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.
China is onto U.S. regime change tactics
page: 3share:
originally posted by: dr1234
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Or, rather than going into crazy conspiracy territory and blaming the "big bad wolf" that is the United States, maybe some people in China don't like their lot in life and protested to change things? Perhaps, just perhaps, China didn't like the fact that a huge protest happened and want to shift blame to someone that wasn't them. Protests can and do happen without "supa seekrit black ops CIA mossad infiltrations!". Looks at OWS. A protest that happened in the United States. Was that ALSO planned by these black ops people?
Funny you should ask... yes.
It's amazing how far some people enormously overestimate the influence of CIA and supposed "black ops" on changing outcomes.
And yet---CIA couldn't find Osama for 10 years.
In truth, the outcomes of states are determined 99% by their own domestic politics, and 99% of that by the people who live there. Outsiders are bystanders and will cheer and boo, but almost always, they're just spectators.
edit on 21-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason
given)
edit on 21-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-11-2014 by mbkennel because: (no reason
given)
I do not think that the US would push a plan like this any time soon, but that is not to say that they couldn't have already started laying the
groundwork. That is probably a given. The tactics and the strategy itself is not new, and China is just as aware of it as the rest of the world. These
same ideas have been used a number of times in the past, in some form in virtually every revolution that has ever occurred. China has experienced this
firsthand, on numerous occasions stretching back through history. So the only thing that could surprise them is that the US would be implementing such
a plan at the moment.
Another reason the US is not likely to engage in this type of subversive action to actually overthrow the Chinese government is because that government is too large at present, and their military forces are too large and sophisticated. The US is not keen on starting WWIII, or just an all out war with China, and will not back the Chinese government into a position where they will definitely use their military might to retain power.
You know why revolutions have succeeded a lot of the time? Because the military either did not support the government, or they were not strong enough to stop such actions. But China is a different story. I know for a fact that the US would not rely on a factor such as turning the Chinese military against their government for success. Yet what other options are there? So it is a lose-lose situation for the US and the rest of the world, because the US will not provoke a war with China and then go toe-to-toe with them just for the hell of it.
Another reason the US is not likely to engage in this type of subversive action to actually overthrow the Chinese government is because that government is too large at present, and their military forces are too large and sophisticated. The US is not keen on starting WWIII, or just an all out war with China, and will not back the Chinese government into a position where they will definitely use their military might to retain power.
You know why revolutions have succeeded a lot of the time? Because the military either did not support the government, or they were not strong enough to stop such actions. But China is a different story. I know for a fact that the US would not rely on a factor such as turning the Chinese military against their government for success. Yet what other options are there? So it is a lose-lose situation for the US and the rest of the world, because the US will not provoke a war with China and then go toe-to-toe with them just for the hell of it.
a reply to: BornAgainAlien
Nothing new here.
We see it in china, Russia, Iran etc
Whenever internal dissent occurs those governments will blame outside factors. They refuse to believe that their policies or decisions can be rejected by their citizens. In their minds the dissent could never come from government action.
In the case of Hong Kong you guys need to understand why it happened. It has nothing to do with the us and everything to do with china violating the agreement of 1 nation 2 systems. When Hong Kong was handed back to china Hong kong was to be allowed the ability to vote for their leaders.
China changed it by requiring government approval of candidates. In other words china chose the people to run Hong Kong and told Hong Kong residents they can vote for one of the people approved.
That's what pissed Hong Kong off and why we saw protests. As for the structure of the protests you guys are ignoring the fact Hong Kong was part of the UK and as such had the ability to protest r speak out against the government. They also have access to things that people in mainland china don't, like foreign news channels that aren't censored.
China refuses to acknowledge they caused the issue by screwing the people of Hong Kong over on elections. So if the people of Hong Kong demand self determination should it allowed or does that argument only run one way?
Nothing new here.
We see it in china, Russia, Iran etc
Whenever internal dissent occurs those governments will blame outside factors. They refuse to believe that their policies or decisions can be rejected by their citizens. In their minds the dissent could never come from government action.
In the case of Hong Kong you guys need to understand why it happened. It has nothing to do with the us and everything to do with china violating the agreement of 1 nation 2 systems. When Hong Kong was handed back to china Hong kong was to be allowed the ability to vote for their leaders.
China changed it by requiring government approval of candidates. In other words china chose the people to run Hong Kong and told Hong Kong residents they can vote for one of the people approved.
That's what pissed Hong Kong off and why we saw protests. As for the structure of the protests you guys are ignoring the fact Hong Kong was part of the UK and as such had the ability to protest r speak out against the government. They also have access to things that people in mainland china don't, like foreign news channels that aren't censored.
