It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Lose Your Money or Go to War?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:42 AM
Lately I've been hearing comments regarding Russia and China trying desperately to deflate the US dollar and abolish it's post WW2 monopoly with the petrodollar. Financial warfare is nothing new to anyone and should be a given in this day and age. But when you mix in the thoughts of a secret government or banking society, at the reins of control, it adds a certain twist.
There are some here on ATS that believe these 'secret' organizations would not allow the US to fail and create a global war to divert its collapse. Conversely, there are others that think this is exactly what TPTB want, the USA to reach critical financial failure, in order to fulfill some other nefarious purpose, such as assimilation into a bigger global system - NWO.

Either of these results are bad for us the people and many go off on pages of rant filled hate toward these 'secret plans' and the mysterious benefactors that hide behind them. But really are we not that different from how they think?

What I'm getting at here is, if every person in America had a choice or a vote which was to going to be used to ultimately decide whether we face global war(WW3) or be financially destitute, what would you choose?
WW3 can be assumed just what you've all come to fear in a modern post nuclear era. I suspect nukes would be used, who buys a gun not to use it when needed most? I'm sure our governments wouldn't have spent billions on these weapons to have them collect dust when the time comes. Cities will be destroyed, loved ones will die and we may not even win.

As for financially destitute conditions, I'm thinking along the lines of the complete devalue of the dollar, wall street crash, banks fail and that wonderful 1.14% something in FDIC insurance will make most penniless. Food, taxes, housing, mortgages, payroll, utilities everything becomes out of reach for the 99% general society. Everything will change, I even have a hard time trying to visualize this scenario and how to maneuver if it happens. Will we lose our houses, our cars if everyone is in the same boat?

So what would you vote for, War or Poverty?
My reasons for asking this question is that I had a very different self impression until I asked myself this. This is just a thought experiment of sorts, so please elaborate in any way you feel fit.

I hope this choice is not one we will ever have to make, AB

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:46 AM
The postulation leaves little option if one wanted to survive..... even to starve would be better than die of radiation poisons or be blown up......

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:51 AM
TPTB would probably prefer both war and financial ruin.

me, well I'll go with no money because I've never really had much anyway, so I really don't have much to lose.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:01 AM
I think the US is not their base of operations. The US to the Cabal is just another economy they can suck dry when the time is right. They are waiting for the right time to betray (As if they havent already) Us and throw us to debt.
Usa is only a pawn for TPTB on the global chess board.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:06 AM
I really don't believe there is an overall plan, other than the coordination between politicians and corporations to continue to grow their wealth by any means necessary. This would include the creation of investment schemes like derivatives and such, that have inflated global markets....but it has no "value".

China and Russia know this and are demonized because they are preparing to trade and continue on after the American system of finance and control eventually falls. All of us Americans and those that stuck by our side will be affected, including the "elite", but the rest of the world will continue on.

America will no longer be able to sustain it's perpetual wars and it will no longer have a stranglehold on the rest of the world.

So I believe we don't have a choice of war or poverty. We are about to financially fall, and we will not be able to make war.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:10 AM
a reply to: AnteBellum

No nukes were used in Korea? Or Vietnam? Or the Middle East? We learned a very valuable lesson that day in 1945...

If there ever was a war to use them in Korea was the one too. More then Once MASSIVE hordes of Chinese moved in formation. No nukes were used.

Ever been in a fist fight? Did you burn down the bar you were in so you could win the fist fight? That's the equivalent of nukes. There's plenty of ways to cause massive pain to yor enemies without getting all the backlash that comes with nukes.

Hell there's even more effective weapons then nukes for massive damage. Still... No reason to burn down the bar to make sure you get that one jackass, ya know?

And before we see massive amounts of poor i think we are going to see a shift to more self reliance. It's already begun IMO. A friend of mine grew a huge amount of vegetables for canning and freezing IN AN APARTMENT.

