempted to starve the German people by blockading Germany. ( An academic study done in 1928 put the starvation death toll at 424,000 ).
President Wilson rejected the German arguments that the British blockade was illegal, and was a cruel and deadly attack on innocent civilians.
Later during WW1, the British ran out of money and had to rely on the US government to finish WW1 and
in finishing WW1,
the US government did not heed to the "violence begets violence" hindsight gained from 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans.
Why the US government does not learn from 300 years of hindsight is detailed below.
Secretary of State William Jennings Bryan advised President Wilson that " (U.S.) ships carrying contraband (weapons) should be prohibited from carrying passengers ... [I]t would be like putting women and children in front of an army" (end of quote ).
US Secretary of State Bryan later resigned because he felt the Wilson administration was being biased in ignoring British contraventions of international law, and that President Wilson was leading the USA into the war.
While leading the US into war, President Wilson demanded that German submarines not sink ships ( with weapons shipment on board ) until the ships had been boarded and searched, even though any surfacing submarines were at a great risk of being easily sunk by an armed ship.
According to historian Thomas Fleming, in his book "The Illusion of Victory: America in World War I" Fleming states :
"Without the backing of American weaponry, munitions and loans, the Allies would have been forced to abandon their goal of the knockout blow.
The war might have ended in 1915 or 1916 with a negotiated peace based on the mutual admission that the conflict had become a stalemate" (end of quote).
Historian Niall Ferguson goes further to state that Germany would have won WW1 if Britain had not entered the war :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT81WwCix4M
In other words, the Treaty of Versailles would not have existed if Germany had won and
the only way Germany could have won is if the US government did not have a militant policy during WW1, that resulted in
the US government arming the allies which made Germany an enemy when
the US government refused to stop arming the allies which was contributing to the deaths of Germans and
President Wilson rejected the German government's appeal that the British blockade was a cruel and deadly attack in starving the German civilians.
During WW1, through the treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Germany was keeping Russia from becoming a world communist power but
the defeat of Germany at the hands of the US government enabled Russia to break the treaty and then
Russia went onto become a world communist power resulting in tens of millions dying under communism.
In other words, WW1 (which the US government helped to finish ),
WW1 beget
WW2, the Zionist-Palestinian conflict, communist expansion and
WW2 beget the Cold War and
behind all the above wars and conflicts was the militant interventionist policies of the US government that beget war after war (except for WW1 ) and conflict after conflict (except for WW1) including the recent "war on terrorism".
The US government was very much involved in WW1 from the very beginning, starting with
American banks wanting to profit from the war by loaning money to the Allies when the US government already knew from their 1776 hindsight that violence begets more violence
( example: 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and Native Americans from 1622 through 1911 ).
300 years of violence begetting violence.
General Butler (below) explains why the US government does not learn from 300 years of hindsight.
Highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler states in his book titled " War is a Racket", that WW1 was all about the profit agenda of the warfare complex and their puppet politicians in the US government.
Pro-war politicians who are puppets of the warfare complex deliberately send our soldiers into harm's way resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year ( one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily ).
Instead of making the profit agenda of the rich and powerful as their priority, hindsight should have taught the US government that a militant interventionist policy is not the answer to solving problems.
Militant interventionist policies by the British resulted in hundreds of years of terrorism from Native Americans and drawing from that experience (hindsight),
the US government should not have had a militant interventionist policy during WW1 which resulted in
the destruction of the Ottoman Empire and the subsequent Zionist-Palestinian conflict,
communists extending their power to become a world power and
WW2 and the terrorism from Hitler since Hitler blamed the Jews for the defeat of Germany during WW1.
"The core of Hitler's hatred of the Jews lies at the defeat of Germany in WW1," said historian and journalist Dr Joachim Riecker, "where Hitler blamed the Jews for the defeat of Germany, the collapse of the monarchy and the ruination of millions".
In the book titled 'November 9: How World War One Led to the Holocaust', the historian Dr Joachim Riecker examines the speeches both public and private of Hitler to try to solve the riddle of how a dictator could morph into the industrial-scale murderer of an entire people.
The entire discussion below will show that the violence of war is not the answer to the profit driven motives of the short sighted, militant US government because
war begets war and in the case of the US government winning WW1, the consequence of that victory in turn beget WW2 and the resulting tragedy of the holocaust.
For non-interventionist policies as a much better alternative to a profit driven war, read the end of this post for the link to non-interventionist policies.
According to a comrade, Hans Mend, Hitler was in depression during WW1 and would leap up, and running about excitedly, say that "in spite of our big guns, victory would be denied us, for the invisible foes (Jews) of the German people were a greater danger than the biggest cannon of the enemy" (end of quote ).
WW1 put Hitler in the hospital due to a bomb shrapnel and Hitler recalled in 1941 how WW1 made him enter politics as he wrote ""I brought back home with me my experiences at the (WW1) front; out of them I built my National Socialist community."
After hearing about Germany's defeat in WW1 at the hands of the US government and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles, Hitler said,
"When I was confined to bed, the idea came to me that I would liberate Germany, that I would make it great. I knew immediately that it would be realized" (end of quote ).
Hitler gained popularity for his rowdy polemic speeches against the Treaty of Versailles.
In a speech to the Reichstag on 17 May 1933, Adolf Hitler denounced the Treaty of Versailles because, in part, it had imposed such large reparations payments as to leave Germany in economic shambles.
Hitler entered politics in order to exploit the cruel attributes of the Treaty of Versailles to his advantage while, Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany's defeat during WW1.
The holocaust happened due to WW2 and
WW2 happened due to Britain declaring war on Germany and
the declaration of war on Germany was due to Germany's invasion of Poland and
Germany's invasion of Poland was due to Hitler wanting to prevent the persecution of German Poles at the hands of the Poles.
Hitler warned the allies that if another war was declared on Germany, the Jews would pay (since Hitler blamed the Jews for Germany's defeat during WW1 )
and that is how the holocaust happened due to Britain declaring war on Germany and
if Britain had not declared war on Germany there would not have been a holocaust and
Hitler would have continued with The Haavara Agreement that was designed to help facilitate the emigration of German Jews to Palestine.
How did the US government defeat Germany during WW1 ?
Since Britain ran out of money,
the U.S. government extended cash and supplies to its European allies, expending more than $7 billion in US government funds,
way before the entry of the US government into WW1 while
supporting the blockade of Germany by the Allies that was starving the German people.
Before the US government appeared on the scene, the Allies were in a stalemate (trench warfare ) with Germany even though
the US government was supplying military equipment to the Allies and Germany was fighting a two front war with Russia and the Allies and
even then,
Germany was still able to defeat Russia during WW1 which resulted in the treaty of Brest-Litovsk and
the Treaty had the effect of preventing communism from becoming a world power until
the US government made the Treaty void, enabling Russia to become a world communist power.
Historian Niall Ferguson in the youtube video interview below states that we would not have heard about Hitler if Germany had won WW1:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT81WwCix4M
We would not have heard about Hitler if the US government did not have a militant interventionist policy during WW1 which resulted in
Germany losing to the US government's million man military and
the subsequent Treaty of Versailles which created the dangerous conditions under which Hitler rose to power.
Should the US government be held responsible for Hitler's rise to power ?
Would you blame the person for letting a tiger out of its cage, so similarly,
the US government helped Hitler and Stalin by creating the dangerous conditions for Nazism and Communism to flourish as the result of
the US government's one million man personnel defeating Germany during WW1.
If Germany had won WW1, the following would have happened:
(1) Germany restraining Russia (through the treaty of Brest-Litovsk) from becoming a world communist power.
(2) Hitler stating his injuries that landed him in hospital during WW1 was worth it.
(3) No Treaty of Versailles.
(4) Hitler not hating the Treaty of Versailles because the Treaty would not have existed.
(5) Hitler not hating his own government because he would have thought of his government as honorable for winning WW1.