China refuses to acknowledge they caused the issue by screwing the people of Hong Kong over on elections. So if the people of Hong Kong demand self determination should it allowed or does that argument only run one way?
edit on 21-11-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
edit on 21-11-2014 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)
originally posted by: DYepes
No world war 3 is not a big deal, because the American people and homeland will still be mostly spared and untouched. In fact, we usually sacrifice Europe and allow them to be the ones directly attacked in such a scenario. Sorry Europe, there is an ulterior motive for having you join us on these suicide missions, and that's to use you as a shield. Noone can touch the American mainland and that's just fact.
We will bring our peace and Democracy to the entire Earth, whether anyone likes or wants it or not bwahaha!!! I am only half joking here. Does it matter that China is on to our game?? they've known forever they were just playing ball until it came home to roost, as it did on Russias borders. I suspect the next decade will be an interesting one of the big powers uniting in an effort to cut us off economically, as everyone knows a direct confrontation with us ends with us winning.
A direct confrontation with China, Russia et al will end with the US in flames and conquered! Defenseless Iraq and Afghanistan were no test of military might. It comes down to a basic numbers game. No country on earth can complete with Chinese industry and Russia has untold natural resources at her disposal. They both also have enough nukes to flatten every American city and the tech to land em on our shores. A war with these guys is suicide, of course maybe that's the real goal here. Whether they openly say it or not a lot of the world would like nothing better than to see the US burn!
We stand on the brink of a massive war that will visit our shores without any doubt! Arm Ukraine and I envision a declaration of war within 24 months. Russia may come off as weak, but it will be the end of the USA as we know it.
edit on 22-11-2014 by Donkey_Dean because: (no reason
given)
a reply to: Cobaltic1978
And it wasn't specified in the post I was replying to, also it only said conflicts and it didn't specifically say they had to be in the conflict alone so they were involved in the conflict called the Gulf War where they won by achieving their objective.
I am aware of those facts, but the member I was responding to didn't mention those conflicts.
And it wasn't specified in the post I was replying to, also it only said conflicts and it didn't specifically say they had to be in the conflict alone so they were involved in the conflict called the Gulf War where they won by achieving their objective.
a reply to: MALBOSIA
We are talking about wars that are a means to an end. I think from Korea to modern day conflicts there was always an end game. TPTB need conflict as part of the global economy. They found after WWII that they made a lot of money but I really think the money is in mini conflicts that are not decided one way other the other.
If we went all out war we could have wiped Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan off the map.
War today is not war from WWII. That was a real war where all out unrestrained conflict decided the day. If anyone thinks we couldn't win any of these past conflicts they are delusional. It is restraint that keeps us from wining. Restraint because TPTB only let it go so far to to make sure conflict is always available to keep the coffers full.
There would be no restraint if the home land was in danger. We would use all means at our disposal to defend it. During the first gulf war we learned about the Stealth Bomber. That was 23 years ago. I can just imagine what they didn't show us or what they have developed since.
I think those in the shadows is where the real danger is but I am always wearing my tin foil hat and why I am a member of this great community. There is always a back story to any conflict and its never about saving humanity. Its always about money and power.
No, I don't see us going WWIII anytime soon. I think our power will gradually taper off. With the leadership we have today and most people voting without really knowing what they are voting for, we are doomed from within. Its a planned death spiral and it sure seems calculated to reduce us to the lowest common denominator.
Without strong leadership, the world is ripe for several mini conflicts and that is where the money is. All out war would make TPTB rich but sustained conflict that lasts decades is where the real money is.
People think we are one nation but that is no longer the case. We are balkinized by ideology and a nation in name only. We latch on to the next politically correct issue of the day and don't have core values or principals that guide us as a nation. We don't have a culture that is our own any longer. The lowest common denominator is the virtue we live by. People are no longer required to assimilate into the American culture and more often than not its because we lost our sense of culture long ago.
All China has to do is wait and that is exactly what I would do. Then they become the next super power pawn for those in the shadows..
We are talking about wars that are a means to an end. I think from Korea to modern day conflicts there was always an end game. TPTB need conflict as part of the global economy. They found after WWII that they made a lot of money but I really think the money is in mini conflicts that are not decided one way other the other.
If we went all out war we could have wiped Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan off the map.
War today is not war from WWII. That was a real war where all out unrestrained conflict decided the day. If anyone thinks we couldn't win any of these past conflicts they are delusional. It is restraint that keeps us from wining. Restraint because TPTB only let it go so far to to make sure conflict is always available to keep the coffers full.
There would be no restraint if the home land was in danger. We would use all means at our disposal to defend it. During the first gulf war we learned about the Stealth Bomber. That was 23 years ago. I can just imagine what they didn't show us or what they have developed since.
I think those in the shadows is where the real danger is but I am always wearing my tin foil hat and why I am a member of this great community. There is always a back story to any conflict and its never about saving humanity. Its always about money and power.