Self reliance will go a long ways to reduce the drama and the fear. I think we get such hot extremist rhetoric because most people's entire lives will collapse if they don't have some sort of support system to rely on. The more people that can show self reliance as a positive to the people around them the more will take up the tongs! (Canning pun lol)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:39 AM
There really is no answer to this unless you buy into the fact that there is another force at play. As SheepSlayer247 wrote, it is my approximate understanding on this as pertains to REALITY. If I was to buy into the 'plan' aspects of an NWO agenda MGaddafi IMO has it right also, they would not be in the USA, my presumption has always been SA.

As far as the rest goes, there will be no winners and that's where the issue gets sticky because why would they target the flock on which it feeds to begin with.

I would like to agree with you mindseye1609 but in small wars such as the ones you mentioned, with little of viable targets other then the cities there, was reason nukes weren't used. In a large scale fast and furious global war, knocking out infrastructure and ability to command will be paramount. That coupled with the distraction of coming to the aid of ones own nation in the midst of a large scale war, would make nukes the perfect tool. We are not talking about localized governments with neighbors that would get affected with radiation to answer to. Global Thermal Nuclear War is a viable threat when looking at USA, Russia and China and I wish it weren't the case.
edit on 10/7/2014 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:09 PM
a reply to: AnteBellum

Now your stepping into MAD territory. No ones gonna blow the whole world up. It would of happened one of many chances it could of already. There has even been times when the launch of MAD nukes should of happened due to a malfunction and the controllers waited because they understood what they were about to do.

No one takes nukes lightly ... Well anyone who actually had the power to use them.

War will always be and it will always be terrible wether its a kinetic round or chemical weapons or nukes. People dying sucks.

I really don't know the answer to it. I can't see any future without some sort of worldwide governing body keeping a lid on extremism. How we get to that point? Idk but if we ever do we might actually begin to see the true potential we have. The human race is destined for great things if we can just put a lid on extremism of all kind.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:18 PM
a reply to: AnteBellum

I would just like to add. Calling Korea a small or insignificant conflict is a very uneducated comment. It was possibly the most hellacious warring the world has ever seen.

ETA: not to say your uneducated but on the topic of the USA vs China on Korea you might wanna do some reading. There's a reason not many talk about their time there.
edit on 7-10-2014 by mindseye1609 because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:25 PM
The middle way. Let the crash come and hunt the people down who caused it while not caring for the rules of the crashed economic system so that people the 99% can live a happy life. You do not need to follow the economic system that you have not yourself designed.

There might be US nuclear weapons and chemicals used on the citizen when this happens if the old order gets a chance to kill the citizens who will not play ball. Rather live in a damaged free world that all are doing there best to fix than live in a caged system.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 12:40 PM
a reply to: AnteBellum

My understanding is that TPTB have planned all along that the US will fail and that China will be taking over next. I'm sure none of us want to starve while here,but you can grow your own food to a point,then barter with others for the rest if need be. The little house movement has taken off for those that refuse to be tied to banks,and others are living in a semi-commune area to have others to lean on when times ahead get hard.

Nuclear war really is never an option if any of us wants to survive. The fall out alone will kill hundreds of thousands. Even those that don't die will starve. The Japanese dug up Kudzu vines after the bombs and had to eat those to have any food.

Now why would anyone want us to fail? Or any country for that fact. Well,as Rhett Butler told Scarlett "there is money to be made in the destruction of a civilization". The Rothchilds have banked on such things for years.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 03:40 PM
Financially destitute. War is for war-mongers and nothing good ever comes from it no matter what BS history books tell you. And I'm sure that other world powers understand what would happen if the financial system here crashes. It wouldn't be good for anybody, IMO. But again, never war unless we're being attacked on our soil.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 04:24 PM
a reply to: AnteBellum

I suggest to you a different option ... As i,will tell you that,financial ruin is inevitable, and that the only thing holding the,petro dollar up, is China.

The options you have are war now, or a biblical holocust in total chaos, where everyone is against everyone. Later.

With 7 billion and growing population, where people have plenty to eat ... What happens, when an inevitable financial ruin, along with natural disaster and diseases tKe over. Our financial system is an inflated bubble, that is only kept afloat by inserting more air. There is no substance of support, or strength behind it. It will lead to a global "potato disease" or similarfollowed by chaos and inability to govern over the masses.