(6) Hitler not hating the Jews for Germany losing WW1 if Germany had actually won WW1.
In other words, if Germany was triumphant after WW1, Hitler would not have had the motivation to enter politics and
even if Hitler did enter politics in the midst of a triumphant Germany,
winning WW1 would have put Germany in a much better political position to deal with Hitler while
Hitler who tried to overthrow the German government for losing WW1 would not have had the motivation to overthrow the German government if
the German government had actually won WW1.
At the same time, even if Hitler did gain power in a triumphant Germany that won WW1, Hitler would have continued the policies of previous governments in Europe in treating Jews as second class citizens and
no holocaust or the expulsion of Jews would have happened.
SO THE ONLY CONCLUSION ONE CAN DRAW IS:
The US government did not learn from 300 years of hindsight gathered from the cycle of violence between the British/US government and the Native Americans and in not learning from hindsight, due to the profit motive,
the US government's short sighted, profit driven militant interventionist policies during WW1 created the dangerous conditions under which
Nazism and Communism flourished in Europe after WW1 that eventually led to WW2 and the holocaust.
In the book titled "War Is A Racket", written by highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, we can come to the conclusion that the reason the US government does not learn from the "violence begets violence" hindsight is due to the profit motive that is behind every war.
For example, the US government knew that violence begets violence ( due to hindsight gathered from the 300 years of the cycle of violence between the British/US governments and the Native Americans )
and yet due to the profit motive,
the US government was not interested in a conditional surrender of Japan during WW2 but rather
more interested in removing Japan as a regional power which in turn created
dangerous conditions under which almost a hundred million civilians died in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia under Communism and Nationalism.
Also, at various times in the past, the power hungry and profit motivated US government supplied military equipment to right-wing dictators who murdered dissidents (here is a partial list ):
General Maximilio Hernández- 1932 of El Salvador,
Saddam Hussein during the 80s,
General Sani Abacha of Nigeria,
Idi Amin of Uganda,
Colonel Hugo Banzer of Bolivia,
Fulgencio Batista of Cuba,
Sir Hassanal Bolkiah of Brunei,
P.W. Botha of South Africa,
General Humberto Branco of Brazil,
Raoul Cedras of Haiti,
Vinicio Cerezo of Guatemala,
Chiang Kai-Shek of Taiwan,
Roberto Suazo Cordova of Honduras,
Alfredo Christiani of El Salvador,
Ngo Dihn Diem of Vietnam,
General Samuel Doe of Liberia,
Francois Duvalier of Haiti,
Jean Claude Duvalier of Haiti,
King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz of Saudi Arabia,
General Francisco Franco of Spain,
Hassan II of Morocco,
Ferdinand Marcos of the Philippines,
General Maximiliano Hernandez Martinez of El Salvador,
Mobutu Sese Seko of Zaire,
General Manuel Noriega of Panama,
Turgut Ozal of Turkey,
Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi of Iran,
George Papadopoulos of Greece,
Park Chung Hee of South Korea,
General Augusto Pinochet of Chile,
General Sitiveni Rabuka of Fiji,
General Efrain Rios Montt of Guatemala,
Halie Salassie of Ethiopia,
Antonio De Oliveira Salazar of Portugal,
Anastasio Somoza Jr. of Nicaragua,
Anastasio Somoza Sr. of Nicaragua,
Ian Smith of Rhodesia,
Alfredo Stroessner of Paraguay,
General Suharto of Indonesia,
Rafael Leonidas Trujillo of Dominican Republic,
General Jorge Rafael Videla of Argentina,
Mohammed Zia Ul-Haq of Pakistan.
Ever since the US government decided to cruelly expand from the original 13 United States, the world has suffered.
The US government at one time believed that one way to make a profit was to enslave others (example: Africans ) or
take lands from others ( example: Native American lands ) or
cruelly occupy far away lands ( example : the extreme cruelty visited upon the Filipinos ) and in more recent times,
the US government required unconditional surrender and required the occupation of Japan and if that could not be obtained,
the US government was willing to use as many atomic and incendiary bombs as possible, resulting in hundreds of thousands of little kids being burned alive, even though:
(1) In the past, Japan never once interfered with the US government's extremely cruel occupation of the Philippines plus
the Japanese government never once encouraged world powers to stop the US government from cruelly expanding from the original 13 United States throughout North America, the Caribbean and the Pacific.
(2) At the start of the Japanese-Chinese conflict, the US government was not willing to be a Peacemaker between the two parties in conflict.
(3) the US government was the one who started the conflict with Japan when the US government contributed to the shedding of Japanese blood in the late 1930s by supplying weapons to the Chinese military in the Chinese-Japanese conflict.
(4) Japanese expansion beyond China/Korea was in direct response to the shedding of Japanese blood by the allied military supplies to the Chinese during the late 1930s, so
the Japanese government wanted to expand into Indo-China and beyond in order to cut off allied military supplies to the Chinese and to obtain vital resources due to embargoes imposed by the allies.
(5) Japan recognized the US government coveting Hawaii as a state of the US and not as a colonial possession and so Japan had no intention of occupying Hawaii, unlike the US government that wanted to occupy Japan.
(6) Western colonial possessions ( in South East Asia ) were coveted by the Japanese government in order to serve as bargaining chips in a future negotiated peace deal with the Allies.
(7) the US government could have settled for a cease fire since the Japanese government was already defeated as early as 1942 when the Japanese government was not able to take back territory lost to the US.
Since the US government was not interested in a cease fire but only interested in an unconditional surrender and the occupation of Japan, the Japanese government felt compelled to keep fighting to prevent the occupation of their homeland.
(8) removing Japan as a regional power created the dangerous conditions under which almost a hundred million civilians died in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia under communism and nationalism.
(9) the Emperor was the one who authorized Japanese imperialism and after the end of WW2, the US government did not indict the Emperor for authorizing Japanese imperialism
but at the same time,
the US government was willing to burn alive hundreds of thousands of little kids during the war, for the wrongs done by the Emperor and his staff.
FOR NON-MILITANT INTERVENTIONIST POLICIES AS A MUCH BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO PROFIT DRIVEN WARS OR CONFLICT,
READ PART SIX OF THE BLOG .
The Pentagon will try to convince you that national security is their priority and the financial security of defense contractors is not but the evidence proves otherwise.
The Pentagon has not passed a financial audit since the Defense Department was created in 1949 and
since 1995 when audits were mandated, at least 8.5 trillion dollars spent by the Pentagon is either missing, wasted or stolen because
according to highly decorated US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler, in his book titled "War is a Racket", General Butler describes all wars and conflicts as
corporate welfare to the warfare complex.
CONTRARY TO WHAT THE PENTAGON AND THE PUPPET POLITICIANS OF THE WARFARE COMPLEX ARE TRYING TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE,
CONSIDER THE FOLLOWING:
(1) Having a military empire is extremely costly because the warfare complex is always wanting a much bigger share of the economy than is necessary.
Example:
In 2011, it only cost millions to initiate peace talks with the Taliban and raid Bin Laden's compound and the co-option of Saddam Hussein during the 80s by President Reagan was comparatively inexpensive and yet
due to the undue political influence of the warfare complex, the so-called war on terror in Afghanistan and Iraq ended up costing as much as $6 trillion, the equivalent of $75,000 for every American household (calculations done by the prestigious Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government).
Another example:
The Cold War was another unnecessary war in which it would have only cost billions if the leaders in the Soviet Empire were co-opted, similar to the co-option of Stalin during the 40s but
the Cold War and its aftermath ended up costing hard working American taxpayers $8.75 trillion in present day terms on nuclear weapons programs between 1940 and 1996, according to an audit done by the Brookings Institution.
(2) While enriching the US warfare complex, why should US tax dollars go towards protecting the world, so that certain countries ( example: Switzerland ) can have a higher per capita income than the US ?
