Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

It isn't about money, oil, or terrorism - It's control

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 07:47 AM
link   
Money is rather pointless to the government. We (the US) are in so much debt that we will most likely never pay it off. We'll pay it off with favors, giving access to things we (here at ATS) don't know about, and access to our markets.
Yet, there's another way to control our debt; Having control.
But let me remind you that this is not about money. It's about control & power, and that simply takes care of money on the side.

Here's a map of the world to help you:
map of the world

I want you to take a look at this map before we continue. The colors are America's current military allies
THE IMAGE

Look at that. Now think about all of this...
> America is currently fighting Mexico over the drug war. Eventually we'll have control of Mexico, or at least be allies with them

> Greenland, Morocco, Australia, and Mongolia do not really count as possible threats. Thus, those grey areas are taken care of.

> Japan is grey, but that's because America has bases all over there; after the war, we decommissioned their military and took that responsibility. Relations with US military & Japanese citizens is quite good

> That leaves the Middle East <

From the Middle East / surrounding areas, we are on good terms with / allied with / unofficially in control of / have a presence in:
-Iraq
-Afghanistan
-Saudi Arabia
-India
-China
-Pakistan (needs some work perhaps after the proposed Bin Laden incident)
-Libya (more recent - mostly NATO, which is an official Ally)

You'll notice that the biggest spot we do NOT have, in that area, is Iran. Iran is the next step. It is not about oil, money, or anything like that. It's not about human rights either. It's about power & control.
Taking Iran will give us most of the Middle East.

SOON, this will all mean that the US will have allies, control, and a major presence in:
-America, Canada, South America & Mexico
-Just short of ALL of Africa
-UK / Britain / Pretty much Europe
-ALL of NATO
-Most of Middle East

Pretty much everywhere else that won't have a strong US presence in it (or be allies with the US) is not a potential threat at all.
Can you see it now? I hope this helps some of the people that haven't looked a lot into it yet.




posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
I've been saying the same for some time now. I call it a crusade.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 08:07 AM
link   
It truly is. Yet everyone seems caught up in terrorism, oil and all that and nobody really discusses how after Iran we will have CLOSE to full control of the entire world.

Mexico is obviously a target, but I mean they really don't do much except send in drugs; which in the eyes of the government (not the public eyes, I'm talking about their private thoughts) doesn't really matter.

I'd say that after Iran, Sudan would be next; they've been with the US here and there, but overall they can't be trusted by the US Govt.

Also, the US will obviously try to get North Korea under control. South Korea is obviously on our side.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 08:37 AM
link   
Having control of the world is not bad if the people controling it are fair. Problem is that the ones controling our government are out for themselves. I understand that the human population of the world is way too high but it wouldn't be if we were satisfied with simple living. The internet could allow us to learn and supply us with the ability to care for ourselves. It is like a collective consciousness. If they took the profit out of deceit it would help. If they separated science from commercialism it would also help. Why should science have to beg for money from industry and use Occams Razor to acquire funding. Why doesent someone compare all the knowledge from existing research to try to see what it shows instead of repeating the tests over and over.

It is presently about retaining the present social system with the present people in charge, not about change for the better. In this country we have too many people collecting high salaries at the top. Jobs that aren't necessary are causing hardship for the common worker. How can an unfair system like this be good for the world. All big Empires did the same thing and every one of them crumbled throughout history. I give the USA ten years max before it falls from within. People are getting to spoiled, they think they are entitled to more than they deserve. I see the end is near for our country. Who will jump in and take our place in the near future and will it involve WW111 is the only question in my mind.

I'm going to enjoy the rest of my life no matter what the conditions progress to. I will go with the flow and observe from the sidelines as people struggle. No matter what happens doesn't mean we have to get stressed and mad, there will always be work out there to allow us to survive if you are reasonable. Maybe we will lose everything we own but I will never lose my desire to learn.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Ghostx
 

well said, but still middle east is something else, Nato always says that they want to spread military in pacific but what we are witnessing is that they always spread their military around middle east not pacific !
I just wonder if there is a better word instead of control which explains the situation better.
I wonder who is really behind such strategies. it is not the strategy of a president or a country.
I always feel something is kept deep hidden. we are all on a ship but who is really making a hole in that ship.
I think they know well that the fortune of world is dependent on the middle east. from every aspects, geopolitic, it's place between east and west, energy, monotheistic religions and their Messiahs !, .....................
Iran had a special role in the middle of middle east for powers. but after it's revolution middle east has been suffering from a certain chain of instabilities.
according to second law of thermodynamic such instabilities are not reversible ! powers should be careful, they should not decide according to illusions. history shows that they are not that familiar with middle east to predict the events.
radicalism is the big threat and monarchies of middle east and some foreign forces are spreading it dangerously.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 12:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Wide-Eyes
I've been saying the same for some time now. I call it a crusade.


And that's what I call it. The old powers, forces still are alive and well; known by other names perhaps but what's in a name...

The Mid East situation goes way beyond geopolitical mechanization. This is a mystical conflict.



posted on Jan, 29 2013 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ghostx
> Japan is grey, but that's because America has bases all over there; after the war, we decommissioned their military and took that responsibility. Relations with US military & Japanese citizens is quite good


I would take issue with that comment.
www.dailymail.co.uk...

Does anyone in the US listen or read the news from sources other than the home grown propaganda machine?