That is your future ... War now, or biblical holocust for your children later. Those are your choises.

edit on 7/10/2014 by bjarneorn because: (no reason given)

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 05:14 PM
Fox news had on armagedon how: They talked about an EMP BOMB. How that it would knock out all the electrical components:
Imagine all of a sudden your power went out. You then tried to turn on the t.v and it did not work. Then you tried your cell phone and it didn't work. Then you tried to listen to the radio and it did not work. You then tried to start your car and it didn't work. Then while you were outside you noticed your neighbors and they asked if your power was out and they asked you for water cause their water did not work either. You walk in the house frantically and worry about all the perishables in the freezers so you go into the garage and get the bike and a bag and head off to the nearest grocery store for ice and supplies. When you get there ,you notice alot of people are looting and shots are fired and the police come and more shots are fired. Then a policeman tells you to go home or go somewhere else to get water. You are able to bike to a gas station on the way home and go inside, but all the shelves are empty and noone is around for you to pay for a bottle of water you found under a shelf someone kicked there by accident. So you leave and head home only to find a looter in your house pillaging thru your stuff and you chase em out hysterically with a butcher knife. You then gather up some stuff, hope and wait for the power to come back on. You spend a week in your house with a flashlight or candles to guide your way in the dark, but now you have a feelin that the power will not ever come back on for a very long time and you still have no idea what just happened as you drain more water out of the water heater into a container. Now the water runs out and their is barely any food. No trucks to carry supplies to grocery stores and all you have is a bike for transportation. Scared, you stay in the house a few days and then you are forced out of the house in search for water. The severe dire need for water sinks in and you finally go outside and see things on fire and you hear gunshots in the distance. You then go back inside and find that ole gun and put some bullets in your pocket and you gather up some things you think you might need and head off on your peddal bike in search of water.
Fox news alway's hypes up the bs and they all put on a big smile for everyone to see.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 07:44 PM
Poverty all the way. I can't wait for the world to stop using a monetary economy. It is by far the worst thing for humanity. It in fact is what causes war. Money IS the root of all evil.

Money creates poverty through social stratification, and breeds war, greed, crime, corruption, more poverty, hunger, etc.

Let's all just stop using money. It isn't real to begin with, so why use it? We have hit a time in human development and ingenuity that we could automate most processes from driving to building to manufacturing. If you don't need to pay the robot, why have money in the first place? Why not just base the economic functions on the finite resources that do exist?

War is stupid. And so is money.

Mo money, mo problems.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 08:05 PM
a reply to: AnteBellum
Only one of your scenarios is likely happen, and unfortunately it's the bad one. It's probably unaviodable.

Imagine that tomorrow morning you wake up and every dollar somehow disappeared overnight, but people carried on with their daily lives as if nothing happened and nobody cared that money didn't exist. Doctors still healed the sick and farmers still farmed etc. but everybody worked for free. The product of a person's day of work was also just given away. People went and shopped for free but didn't take more than their share of supplies to survive. This hypothetical selfless society could carry on just the same as ours now without any monetary system in place as long as a persons greed was kept in check.

A situation where 99% of people are destitute and we still have a functioning society where money is worth something is impossible. The 99% of poor people would say screw your money we're going to make a new system and you 1% aren't invited. Suddenly the 1% aren't rich anymore if they can't get any goods or services for their money.

The reality is that the monetary system is set up managed in a way to keep the people working so those at the top can have control of everything. As long as they can set the table and keep the game going without civil unrest the status quo will continue. They have basically brainwashed everybody to believe we need their money to survive. It is part of their propaganda that a man-made monetary system collapsing would cause widespread destitution. It is not the money that makes the world go round, even though the powers that be have manipulated everybody to think it is. It's a case of 'perception is reality.'

WW3 is something that would have far worse effects. Dwellings and infrastructure would be destroyed. Huge amounts of resources would be diverted to help one side kill the other side which is ultimately destructive. I will take a 'poor society' every time.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 09:39 PM
Thanks everyone for the answers they were all great to read as I was bouncing this around my head for the past few days.
I wish for a world like SouthernForkway26 described but I sadly feel it's too idealistic. My take on financial apocalypse is a cross between what you wrote and Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome!