(3) A military empire can't help but be coercive or threatening by nature and at the same time, the US government should learn from the mistakes of the British empire and the Soviet empire that maintaining an empire is extremely costly in terms of blood and treasure and
those who feel "occupied" by military powers tend to rebel as seen by the British being driven out of North America and
US government troops leaving Saudi Arabia in 2003 due to the terrorist attacks on 9/11/01.
The link below shows how the US government can police the world without using the military which will only cost about 50 billion a year instead of
the lowest estimate of 1.1 trillion dollars a year the US government now spends on maintaining its unsustainable military empire.
(4) US government has in the past co-opted dictators ( example: Stalin in the 40s and Saddam in the 80s ) which enabled the US to do business with Stalin and Saddam plus
by being non-confrontational, the US government can have peace with all its enemies, similar to the peace that exists between China and North Korea.
Normalizing relations with the enemy ( example: Iran, North Korea etc ) will result in restoring full trade relations.
Psychology Professor Steven Pinker of Harvard University agrees with Dr Ron Paul who says that
friendly trade with the “enemy” will reap beneficial results since
the “enemy” has a vested interest in your success when you trade with him.
(5) Whether the US government has a military empire or not, American goods and services will always be in demand all over the world, similar to Swiss goods and services being in high demand throughout the world, even though the Swiss do not have a military empire.
(6) In fact, the demand for American goods and services will increase due to the fact that when the US government gives up its worldwide military empire, the friendship towards America (from non-allies) would increase dramatically.
(7) Countries have to pay for their own security which in turn will keep American goods and services competitive since countries cannot subsidize the private enterprise if they have to foot the entire security bill
(8) By saving hundreds of billions of dollars in giving up the US government's military empire, the US government can in turn concentrate on making sure our infrastructure is the best in the world, resulting in no traffic jams, blackouts, slow internet speeds etc.,
and in having the best infrastructure in the world, American goods and services can use the infrastructure facilities to further reduce the cost of goods and services produced.
(9) If the world community, local law enforcement and corporations through private security are not able to keep sea lanes free of piracy, its a lot cheaper raising the price of goods and services ( example : due to the cost of insurance or shoplifting ) than spending up to 1400 billion a year on an unnecessary world wide military empire.
(10) Corporations should realize that the US government cannot bail them out militarily if corporate assets in a particular country are taxed more heavily or nationalized and so
just as any smart portfolio manager diversifies his portfolio, corporations should not put "all their eggs in one basket" but rather diversify throughout the world, just in case their assets are confiscated in any one country.
FOR A MORE DETAILED DISCUSSION ON :
(1) how to delay the coming bankruptcy or even prevent the bankruptcy ( read Part Seven of this Seven Part Blog )
(2) how to stop people like Hitler (read Part Five of this Seven Part Blog ),
(3) dealing with human rights issues ( read Part Six of this Seven Part Blog ),
(4) terrorism (read Part One of this Seven Part Blog ) and
(5) how to police the world without using the military (read Part Six of this Seven Part Blog )
which will cost only about $50 billion a year plus another $50 billion to defend the homeland for a total national security yearly bill of $100 billion.
SECOND HALF OF THE PAGE :
THE LATEST (past 7 updates ) INFORMATION HAS BEEN ADDED TO :
PART(S) :
1 on 7/13/13
1 on 7/18/13
1 on 7/27/13
1 on 8/4/13
1 on 8/7/13
1 and 6 on 12/4/13
1 on 12/9/13
1 on 2/2/15
PART ONE: 9/11/01 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED
The following unedited 7 part community blog is being updated on a regular basis by
several contributors using the same password,
so forgive us if some material is repeated, thanks.
To watch the youtube links,
change the resolution/quality of the screen by
clicking on the icon that looks like a "toothed wheel" at the bottom of the screen
and choose 480p in order to see clearly the text that has been videotaped
and then click on the "full screen" icon at the bottom right of the screen
and then at any time you can click on any part of the full screen to pause the video as the video scrolls down the webpage video shot
PLEASE CHECK BACK ON A MONTHLY BASIS FOR
NEW INFORMATION ADDED TO
THE 7 PART COMMUNITY BLOG.
If citation links do not open in a new window,
just open a new window
and copy and paste the links as needed.
If any citation links are outdated or do not work,
please let us know along with your feedback to:
worldpeacethruworlddisarmament@gmail.com
When citations do not immediately appear after an important fact,
those important links will appear in other parts of the blog so please be patient
and read the entire 7 part blog.
Its vitally important that you critique our blog,
since it will help us improve our blog.
THERE ARE SEVEN PARTS TO THIS COMMUNITY BLOG :
PART ONE :
THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED
PART TWO :
A SHORT HISTORY OF TERRORISM
PART THREE :
WHAT IS WAR ALL ABOUT ?
PART FOUR :
PART FIVE:
PART SIX:
IS THE US GOVERNMENT'S MILITARY EMPIRE NECESSARY ?
PART SEVEN:
THE FUTURE OF THE US GOVERNMENT
Part Seven introduces readers to a new type of government called an "intellectocracy".
PROLOGUE TO PART ONE :
THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED
Before we get to the summary and the elaboration of Part One ,
we want to emphasize that we do want the US government to be involved in the world but
not through its worldwide military empire ( in other words being a non-military interventionist power ) because
the US government becoming militarily involved in the world created the dangerous conditions under which Nazism rose to power and led to WW2
and the US government becoming militarily involved in the world created the dangerous conditions under which Communism rose to power and led to the bloody and extremely expensive 5.5 trillion dollar Cold War.
The US government being militarily involved in the world can be compared to how the British became militarily involved in colonial America
and British militarism is what made the American colonists turn against the British
especially when the British turned to harsh measures, through the military, to put down the American rebellion in the 1700s.
For details on how the US government's militarism created the conditions under which
Nazism
and Communism flourished,
please read Part Five of this community blog which will show that
a militarily weak US government would be a blessing to the world,
since a militarily weak US government would have resulted in Nazism and Communism being defeated,
so please do read Part Five of this community blog to see why a militarily weak US government would have been a blessing to the world, resulting in the defeat of Nazism and Communism.
In other words, Part Five of this community blog will show that,
if the US government had the non-military interventionist policies of Switzerland,
WW2,
the attacks on Pearl Harbor,
the Israeli-Palestinian crisis,
the bloody and extremely expensive 5.5 trillion dollar Cold War
and the attacks on 9/11/01
would not have happened, if the US government was militarily weak and a non-military interventionist power.
We are not talking about adopting all of Switzerland's policies,
just the Swiss policies that are non-military interventionist in nature that
do not create the dangerous conditions that resulted in attacks against the US ( example: the attacks on 9/11/01)
Part Four will show you how corrupt the US government is,
and an example of that corruption :
the US government had no problems dropping an atom bomb over a church in Nagasaki resulting in nuns being burned alive in Nagasaki ( the center of Christianity in Japan ) but
at the same time, the US government pardoned the Emperor of Japan who authorized the atrocities committed by the Japanese military.
Right now, the US government is spending up to 1.4 trillion dollars a year on a totally unnecessary military empire that we cannot afford,
as the interest on the debt will eventually be over a trillion dollars a year.
Its only a matter of time before the US government will be forced to declare bankruptcy, probably in the next 10-20 years.
When the annual interest rate on the debt exceeds a trillion dollars, it will be a matter of years before the US government declares bankruptcy.
When the bankruptcy happens,
the health standards of Americans will be dramatically reduced
( example : the US government would not be able to pay Medicare )
and the living standards of Americans will be dramatically reduced
( example: Retirees who hold government bonds will only get paid "cents on the dollar" ).
After the bankruptcy, the best we can hope for is
the Union stays intact and the Federal government is as weak as when the Continental Congress was first formed.
To avoid the bankruptcy, the US government can easily maintain its defenses with a yearly 100 billion dollar defense budget
and still be able to "police" the world through non-military means.
