Originally posted by SLAYER69
Very interesting to say the least. I remember one of my instructors telling us that one day in the future the company you work for would become more important than the country you live in.

And that someday in the future you would have confrontation between rival companies on the scale of small countries at wars.

Just in tonight, Canada, where I live, is now co-owner of GM.
US govt has taken 60%, Canadian govt 12%.

I don't want to be a shareholder in GM.

Canadians don't have to worry about the NWO seizing control here.
If there is such a thing we have put in our application already.


NWO

Arguably oil conglomerates make foreign policy decisions in the Middle East, at the very least.

Hard to separate big oil form big government.

Notably the United States has had a family of oilmen as Presidents in the last couple decades.

Mike

Originally posted by mike dangerously

we have all these pieces on the chessboard we have the Iranian government freaking out over the possibility of a moderate president that would weaken the Mullahs hold on power on one side and on the other side we have the US government who knows their dominance is waning so they are also getting desperate.They send some former stay-behind operatives into Iran looking to force the issue or The Iranians looking to make sure Abbas wins hires the job out to some local mercenaries.

I wish it was so simple. The president of Iran has limited authority.

Grand Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has been Supreme Leader of Iran for 20 years and was president through the 80s. He and a small handful of Imams determine policy for the country.

Their anti-Western stance has hardened not softened in 30 years. Much of what happens in the Middle East depends on their interpretation of situations.

Myself I feel more comfortable when there is a greedy corrupt regime as opposed to a religious one. At least when the issue is mainly bout money you can predict policies as being self-serving and self-protecting.

Are Ali Khameini and his peers coming to terms with the changing realities of Iran's internal problems and increasing vulnerabilities? Will they choose to have Iran go out in a blaze of glory attempting fulfillment of destiny?

No one can say for sure.


Mike


[edit on 1-6-2009 by mmiichael]

Reinhardt is pretty doomy and gloomy...

I was hoping that unlike the 1930s..
the world’s governments weren’t going to opt for world war..
as the economic answer..

*
.. so much for hoping

*
statesmen & stateswomen are so evil..
viewing humanity as so much fodder for elite economic gain

*
it is becoming obvious that War..
is the direction they are going and the..
economic (labor-galvanizing) cure they are relying on

Given what is happening in Pakistan and the tragedy for millions of people there, it seems the switch in bankers-talk from millions to billions and trillions, is going to heavily reflect on inhabitants of this planet.

Trouble with tribbles... pardon, tribals...

Break from the news for a minute.

Arguably with impending economic collapse in so many parts of the world, and a real danger of the US defaulting for the first time, a war would be a good way to reshuffle the cards for a pot of players.

The US, as strained as it's military seems to be in the Middle East and maintaining a presence worldwide, is still the one best prepared and positioned to for an extended war. China is coming closer with upscaling their navy and cyber weaponry and has tens of millions of potential recruits.

Russia I'm afraid, despite their rhetoric, is a shadow of itself. They barely managed to look like they were capable when they wheeled tanks into bush league Georgi not long ago. Their equipment has not been updated and they are chronically short of young seasoned soldiers.

It would depend on alliances formed, and of course, with the assumption it would be a conventional not nuclear war.

The example of how the US benefited from WWII is always thrown out. I don't think anyone rational looks at that as an endgame. A new major war could end up with everyone the loser. Even the winning side could suffer crippling damage that would set them back generations.

Threatening to go to war has become a weapon in itself. Dysfunctional North Korea knows that, and Iran takes cues from them.

I think what will happen in the Middle East is not so much a world engaging mega conflict so much as a prolonged vivisection. Limbs will be cut off one by one, till there's only the two heads - Saudi Arabia and Iran.

The Israeli retaliations in Lebanon and Gaza were dry runs for the future. Everyone looked on but even allied or sympathetic Arab and European states declined stepping in as Iran used it's proxies to provoke Israel and give a test slap in the face to the US.

A badly planned and executed democratization of Iraq may in the end be the benchmark for a new Middle East. If it doesn't fail.

Corrupt monarchies, brutal militarys, and power hungry despots, with their neverending tribal grudges, do not make good leaders in the final analysis. We only have to look at Africa to see that.

The West wants access to their resources, and they can either learn how to play the global game or see themselves weeded out one by one.

(too lazy to reread what I just typed so hope it's comprehensible.)

Mike

Hello, its been a while since i posted in this area, so i was wondering if anyone has a heads up on the build of chinese in cuba, or has it not hit the media yet.

Tristar and Slayer69, feel free to add onto the article as you see needed. Some of this stuff I can only come up with so much on and I've been a little busy lately for making any contributions.