It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Obama Declares War On Pakistan?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Obama Declares War On Pakistan?


www.blacklistednews.com

WASHINGTON, DC -- Obama's West Point speech of December 1 represents far more than the obvious brutal escalation in Afghanistan -- it is nothing less than a declaration of all-out war by the United States against Pakistan . This is a brand-new war, a much wider war now targeting Pakistan , a country of 160 million people armed with nuclear weapons. In the process, Afghanistan is scheduled to be broken up. This is no longer the Bush Cheney Afghan war we have known in the past. This is something immensely bigger: the attempt to destroy the Pakistani central government in Islamabad and to sink t
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:42 PM
link   
This would explain the whole situation and also as to why the choices were what they were eg sending another 30000 troops over? So basically Iraq was just a stepping stone to their true goal. But what is the True goal? Oil? World domination? or something else? What are your thoughts on this? By the way this is my first post so i appologise if something is wrong

www.blacklistednews.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:50 PM
link   
thats why they neeed the trillion dollar spending bill. more wars on the horizon.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by enca78
 


Star and Flag on a great first effort!

The conspirator in me has always thought that this war in/on the Mideast is just a continuation of the Crusades to vanquish the World of Islam.

Shadow secret societies with intimate connections to Banking, Weapons manufacture, esoteric knowledge are behind this everpresent and all consuming war.

The combatants will never know the real reason why they fight; they just do what they are told.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
reply to post by enca78
 


Well, I tend to think global government is the next logical step in our civilization.

I don't know if it will be a good or bad thing, but it certainly makes sense. Our technology is certainly aiding the process and helping to create a more global planet anyway.

We cannot really go out and join the galactic society (if there is one) if we cannot unite as a single planetary civilization first.

This is all conjecture of course. The whole situation is very mind boggling to say the least!

[edit on 12/14/2009 by yadda333]



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
I made a comment in several threads following the West Point Speech that I was surprised that more people were not outraged that we are now also at war in Pakistan and that we have also guaranteed them funding to re-build once we are done ripping up their country as well.

However, I will say that there is no point in simply ignoring Pakistan is there and therefore pushing the insurgents into Pakistan -- similar to the "while we were in Iraq they were in Afganistan" kind of mentality.

However, I thought it would have been nice to have a discussion about beginning an entirely new mission in an entirely new country with brand-new money to boot. But, instead, it was simply added as a "oh by the way" throughout much of his speech. No fanfare. No outrage. Nothing.

And since most people on ATS either didn't really care, thought it was so great they were speechless, or were oblivious to the fact that Pakistan is now added onto our list of countries "to fix" -- conversations went nowhere so I dropped it. It will be interesting to see what kind of responses you receive.

As a side-note -- I did find it ironic that the day after his speech in West Point a bomb blew up much of Pakistan and killed a 100 or so people -- sad....I'm so used to it I don't even remember the actual number. To me, it was kind of like "see...of course this has to be done" kind of bomb. It was very suspect to me and the timing was impeccable.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:02 PM
link   
I cant help but think that everything on this site ties in with everything else. It all seems inter twined. Free energy, ufo disclosures, ET`s ,religion etc its all just many parts of the jigsaw. If we actually do have the technology for free energy etc, then surely no one in the right mind would send thousands of men and women to war? Could it be global domination? I honestly dont know, but thats why i am on here for the answers.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by enca78
 





but thats why i am on here for the answers.



Sorry, precious few answers. More questions though. Welcome.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   
reply to post by enca78
 


My thoughts in this are the author of the article has expressed his views. Instead of reporting news...he has tried to enforce his beliefs which stand no ground practically.

The reason for surge is purely countering 'hardcore' extremist in Afghanistan and secure the AF-PAK border.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by enca78
 


IMO its civilized human evolution..

The unknown is always scary.



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 06:16 PM
link   
This part sums it up succinctly, obamas Himmler in employing 4th generation and guerrilla warfare to divide & conquer by violence. Nobody in that area of the world is on "our" side.. they uniformly hate the US govt and should be uniting to douche the occupier stink away .. keeping them busy with civil strife makes sense. Of course it's illegal, wrong, a waste of time and a waster of lives.. but thats never stopped the sociopath DC mafia before.

This time they are truly playing with fire, if they upset the wrong person it would take one small paki nuke to decimate the largest US base in afghanistan as a lesson.

The architect of the new Pakistani civil war is US Special Forces General Stanley McChrystal, who organized the infamous network of US torture chambers in Iraq . McChrystal's specific credential for the Pakistani civil war is his role in unleashing the Iraqi civil war of Sunnis versus Shiites by creating "al Qaeda in Iraq " under the infamous and now departed double agent Zarkawi. If Iraqi society as a whole had lined up against the US invaders, the occupiers would have soon been driven out. The counter-gang known as "Al Qaeda in Iraq " avoided that possibility by killing Shiites, and thus calling forth massive retaliation in the form of a civil war. These tactics are drawn from the work of British General Frank Kitson, who wrote about them in his book Low Intensity Warfare. If the United States possesses a modern analog to Heinrich Himmler of the SS, it is surely General McChrystal, Obama's hand-picked choice. McChrystal's superior, Gen Petraeus, wants to be the new Field Marshal von Hindenburg ­ in other words, he wants to be the next US president.
www.blacklistednews.com...



posted on Dec, 14 2009 @ 07:22 PM
link   
reply to post by GovtFlu
 


i would have to agree. it only makes sense when you can't get something done outright you catalyse something else that can do it for you. all is fair in love and war, as long as you don't get cought. and as it's obvious iran is the final target, all her freinds must be detained first ... sad story our world leaders are unfolding. they really are playing with fire.

[edit on 14-12-2009 by notsympl]



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 09:06 AM
link   
I figured it out! The reason why we invaded both Afghanistan and Iraq were at the time for different reasons, but the only reason Bush/Obama have continued these wars was to prepare for the big day so that all of our troops are in place. When America was beginning to hear of Iran and the nuclear program Bush decided to keep the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan stable. Now Obama has stepped in and removed US troops from the cities, why? So that we dont have to fight anymore in Iraq and waste our resources we already got the oil like we wanted. The he set a timeline to bring all of our troops home in mid 2010. The he sent a surge to Afghanistan of 30,000 and put a timeline on that. Why? He set a timeline of mid 2010 for Iraq to make Americans believe the wars are finally ending, he set a timeline in Afghanistan for mid 2011 to make Americans believe the wars finally ending there too. Notice the timeline? We won't leave either country until mid 2010 so that if Israel makes an attack in 2010 that Americans will feal that it is justified to back up Iran and use the troops already there to invade the country from both sides. Then he wants to widen the war to Pakistan, why? So we can destablise the country enough while we keep their military occupied worried about Iran so that the Taliban and Al Qaeada cant establish a government there or allow Pakistan to pick sides, while we turn the people against the Pakistani government so we can establish a proxy there and put up military bases and secure their nuclear missiles.

[edit on 15-12-2009 by Misoir]



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 09:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


When I said so America will back up Iran I meant back up Israel.



posted on Dec, 15 2009 @ 02:15 PM
link   
There's an Islamic prophecy about an army emerging from that "Af-Pak" region carrying black flags ending up in liberating Jerusalem. Uncle Sam's recent clandestine inititiave might just be the beginning of it .... who knows



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join