Please read Part Six on inexpensive, non-military solutions to maintaining world peace,
and in maintaining world peace through non-military means,
our soldiers,
their children
and children in war zones will be thankful since
right now,
a new study finds that half a million young children of parents on active duty are facing serious risks to their mental development:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/23/child-trends-study-children-in-military-families_n_3635441.html
and while soldiers’ children are suffering emotionally and mentally,
our soldiers end up committing suicide when the war is over as up to
22 veterans a day commit suicide
and over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to the horrors they experience during war:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite
A 2009 U.S. Army report indicates military veterans have double the suicide rate of non-veterans:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States
If veterans have double the rate of suicide as non-veterans,
one can imagine the dramatic increase in the rate of suicides among combat veterans compared to non-combat veterans.
What WW2 taught the elite 15% of the rich and powerful among Americans is
that they could actually financially profit by reminding Americans of the danger of another world war or
in contemporary language, the never ending war on terror,
and those 15% of elite Americans are doing everything within their power to financially support politicians who are willing to
keep draining the treasury of trillions of hard earned tax dollars on behalf of the warfare complex and corporations,
even though the rich and powerful know that
every war results in thousands of veterans committing suicide due to the horrors of war
and today, 22 veterans commit suicide every single day, which is over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year
and yet the rich and powerful are not willing to push their politician friends to make peace with the enemy
because profiting from conflict is more important to the rich and powerful than the lives of our vulnerable soldiers.
So remember, whenever pro-war, pro-conflict politicians talk about national interests,
its almost always a euphemism for economic interests.
"Peace through strength" has never worked since
strength has only resulted in more conflict and more budget busting wars in which
innocent lives are always sacrificed for the greater good which almost always involves
furthering the profit agenda of those who profit from war.
From the History Channel’s “Civil War Journals” :
There is very little honor in war as was seen during the Civil War when
25% of union soldiers were ravaged by sexually transmitted diseases while
the US government legalized prostitution due to the demand by soldiers during the Civil War.
Pornography was rampant among Civil War soldiers.
Binge drinking was common as soldiers self-medicated themselves due to the horrors they experienced during war.
Starvation turned Civil War soldiers into a hungry mob, taking what they wanted from poor farmers.
Disease killed more soldiers during the Civil War than the war itself and even minor wounds resulted in death due to gangrene setting in.
The Civil War was nauseating to many as they had to endure the screams from men whose limbs were being amputated
and the mounds of bloody amputated limbs at field hospitals.
At the end of the civil war, most of the men in mental institutions were veterans of the civil war, according to HBO’s documentary “Wartorn”
and tens of thousands of families slipped into destitution due to veterans being disabled due to the war :
http://www.civilwar.org/education/civil-war-casualties.html
and today, over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year ( 22 daily)
because war has more to do with horror than glory or honor.
What the world needs is not “Peace through strength” but
rather "Peace through non-military solutions" which is how the Swiss are prospering in peace while
Americans are living in constant fear of the unknown due to
pro-conflict, pro-war politicians who are keeping the American people in constant fear of the unknown so that
the American people do not question the trillions of hard earned tax dollars being drained from the US treasury in order to
help the friends of the pro-conflict, pro-war politicians in the warfare complex and corporations
while the health and living standards of the American people or
the mental health and physical well being of our soldiers or
the mental health of our soldiers children or
mental health and physical well being of children in war zones
are of secondary importance to pro-conflict, pro-war politicians.
President Bush is smiling in the video below, just before he announced the invasion of Iraq in 2003:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG7tkDV7egw
Would President Bush be smiling if there existed a simple law that stated that all eligible children of pro-war politicians would be drafted to the front lines of any action ?
Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians have no problems sending other peoples' poor and powerless children to the front lines of any action but
those same pro-war, pro-conflict politicians would have a major problem if their own eligible children were required by law to be stationed on the front lines.
Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians keep talking about saving lives
and they are interested in saving lives but
they are more interested in saving the bank accounts of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations even though,
those pro-war, pro-conflict politicians know about the “non-military solutions” record of the Swiss in making peace with the enemy
and yet pro-war, pro-conflict politicians are more interested in helping the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations
than trying to save hard working taxpayers money by following the “Swiss peace making” model.
Here is an example of the US government’s priorities :
The US government first spent trillions of hard earned tax dollars in two unnecessary wars in Afghanistan and Iraq in order to
satisfy the profit agenda of its friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations
before actually solving the problem
and that was “capturing” Bin Laden which was relatively inexpensive, costing only in the millions.
In other words,
the US government will first spend trillions to satisfy the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations
before actually solving the problem through relatively inexpensive means.
We say the word "capturing" (above) because we do not believe in extra-judicial killings or assassinations
and Part Six will show how Osama Bin Laden could have been captured without the relatively inexpensive operation being a "kill mission".
Part One below will show that “Peace through non-military solutions” that is adopted by the Swiss would have worked
and thus the attacks on 9/11/01 would have been prevented.
We will first summarize Part One and then elaborate on the details.
TO SUMMARIZE PART ONE :
The attacks on 9/11/01 could have been prevented if the US government had done the following :
(1) Not getting involved with the Mujahadeen to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan
(2) Not getting involved in ousting Iraq from Kuwait in the 1990 gulf war
(3) Not stationing US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the gulf war in 1990
(4) Not sanctioning Iraq
(5) Not selling weapons to Israel
(6) Reinforcing cockpit doors and having air marshals on every flight.
IN OTHER WORDS :
The attacks on 9/11 could have been prevented if the US government had the same non-interventionist military policies in the Middle East during the 20th century similar to the non-interventionist policies the governments of the world adopted during
the US government's imperial and cruel expansion across North America, the Pacific and the Caribbean.
If the US government had adopted a non-militant interventionist policy during the 20th century in the Middle East,
poor Melissa Doi (one of the victims on 9/11, whose 911 call was recorded )
would have been happily married with children today
and 3000 Americans would still be alive today
and America would not have been subject to the horror of 9/11/01
and America would not have experienced the horror and tragedy that front line soldiers and their families go through ( over 8000 of our veterans committing suicide every year, one tragic suicide almost every hour and on average, 22 tragic suicides daily ) due to
the US government’s unnecessary world wide military empire‘s militant, interventionist activities.
TO ELABORATE ON
PART ONE:
9/11/01 ATTACKS COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED:
We could easily have prevented the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, if the US government had done the following :
(1) Not getting involved with the "Muhjahadeen" to oust the Soviet Union from Afghanistan.
Osama Bin Laden's life was transformed by the experience he had in Afghanistan.
You could say his ideas of jihad were "born again" in Afghanistan
and the aid the US government gave the Muhjahadeen went a long way to helping this "born again" experience.
If Bin Laden was defeated in Afghanistan against the Soviets
( which was very possible if the US government did not help ) then
Bin Laden might have concluded that it was not Allah's will to go after super powers, or
Bin Laden might to this day be too busy fighting the Russian backed government in Afghanistan
and not been able to use Afghanistan as a training base for attacks on the US or Kashmir
(2) Not getting involved in ousting the Iraqi military from Kuwait
which resulted in the US government restoring the cruel dictatorship in Kuwait
and protecting the cruel dictatorship in Saudi Arabia who live hedonistic lifestyles,
even though there was no evidence of Saddam Hussein wanting to invade Saudi Arabia
and even if Saddam did invade Saudi Arabia the result would be the same as when Iraq went to war with Iran, which was a stalemate.
Below are examples of Saddam wanting to be an ally of the US :
Saddam Hussein was anti-religious and ready to sell oil to the West.
In fact, during the oil embargo of the seventies, when Arab nations restricted the sale of oil, Saddam Hussein went against the embargo and sold oil to the west:
http://www.encyclopedia.com/topic/Saddam_Hussein.aspx
In a custodial debriefing, Saddam said he wanted to develop better relations with the US over the latter part of the 1990s.