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by creatives

Originally posted by Ghostx
> Japan is grey, but that's because America has bases all over there; after the war, we decommissioned their military and took that responsibility. Relations with US military & Japanese citizens is quite good

I would take issue with that comment.
www.dailymail.co.uk...
Does anyone in the US listen or read the news from sources other than the home grown propaganda machine?


Many people are going crazy over gun control laws, yet last time I heard a total of 47 states opposed the proposals from the government. So based on what 47 states have said (not taken action against), gun control is not an issue.

You're saying that because a bunch of people, and SOME officials (the Prime Minister has actually opposed, by action, the remaking of deals between Japan & America), are opposing American military in Japan that they are not our ally.
Japan has military alliances (just the fact that we occupy their country is proof of that) with America. That is fact. A people's uprising does not make it any different, at least right now. If it is resigned, it simply to avoid crime, pollution & noise in populated areas (where some bases currently reside). America's not getting kicked out or anything like that.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 03:58 AM
link   
There are a fair few flaws with your post and to be honest a lot of it really doesn't make any sense.

At war with Mexico? That would suggest that the Mexican military is fighting with the US military, which isn't happening. What is happening is some loose attempt to collaborate with a corrupt government in Mexico and a corrupt military in order to combat drug cartels. Clearly, it is not going so well.

The idea that the relationship between the US military and Japanese citizens is good is false. If anything it is very tentative. Pragmatically, the view the relationship with the US as necassary to hedge against a growing Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific, however, it is fairly common to hear of anti-US protests throughout Japan. Moreover, they've gradually minimised the US presence in replacement with a very advanced Japanese military in order to be more self-dependent and less reliant on the un-populour USA.

Relations between the US and China seems like one of containment and engagement. On the one hand, out of necessity the US engages economically with China whilst containing its growing influence militarily. Thus, whilst largely peaceful, the relationship is also tentative. Moreover, it must be remembered that the US has a military treaty with Taiwan which states that in the case of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, the US is obliged to defend the Island. Thus, whilst unlikely there is the potential that the two states could go to war.

I'm not in disagreement with your argument. The US is clearly attempting to exercise influence and control on a global level. But I think you evidenced is flawed and doesn't really make much sense.



posted on Jan, 31 2013 @ 12:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
There are a fair few flaws with your post and to be honest a lot of it really doesn't make any sense.

At war with Mexico? That would suggest that the Mexican military is fighting with the US military, which isn't happening. What is happening is some loose attempt to collaborate with a corrupt government in Mexico and a corrupt military in order to combat drug cartels. Clearly, it is not going so well.

Not once did I say we were at war with Mexico. I DID say that we are fighting Mexico based on all that drug trade. Which is true. Fighting does not always mean a military invasion; it includes preventive care, defense, political tactics, and social debating.


Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
The idea that the relationship between the US military and Japanese citizens is good is false. If anything it is very tentative. Pragmatically, the view the relationship with the US as necassary to hedge against a growing Chinese influence in the Asia-Pacific, however, it is fairly common to hear of anti-US protests throughout Japan. Moreover, they've gradually minimised the US presence in replacement with a very advanced Japanese military in order to be more self-dependent and less reliant on the un-populour USA.

It's quite common to hear about Neo-Nazis in America. That does not mean that America is going to get up and start following the path of the Neo-Nazis.
Sure, the people don't like America, and that is fine. However, that does not mean that Japan is going to cut off ties with America. If you read the news, you'll notice that the government is just trying to change America's presence only slightly, not entirely. They are still on good terms with us in the sense that they most likely will not attack America, and America will not attack them.


Originally posted by SpeachM1litant
Relations between the US and China seems like one of containment and engagement. On the one hand, out of necessity the US engages economically with China whilst containing its growing influence militarily. Thus, whilst largely peaceful, the relationship is also tentative. Moreover, it must be remembered that the US has a military treaty with Taiwan which states that in the case of a Chinese attack on Taiwan, the US is obliged to defend the Island. Thus, whilst unlikely there is the potential that the two states could go to war.

There is always the chance that we could go to war. England could one day get up and attack us for no reason at all. We would probably go to war.

My post is based on current alliances, partnerships, and military presence. While there are some opinions involved in mine, I think that lengthy political friendships show more than the opinion that some people in said countries do not like America.



posted on Feb, 1 2013 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Ghostx
 





America is currently fighting Mexico over the drug war


Ok, so your definition of "fighting" has all of the sudden become very loose. Social debating? That's not fighting. The US is not fighting the Mexican state. It is battling the drug cartels, but clearly this successful.



It's quite common to hear about Neo-Nazis in America. That does not mean that America is going to get up and start following the path of the Neo-Nazis.


This statement makes no sense. The Japanese government understands the need for an American defence arrangement but it is actively distancing itself from the US and pursuing increased autonomy and strength in the military sector, largely because of the dislike of American empire and the realisation that the US will not be around forever to protect the Japanese interests in the Pacific.

You previously said that the Japanese citizens had a good relationship with the US government. I dissolved this point and then your argument changed. Strange.



There is always the chance that we could go to war. England could one day get up and attack us for no reason at all. We would probably go to war.


Stupid argument considering that China has an actual scenario and reason for attack.



My post is based on current alliances, partnerships, and military presence.


Not really. I study international relations and middle east studies. Many of your alliances and partnerships seem more like fantasies. Do some reading before you make another post like this.



posted on Feb, 2 2013 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Okay If you would like to assume that Japan and the US won't stay on good terms, go ahead, but my main point is still valid.
This is about US control, not oil, money or terrorism.





new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join