Mindseye1609 I do hope your right, I don't believe you are, I just hope it is true.
As for the the Korean War of course it wasn't insignificant, just not as significant as a world war has been or will be. I see them as quite different and my understanding on them is limited but truth be told, it was more or less isolated to fighting in one area Korea. Nuking the location would have served no purpose doing more collateral damage to those around then good.
As for a war with USA, Russia and China being the major aggressors the only way to win would be to Nuke. Let me ask you if Russia and China were to attack the USA tomorrow how would you think they would do it? Ground based assault on US, Russian or Chinese soil just doesn't seem could work on any scale unless command and infrastructure was fractured first. They wouldn't have adequate time to use missiles effectively, counter defenses are too strong on all sides. The only option to winning a war such as this would be to take out certain cities and military targets simultaneously. I just can't see it any other way, 3 countries with immeasurably large defenses, they can see things coming from the other side of the planet. There is no way we or they would let anyone walk on up to bat. It will escalate one way or another and nukes will go airborne.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 10:41 PM
The US will let all their nukes fly before they just "rot away" as some 3rd world country in financial despair. The war machine can roll anwyay. US has natural resouces and pumping much oil and gas and is slated to be worlds leader in that area by 2016. Everyone on here should know that. Folks who are clamoring for the downfall of the US are also clamoring for the downfall of humanity.

Come on. Little Greece almost failing economically almost sent the globe into a catastrphophe. To those who think the US will just "fail" and everyone else will continue on their merry little way well you're either 12 years old, taking a serious short-cut to thinking, or just not very bright at all to begin with to not understand how this whole thing is connected.

Now, to those who think it was by design for the US to be set up as the worlds greatest power then for another system to gain control over it (therefore gaining control over the rest of the globe by default), you may be onto something. But thats a different topic.

posted on Oct, 7 2014 @ 11:00 PM
I'll settle for self sufficient. Let the rest play that game. I'll trade you a few fish for some veggies. Life will go on whatever fate falls upon us. Screw money and war. I opt out.

posted on Oct, 8 2014 @ 10:29 AM
a reply to: AnteBellum

See Korea was the perfect place to use a Nuke. The Americans surprised the living day lights out of the North Koreans when we made landfall 2/3rds the way up the western coast of korea in north korean territory instead of trying to retake the the south and work our way up. We cut the lines to the south and wiped it up.

It was such an overwhelming win for the US that mcarthur got a little cocky and assumed the GIANT formation of Chinese gathering near the border of china and Korea was just a defensive army to defend china against a continued invasion from the US into china.

The choices were to either

A: nuke the Chinese invasion/defensive force on the koren border and provoke china and Russia into an all out war.

B: split forces to prepare for the Chinese invasion and risk weakening the force taking North Korea as they are really getting into the Storm.

C: ignore them and hope they stay a defensive force at the border of china and Korea.

Well we chose C. One of the biggest military mistakes in history in my opinion. Several accounts I've read differ but when it was revealed the Chinese were joining the party at the chosin reservoir it was discussed using nukes again. 67,000 Chinese had 30,000 UN troops surrounded and it was thought more Chinese were on the way.

This was in the winter of 1950. Only 5 years after we hit Japan. The option was still very much on the table and it never got used. Even in the face of a possible overwhelming by Chinese forces. At this time china did not have nuclear capabilities. Russia had only just tested there first one successfully.

STILL. The thought is, that even back then, the worry of nuclear retaliation made it too difficult of a choice to use them in Korea. Remember ICBM's and Mutually assured destruction didn't exist yet. We Are talking nuclear artillery or a bomb from a plane. Ez enough to plan and prepare to fight against and they still took the threat so seriously that they decided to gut out one of the most hellacious war's in history instead of using a nuclear weapon.

How seriously do you think they take them now that the entire world goes up like a match if we use them now? 1 nuke launch = hundreds of nukes launched = most of the world dead and most unlivable once the power plants start going up. It's a chain reaction no one wants to start. Like you said, I hope anyway lol

edit on 8-10-2014 by mindseye1609 because: (no reason given)

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in