He said, however, that he was not given a chance because the US refused to listen to anything Iraq had to say.
In 2004, Charles Duelfer of ISG and Special Advisor to the CIA said that
between 1994 and 1998, both he and UNSCOM Executive Chairman Rolf Ekeus were approached multiple times by
senior Iraqis with the message that
Baghdad wanted a dialogue with the United States,
and that Iraq was in a position to be Washington’s “best friend in the region bar none.” :
https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/general-reports-1/iraq_wmd_2004/chap1.html#sect6
If Saddam Hussein were to have taken over the middle east
(which is next to impossible as seen in Iraq’s stalemate war with Iran )
Saddam would not have allowed religious terrorists a base to operate from,
he would have checked the regional aspirations of Iran
and sold cheap oil to the US,
and even if Saddam restricted oil sales, it would not have adversely affected the US economy:
http://www.davidrhenderson.com/articles/0902_sorrysaddam.html
Saddam Hussein promised to stop supporting insurgent groups which in turn led
President Ronald Reagan to initiate a strategic opening to Iraq,
signing National Security Study Directive (NSSD) 4-82
and selecting Donald Rumsfeld as his emissary to Hussein,
whom he visited in December 1983 and March 1984.
....the above is another of several examples that Saddam wanted to be our ally.
Even though during the 80s when Saddam Hussein was at his worst
and actually using WMD,
there was not one CIA report stating that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the US
which in turn allowed for the US government’s
aid to Iraq which included
several billion dollars worth of economic aid,
the sale of dual-use technology,
non-U.S. origin weaponry,
military intelligence,
Special Operations training,
and direct involvement in warfare against Iran:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_support_for_Iraq_during_the_Iran%E2%80%93Iraq_war
and yet, the US government chose to invade Iraq in 2003 with the excuse that
Saddam wanted to hand over WMD to terrorists even though
when Saddam was at his worst in the 80s and actually using WMD,
President Reagan did not receive any CIA report that stated that Saddam was a threat to the US or Israel
and so President Reagan co-opted Saddam in the 80s even when Saddam was at his worst and actually using WMD.
So why did the US government change its mind about President Reagan's co-option program regarding Saddam when Saddam was at his weakest in 2003 ?
ignoring the fact that Saddam had always wanted to be an ally of the US government,
but still the 2003 invasion of Iraq took place,
even though the CIA knew about the consequences of the 2003 Iraq war .
Even though the following documentary "War Made Easy" points to many factually incorrect statements made by the Bush Administration :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mpXZyhr1Sbg
President Bush did also omit the fact that
in 2003, Saddam Hussein not only wanted to allow the CIA into Iraq to show that Iraq was not hiding nuclear weapons
but also that Saddam
wanted to be our ally in the middle east when President Bush must have got the 90s report from Charles Duelfer (Special Advisor to the CIA) that stated that
Saddam wanted to start a dialog with the US and wanted to be America's best friend in the middle east.
Also, President Bush failed to reveal to the American people what the CIA must have known from the following NPR report :
March 7, 2003 from Morning Edition (Before the Iraq War ) :
(a) plots of land along its (Jordan's ) common border have been set aside as possible settlements for Iraqis fleeing the country.
(b) Turkey is preparing to send troops into northern Iraq once hostilities break out to keep the Kurdish population there contained.
(c) And an Iraqi Shiite militia opposed to Saddam Hussein reportedly already is occupying a stretch of northern Iraq.
(d) Within Egypt, which is a close ally of the United States and no friend of Saddam Hussein, there are fears that a war in Iraq could destabilize an already volatile region.
(e) A neat military operation to defeat Saddam is possible to launch, but aftermath of that is unimaginable. It's going to be very messy. the first Bush administration recognized this fact after the last Gulf War.
(f) (Iraq) consists of different ethnic groups that were put together under colonial rule and then stayed together under the iron fist of Saddam and the Ba'ath Party. And once that iron fist is removed, Iraq will begin to unravel as these groups begin to scramble for their share of the pie.
(g) Chaos after invasion : Kurd vs. Turkoman; Shiite vs. Sunni; Syrians, Muslims, Ba'athis vs. non-Ba'athis, tribes vs. urban centers; there are a thousand contradictions and it's a tough, tough, tough task for anyone to control.
(h)if the US fails to address these contradictions, Iraq could quickly disintegrate into a Kurdish state in the north, a Sunni state in the center and a Shiite state in the south.
(i) Result of invasion : a benign authoritarian leader, then you haven't changed much. All your talk (US govt) about democracy and so on is not realized. And then if you have military rule, then you have military occupation of a country which will be resented by almost everyone in the Arab world.
(j) The US has yet to explain how it intends to reform and democratize Iraq's political system now firmly in the control of Saddam's ruling Ba'ath Party. There have been hints the administration plans to leave some lower level Ba'athists in place in order to help run Iraq's infrastructure. that's a risky proposition.
(k) In fact, you (US govt) are playing with a double-edge sword of using the Ba'ath's administrative system in Iraq by removing only the heads of it, but the rest of it is there. While you are trying to go into a despecification of the Ba'ath Party in the country, that means you are dealing with the enemy and using it in the same time.
(l) there's no clear indication how US troops would be received by the Iraqi people if and when the war starts. So even though many Iraqis there would say would like to get rid of Saddam, they don't want this to be done by American troops.
(m) the initial response (of the invasion) from Iraqi civilians to be favorable. The difficulty, they say, will come when the various groups competing for influence begin to feel they are being left out.
(n) the US military will need to stay in Iraq for far longer than the one- or two-year time frame the Bush administration appears to favor. But this, too, presents a problem. The longer the US stays, the more likely it will be seen as an occupying power that could lead to an increase in terrorist attacks against US targets in Iraq and around the globe with more young Muslims flocking to Islamic militant groups like al-Qaeda.
(o) By the end of the day, we might end up with several bin Ladens, not only one. And that's what I mean by Iraq being a really messy situation afterwards.
(end of NPR report right before the invasion of Iraq in 2003)
Lastly, President Bush failed to answer the following question that must have been posed by the CIA :
For the past 25 years when Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction,
why did Saddam Hussein not use those weapons of mass destruction against the US or
Israel, or
hand them over to the Al-Qaeda terrorists or
the terrorists in the west bank, even though
during the past 25 years, on and off, the following were done which angered and humiliated Saddam Hussein:
(a) Israel destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactors in the 80s
(b) Through the Iran-Contra scandal, the US supplied arms to Iran in the Iran-Iraq war in the 80s
(c) In the 90s, the US ousted Saddam Hussein from Kuwait
(d) In the 90s, The US openly encouraged the Iraqi Kurds and Shias to rebel against Saddam Hussein and overthrow him from power and in this case, he did not even use his weapons of mass destruction against the rebellious kurds and shiites
(e) In the 90s, Saddam Hussein's palaces were destroyed by the US
(f) In the 90s, the CIA made several assassination attempts on Saddam Hussein
(g) In the 90s, the US prevented Saddam Hussein's planes from flying in the no-fly zone
(h) In the 90s, the US had crippling economic sanctions on Iraq
(i) Throughout the 90s, the US periodically bombed Iraq which resulted in massive property damage and the deaths of thousands of Iraqis including relatives of Saddam Hussein
(j) Throughout the 90s, the US systematically decimated almost the entire air defense systems of Saddam Hussein
So even though the US and Israel for the past 25 years have angered and humiliated Saddam Hussein,
why did Saddam Hussein not use his weapons of mass destruction against Israel or
the US or
hand them over to the Al-Qaeda terrorists or the terrorists in the west bank, these past 25 years ?
So even though there did exist WMD at one time in Iraq,
Saddam did not use it against Israel or the US, because
Saddam was more interested in staying in power than giving Israel or the US an excuse to go to war against Iraq.
President Bush knew that the war with Iraq was not necessary since
he could have co-opted Saddam Hussein like President Reagan did in the 80s when Saddam was at his most dangerous
and so President Bush failed to disclose to the American people regarding President Reagan’s successful co-option program in co-opting Saddam Hussein.
President Bush failed to also accept Saddam's invitation to the CIA to enter Iraq to search for WMD:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/wanniski/wanniski6.html
Even though the British bullied and instigated the US government into the war of 1812,
the US government never asked the British for unconditional surrender but
rather the war ended in a ceasefire.
In the case of Iraq, the US government was only interested in an unconditional surrender of Iraq in 2003 even though
Iraq did not do anything close to what the British did to Americans before the war of 1812.
The US government only asks comparatively weak nations for unconditional surrender as seen in the case of Iraq in 2003 and Japan during WW2
but the US government will never ask powerful nations like China or the Soviet Union (Russia) for unconditional surrender even though
China and the Soviet Union were directly and indirectly responsible during the Cold War in Vietnam and Korea for
hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either dying horrifying deaths or
being maimed,
disfigured,
blinded,
paralyzed and spoon-fed for life
and/or deformed for life due to
the direct and indirect actions of the Soviet Union and China.
While Iran, North Korea, China and Russia would never allow the CIA into their countries,
Saddam wanted the CIA inside Iraq to prove that he had no WMD
but President Bush was not interested in President Reagan's co-option program making Saddam Hussein an ally but
rather interested in a short sighted profit driven policy of invading Iraq for the profit benefit of his friends and political supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions.
President Bush knew the Iraq war was unnecessary, even smiling before announcing the invasion :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HG7tkDV7egw
An unnecessary Iraq war that has resulted in thousands of US soldiers lives lost,
tens of thousands of US soldiers maimed,
deformed,
blinded,
paralyzed and spoon-fed for life
and/or
disfigured for life,
the trauma that the families of US soldiers have gone through with
US soldiers kids suffering from anxiety attacks
and not knowing whether their dads were ok,
trillions of dollars wasted,
millions of pitiful Iraqi refugees,
hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians
and children losing their lives or
being maimed,
deformed,
blinded,
paralyzed and spoon-fed for life
and/or
disfigured for life due to sectarian violence or
US government collateral actions.
Many of our poor soldiers and innocent iraqis have to be spoon-fed the rest of their lives due to
the horrifying and paralyzing injuries suffered in the horror that people call war.
The only winners in this unnecessary war are the warfare corporations and institutions
and their pro-war politicians in the US government who have
funneled tens of trillions of dollars of hard earned taxpayers money over the decades into the corporate welfare system of the warfare corporations and institutions,
all in the name of honor,
duty,
freedom,
patriotism
and liberty while deliberating sending our poor soldiers into harm's way.
As one wise Samuel Johnson said on the evening of April 7, 1775, "patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".
If any defense contract gets reduced or cancelled,
you can bet the war profiteering defense contractor will rally up his supporters
and say its not patriotic to cancel a defense contract.
The problem with pro-war, pro-conflict politicians is not that they do not care about the horrors that our soldiers go through resulting in over 8000 veterans committing suicide every year or
that hundreds of thousands of the children of soldiers go through emotional and psychological trauma not knowing what is happening to their dads, especially on the front lines.
Pro-war, pro-conflict politicians do care about our soldiers and the children of the soldiers but
they care more about their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations
always pushing off the thousands of yearly veteran suicides to the back of their minds,
saying that the “ends justify the means” meaning,
its okay to sacrifice the lives of the innocent in order to save other lives which almost always includes
enormous profits to their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations;
and that is why either consciously or subconsciously pro-war and pro-conflict politicians almost always
create the conditions for conflict and when the conditions result in war,
they don’t blame themselves for creating the conditions for war or conflict but
rather look upon the conflict as an opportunity to further their power agenda
and the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations;
and that is why the attacks on 9/11/01 gave the opportunity for pro-war and pro-conflict politicians to ramp up military spending (base budget) to about $700 billion from $300 billion a year between 2001 and 2011 :
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324712504578131363091573002.html
By 2012, the total security budget ( base plus other programs related to national security ) of the US government was as much as 1.4 trillion dollars a year :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_budget_of_the_United_States#Budget_breakdown_for_2012
Always remember,
when politicians tell you that our soldiers are serving our country,
those politicians are actually telling you that soldiers are actually serving those who profit from war
and protecting the bank accounts of the rich and powerful in the warfare complex and corporations.
By taking refuge in the magical words,
“ patriotism”,
“honor”,
“duty”
and “defense of country”,
and controlling the American people by keeping the American people in constant fear of the unknown,
pro-war and pro-conflict politicians,
in their thirst for more power have managed to
drain the US treasury of trillions of dollars of hard earned tax dollars in order to
further the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations.
Remember, pro-war and pro-conflict politicians will always tell you that
the reason they have to take your hard earned tax dollars is to
send other peoples poor and powerless children ( not their children ) deliberately into harm’s way in order to
“save the world” but
they will never tell you that
in order to “save the world” ,
millions would have to end up as pitiful refugees in extremely unhealthy, unsanitary conditions,
hundreds of thousands or even millions of innocent lives have to be sacrificed,
including the yearly suicides of thousands of our veterans after the war is over
and the emotional suffering of hundreds of thousands of children of our soldiers;
and those same pro-war and pro-conflict politicians will definitely not tell you
how much money their friends and supporters in the warfare complex and corporations will make in a conflict or war that could have been prevented or avoided.
In other words,
pro-war, pro-conflict politicians will never tell you that
waging war is the greatest violator of the human rights of the innocent,
compounding the suffering of the innocent due to
the short sighted, profit driven, military interventions of the US government.
So do not believe the propaganda that war is good;
its only good for those who are very far from the conflict
and war is good to those who profit from it.
Why is it when 3000 Americans died on 9/11 , the government was willing to spend trillions
( a trillion is five hundred thousand million dollars plus another five hundred thousand million dollars )
on the "war on terror ",
but at the same time, the same government is cutting cancer research when over a million Americans are dying from cancer alone, every two years ?http://www.aacr.org/home/public--media/science-policy--government-affairs/resources-for-policymakers/federal-cancer-research-funding.aspx
Is supporting the profit agenda of the warfare corporations and institutions more important than
the lives of your friends and loved ones and the millions of Americans dying from cancer alone every two years ?
An easy way to prevent all wars is for two simple laws to be enacted :
(1) All pro-war politicians' eligible kids would be drafted to the front lines of any action.
(2) Instead of borrowing the money from China, all actions will have to be paid for by the American taxpayer within a year of the action taking place.
If the two simple laws above are enacted, pro-war politicians will be "tripping over each other " trying to make peace with the enemy
because as it is now, pro-war politicians have no problems sending other peoples poor kids to the front lines but
would have a major problem if their own kids lives are at stack.
So the above two laws recommended is not a punitive measure but
its a way to save both the lives of the pro-war politicians' children and the lives of the children of the poor and powerless
because no war will ever happen if both the two laws above are enacted
but instead what will happen is
a concerted effort to make peace and to resolve conflicts through diplomacy and other non-war, non-military efforts
because as it is now,
even though conflicts take years or even decades to develop,
the Pentagon and the US government is not interested in promoting long term peaceful solutions to avert violence or war
because pro-war politicians are more interested in promoting short sighted, profit driven policies mainly to
support the profit agenda of their friends and supporters in the warfare complex, corporations and institutions.
Please do read Part Five of this 7 part community blog where you will see
how the US government got involved in major conflicts over the centuries,
even though the US government, due to its
short sighted, profit driven policies, created
the conditions for Nazism, Communism and dictatorships to flourish resulting in
the horrors of the 20th century
and the US government is now heading towards its inevitable financial bankruptcy in the 21st century due to
the annual interest on war debts and perpetual conflict (example: the Cold War and the war on terror ) approaching a trillion dollars a year by the year 2020.
PART SIX of this 7 part community blog will give pragmatic, non-military solutions to
prevent or avoid war so that all can prosper in peace and good health.
CONTINUING WITH
" THE ATTACKS ON 9/11/01 COULD HAVE BEEN PREVENTED IF THE US GOVERNMENT HAD DONE THE FOLLOWING" :
(3) Not sanctioned Iraq.... ..Osama Bin Laden points to UN reports, that the US government sanctions on Iraq was the cause of half a million Iraqi children dying prematurely:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Estimates_of_deaths_due_to_sanctions
The UN Humanitarian Program for Iraq that was established in 1996, was set to fail.
Hans Von Sponeck, one of the main co ordinators, who resigned in disgust in 2000, recently wrote:
“…the per capita value/ day of humanitarian goods actually benefiting Iraqis amounted to 51 US cents – a shameful reality for which the US & UK Governments were largely responsible.”
Under-five mortality rate in the Center and South of Iraq (136 per 1,000 live births) remained at 2.5 times the level recorded in 1990 ( before the gulf war )
http://childvictimsofwar.org.uk/the-impact-of-the-iraq-war-on-iraqi-children/
In other words, Iraqi children were better off under Saddam Hussein before the US government's first war with Iraq ( the gulf war )
(4) Not sold weapons to Israel... ...Osama Bin Laden points to the fact that US government made weapons were used by the Israeli government to kill Palestinian men, women and children through collateral damage:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7204.htm
(5) reinforced pilot doors and had air marshals on every flight, like Israel did long time ago.
(6) Not setting up bases in Saudi Arabia.
IF THE US GOVERNMENT HAD NOT
GOT INVOLVED IN THE GULF WAR, THE US GOVERNMENT WOULD NOT
HAVE HAD TROOPS IN SAUDI ARABIA..
The presence of US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the 1990-91 gulf war was the "straw that broke the camel's back"
The gulf war was a totally unnecessary war, in which civilians died by the tens of thousands (one estimate was at about 100,000) due to
bombings by the US government and the after effects of the war:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Civilian
and the eventual premature deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children due to US government sanctions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_sanctions#Estimates_of_deaths_due_to_sanctions
which in turn motivated Bin Laden to want to expel US government troops from Saudi Arabia.
If the US government followed the non-military, non-interventionist policies of Switzerland that
never experiences religious terrorism,
Melissa Doi who died a horrible death on 9/11/01 would still be alive today, happily married with children.
If Melissa Doi was living in Switzerland on 9/11/01, she would be alive today, happily married with children.
Who is Melissa Doi ?
Melissa Doi was crying to the 911 operator saying
she knew she was going to die
and pleaded with the operator to stay on the line with her because
she did not want to die alone
and as the 911 operator was trying to comfort her, the building collapsed around poor Melissa Doi who died plunging to her horrifying death.
Listen to the pitiful Melissa Doi as she is helplessly pleading with the 911 operator :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PDBjsKDagqk
WHAT DID BIN LADEN SEE IN THE US GOVERNMENT’S MILITARY EMPIRE ? :
If "taxation without representation" resulted in collective punishment when
American mobs terrorized and disfigured by
tarring innocent British civilians/American loyalists over a tiny tea tax,
a tax that mainly affected the rich:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Tempe
is it surprising that Bin Laden started a 10 year terror campaign to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia as a result of
Saudi dissidents being tortured for opposing the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia following the carnage of the gulf war
in which
the US government was accused of not only massacring fleeing Iraqi soldiers from Kuwait :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_of_Death
but also
air strikes that collaterally killed Iraqi children and babies in the gulf war where US bombs
and the after effects of war killed tens of thousands of Iraqis, destroyed 20,000 Iraqi homes, leveled schools and hospitals:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Coalition_bombing_of_Iraq.27s_civilian_infrastructure
plus sanctions that according to the UN estimates, between 500,000 and 1.2 million children died during the years of the sanctions:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War#Sanctions
In one air strike by the militarily strong US government :
three hundred Iraqi children were killed by "smart" bombs in a Baghdad bomb shelter on February 16, 1991.
The blast caused a fire so intense that it flash-burned outlines of those children and their mothers on the walls; you can still peel strips of blackened skin-from the stones.
And in 1994, religious scholars safar al-hawali and salman al-awdah were tortured by the Saudi government for protesting against US government troops in Saudi Arabia
which made Bin Laden even more determined to get US government troops out of Saudi Arabia.
Revenge was created in Osama Bin Laden's mind due to the US government's 1990 gulf war and its tragic consequences for the civilians, children and babies in Iraq
and the following events ( mentioned in various fatwas issued by Al-Qaeda ) finally led to the attacks on 9/11 :
(1) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government . fire and atom bombing Japan in 1945 when
Japan was already defeated as early as 1942 when
Japan was not able to take back territory already lost,
but FDR did not care about
the chinese communists and chinese nationalists who were killing millions of civilians ( Benjamin Valentino in his book titled "Final Solutions: Mass Killing and Genocide in the Twentieth Century" has estimated atrocities in the Chinese Civil War resulted in the death of between 1.8 million and 3.5 million people between 1927 and 1949. Atrocities include deaths from forced conscription and massacres).
With the removal of Japan as a regional power by the US government, the communists and nationalists in Asia eventually killed almost a hundred million civilians in China, Korea, Vietnam and Cambodia.
Ever since 1776, the US government's militant interventionist policies have resulted in hundreds of thousands of US soldiers either
dying horrifying deaths or
being maimed,
disfigured,
deformed,
blinded or
paralyzed for life.
(2) Osama Bin Laden read about US/Allied POWs in Japan
and hundreds of thousands of Japanese children being terrorized, tortured and burned alive in the US government's fire and atom bombings of Japan
and Bin Laden concluded that
if FDR/Truman did not care about the plight of their own US soldiers captive in Japan who were being killed by the US government's atom and fire bombings of Japan
and since FDR/Truman did not care about the lives of hundreds of thousands of Japanese children and babies,
Bin Laden concluded that he did not have to care about American civilians either when
strategic goals were more important ( this is how both state and non-state terrorists think and we do not agree with the way they think ).
(3) Bin Laden read about atrocities by US government personnel in Korea and Vietnam :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_war_crimes#My_Lai_Massacre
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_Gun_Ri_Massacre
(4) Osama Bin Laden read about the US government in the 50s overthrowing a democratically elected Mossadegh of Iran and
eventually the Shah terrorized his own people in Iran, thanks to the military support given by the US government
(5) Bin Laden read about the US government in the 60s, arming the Israeli government that used those very US weapons to collaterally kill Palestinian children and babies
(6) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 70s using napalm, agent orange and carpet bombing Vietnam and Cambodia and collaterally killing hundreds of thousands
( millions are still adversely affected by agent orange to this day leading to cancers, birth defects and other life threatening ailments ) :
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agent_Orange#Health_effects
(7) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 80s siding with the "christian" militias in Lebanon, the very christian militias that massacred Muslims
Another example Osama Bin Laden gives is the UN, Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International reports in 1996 that blamed the Israeli government using US government weapons to deliberately or carelessly kill women and children in the UN compound near Qana, a village in Southern Lebanon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996_shelling_of_Qana
(8) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 80s supporting cruel dictators like Saddam Hussein
(9) Bin Laden saw the US government in the 90s imposing cruel sanctions on Iraq resulting in UN reports stating that half a million Iraqi children died prematurely due to the sanctions.
In the spring of 2000, a U.S. Congressional letter demanding the lifting of the sanctions garnered 71 signatures,
while House Democratic WhipDavid Bonior called the economic sanctions against Iraq
"infanticide masquerading as policy.":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanctions_against_Iraq#Infant_and_child_death_rates
(10) Bin Laden saw that the cruel Saudi dictatorship was being supported by the US government , the very dictatorship that tortured dissidents who opposed the stationing of US troops in Saudi Arabia
(11) Bin Laden saw that the US government never left any country in which it had troops in ( example; US troops still present in Germany and Japan, even after the war had ended decades ago)
Mar 24,1991 : US General H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the American commander of Operation Desert Storm, told reporters in Saudi Arabia the United States was closer to establishing a permanent military headquarters on Arab soil.
(AP, 3/24/01)
(12) Bin Laden saw that warnings to the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia were ignored
(13) Bin Laden saw one way to get US troops out of Saudi Arabia was to launch a terror campaign
(14) Bin Laden saw that his terror campaign during the 90s against the US had failed ( due to Al-Qaeda being a tiny force )
and US government troops still remained in Saudi Arabia 9 years after the gulf war had ended.
(15) Bin Laden saw that the only way to get the US government to withdraw its troops from Saudi Arabia was to launch an attack on the US homeland on 9/11/01.
American muslims did not go along with Bin Laden's program of attacking the US homeland
and so on 9/11/01 no American muslims were involved in causing havoc,
which goes to show its extremly difficult to get muslims to attack the innocent
and so Bin Laden was only able recruit 19 muslims out of billions of muslims on 9/11/01
(16) Bin Laden saw that the Bush Administration finally gave into Bin Laden's demands to withdraw US government troops,
only after the 9/11 attacks,
and US government troops finally left Saudi Arabia in 2003,
almost 13 years after the gulf war had ended.
Al-Qaeda does not hate us, they hate the US government's policies that end up collaterally killing innocent muslims.
Off course, Al-Qaeda will never admit to killing the innocent,
just as the US government only sees the good it does but
will never admit to starting, instigating, prolonging or allowing a conflict to flourish
for the benefit of their friends and supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions.
People do horrifying things due to strategic goals and not because they personally have something against Americans or anybody else.
Example :
Truman dropped a bomb on Hiroshima, not because
he was personally wanting to burn alive hundreds of thousands of innocent Japanese men, women, children and babies for the sake of terrorizing the innocent
but rather, the terror bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki served Truman's strategic goals of wanting unconditional surrender from Japan instead of
a cease fire or negotiated peace settlement,
so Al-Qaeda thought by attacking America, the US government will remove its troops from Saudi Arabia ( Al-Qaeda's strategic goal ).
The Bush Administration finally gave into the demands of Al-Qaeda and removed US government troops from Saudi Arabia, only after the attacks on 9/11
so Al-Qaeda's strategic goals were achieved and innocent Americans had to tragically pay the price of
the US government's short sighted, profit driven policies in the middle east.
On 9/11/01 Al-Qaeda consisted of a few hundred members who mostly were being trained to fight in Kashmir.
The US government will never be able to eradicate Al-Qaeda as long as it provides the recruiting propaganda for Al-Qaeda through drone strikes that collaterally kill muslim women, children and babies.
Al-Qaeda did not exist before the occupation of Afghanistan by the Soviet military,
so Al-Qaeda's existence is directly related to the occupation of muslim lands.
You will find that whenever western forces leave a muslim country, terrorists from that country never follow the western forces back to the homeland of the western forces
( example : Afghan terrorists not following Soviets back home; Lebanese, Somali and Saudi terrorists not following US troops back home and Iraqi terrorists not following Spanish troops back home )
The Afghan war was unnecessary, as was seen by the inexpensive covert operation against Osama Bin Laden in 2011.
Furthermore, the Taliban ( in order to save face ) told the Bush Administration, that they would put Bin Laden on trial in a neutral country when found, since Bin Laden had fled to the mountains of Tora Bora after the attacks on 9/11/01.
Right after the attacks on 9/11/01, the Taliban stated : "War is nothing but pain and death, blood does not wash blood, negotiations are a good path and we can discuss all issues including Osama:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/05/afghanistan.terrorism
The US government ends up spending trillions of dollars of hard earned tax payers money to benefit its friends and supporters in the warfare corporations and institutions on an unnecessary war
before spending millions to actually solve the problem as when Osama Bin Laden was tracked down in 2011.
The Afghan war was profitable to the warfare corporations and institutions, just check out the share prices of the warfare corporations after 9/11/01.
We have two choices:
Either give in to
the pro-conflict, pro-war politicians and let them help their supporters and friends in the warfare complex and corporations by
draining the US treasury of trillions of hard earned tax dollars in order to eventually create
a “fortress America” with soldiers in every corner like in Israel
Or we can
go against the wishes of the pro-war , pro-conflict politicians and make peace with all our enemies like the Swiss have done
and so the Swiss live in peace, while we are constantly in fear of the unknown .
In making peace with all our enemies,
we deprive those who profit from conflict and war from “laughing all the way to the bank” with your hard earned money.
In the end, if the US government does not make peace with all its enemies,
all the money in the world cannot
adequately secure and protect
every mile of railroad,
power station,
every mile of the power grid,
every mile of pipeline,
every nuclear reactor,
every cargo container,
school,
university,
mall,
every mile of bridges,
tunnels ,
subway,
dams ,
every air plane,
train,
bus,
ship ,
multi-storey building,
stadium,
embassy,
theme park,
locations where thousands of people gather or
locations with huge tanks with explosive gas/chemicals/oil stored.
So either we
behave like the Swiss and prosper in peace or
we give in to the pro-war , pro-conflict politicians
and end up having a trillion dollar annual interest on the national debt,
effectively bankrupting the US government,
resulting in a dramatic reduction in the health standards
and the living standards of the American people
and making our soldiers on the front lines suffer to the point where
over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to
the horrors they experience during war
including the hundreds of thousands of children of soldiers who suffer PTSD and anxiety attacks because
of their parents being involved in the US government's unnecessary world wide military empire.
TO REITERATE PART ONE :
The attacks on 9/11/01 could have been prevented if the US government had done the following :
(1) Not getting involved with the Mujahadeen to oust the Soviets from Afghanistan
(2) Not getting involved in ousting Iraq from Kuwait in the 1990 gulf war
(3) Not stationing US government troops in Saudi Arabia after the gulf war in 1990
(4) Not sanctioning Iraq
(5) Not selling weapons to Israel
(6) Reinforcing cockpit doors and having air marshals on every flight.
IN OTHER WORDS :
IF the US government had the same non-interventionist military policies like the rest of the world governments had,
when governments did not ally amongst themselves in order to interfere when
the US government had its imperial and cruel expansion across North America, the Pacific and the Caribbean,
poor Melissa Doi (one of the victims on 9/11, whose 911 call was recorded ) would have been happily married with children today
and 3000 Americans would still be alive today
and America would not have been subject to the horror of 9/11/01
and America would not have experienced the horror and tragedy that front line soldiers and their families go through due to
the US government’s unnecessary world wide military empire‘s militant activities.
The US government can maintain World Peace through
non-military means as you will find in Part Six of this community blog
and in maintaining world peace through non-military means,
our soldiers,
their children
and children in war zones will be thankful since
right now,
a new study finds that half a million young children of parents on active duty are facing serious risks to their mental development:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/23/child-trends-study-children-in-military-families_n_3635441.html
and while soldiers’ children are suffering emotionally and mentally,
our soldiers end up committing suicide when the war is over as up to
22 veterans a day commit suicide
and over 8000 veterans commit suicide every year due to the horrors they experience during war:
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite
A 2009 U.S. Army report indicates military veterans have double the suicide rate of non-veterans:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Suicide_in_the_United_States
If veterans have double the rate of suicide as non-veterans,
one can imagine the dramatic increase in the rate of suicides among combat veterans compared to non-combat veterans.
PLEASE GO TO THE PROLOGUE ON PART TWO:
A SHORT HISTORY OF TERRORISM
http://worldpeacethroughworldwidedisarmament.blogspot.com/2013/02/part-one-91101-attacks-could-have-been.html#!/2013/02/part-one-91101-attacks-could-have-been.html