No, I don't see us going WWIII anytime soon. I think our power will gradually taper off. With the leadership we have today and most people voting without really knowing what they are voting for, we are doomed from within. Its a planned death spiral and it sure seems calculated to reduce us to the lowest common denominator.
Without strong leadership, the world is ripe for several mini conflicts and that is where the money is. All out war would make TPTB rich but sustained conflict that lasts decades is where the real money is.
People think we are one nation but that is no longer the case. We are balkinized by ideology and a nation in name only. We latch on to the next politically correct issue of the day and don't have core values or principals that guide us as a nation. We don't have a culture that is our own any longer. The lowest common denominator is the virtue we live by. People are no longer required to assimilate into the American culture and more often than not its because we lost our sense of culture long ago.
All China has to do is wait and that is exactly what I would do. Then they become the next super power pawn for those in the shadows..
originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
China is onto U.S. regime change tactics
The 12 Steps to regime change, employed by the USm as outlined in the video:
1. Dispatch CIA, MI6 and other intelligence officers as students, tourists, volunteers, businessmen, and reporters to the target country
2. Set up non-governmental organisations (NGO) under the guise of humanitarianism to fight for “democracy” and “human rights” In order to attract advocates of freedom and ideals
3. Attract local traitors and especially academics, politicians, reporters, soldiers, etc., through bribery, or threaten those who have some stain in their life
4. If the target country has labour unions, bribe them
5. Pick a catchy theme or color for the revolution. Examples include the Prague spring (1968), Velvet revolution (Eastern Europe, 1969), Rose revolution (Georgia, 2003), Cedar revolution (Lebanon, 2005), Orange revolution (Ukraine), Green revolution (Iran), Jasmin revolution, Arab Spring and even Hong Kong’s Umbrella revolution
6. Start protests for whatever reasons to kick off the revolution. It could be human rights, democracy, government corruption or electoral fraud. Evidence isn’t necessary; any excuse will do
7. Write protests signs and banners in English to let Americans see and get American politicians and civilians involved
8. Let those corrupted politicians, intellectuals and union leaders join the protests and call upon all people with grievances to join
9. The US and European mainstream media help continuously emphasize that the revolution is caused by injustice thereby gaining the support of the majority
10. When the whole world is watching, stage a false-flag action. The target government will soon be destabilised and lose support among its people
11. Add in violent agent provocateurs to provoke the police to use force. This will cause the target government to lose the support of other countries and become “deligitimized” by the international community
12. Send politicians to the US, EU and UN to petition so that the target government will face the threat of economic sanctions, no-fly zones and even airstrikes and an armed rebel uprising
We know Russia is open about knowing it, but now China is also open about it.
Only WW3 can come from it, but that`s not such a big deal of course.
Great post. Yeah, the US intelligence services have a long and prolific career of executing regime changes through various means, covert or overt.
originally posted by: BornAgainAlien
China is onto U.S. regime change tactics
The 12 Steps to regime change, employed by the USm as outlined in the video:
1. Dispatch CIA, MI6 and other intelligence officers as students, tourists, volunteers, businessmen, and reporters to the target country
2. Set up non-governmental organisations (NGO) under the guise of humanitarianism to fight for “democracy” and “human rights” In order to attract advocates of freedom and ideals
3. Attract local traitors and especially academics, politicians, reporters, soldiers, etc., through bribery, or threaten those who have some stain in their life
4. If the target country has labour unions, bribe them
5. Pick a catchy theme or color for the revolution. Examples include the Prague spring (1968), Velvet revolution (Eastern Europe, 1969), Rose revolution (Georgia, 2003), Cedar revolution (Lebanon, 2005), Orange revolution (Ukraine), Green revolution (Iran), Jasmin revolution, Arab Spring and even Hong Kong’s Umbrella revolution
6. Start protests for whatever reasons to kick off the revolution. It could be human rights, democracy, government corruption or electoral fraud. Evidence isn’t necessary; any excuse will do
7. Write protests signs and banners in English to let Americans see and get American politicians and civilians involved
8. Let those corrupted politicians, intellectuals and union leaders join the protests and call upon all people with grievances to join
9. The US and European mainstream media help continuously emphasize that the revolution is caused by injustice thereby gaining the support of the majority
10. When the whole world is watching, stage a false-flag action. The target government will soon be destabilised and lose support among its people
11. Add in violent agent provocateurs to provoke the police to use force. This will cause the target government to lose the support of other countries and become “deligitimized” by the international community
12. Send politicians to the US, EU and UN to petition so that the target government will face the threat of economic sanctions, no-fly zones and even airstrikes and an armed rebel uprising
We know Russia is open about knowing it, but now China is also open about it.
Only WW3 can come from it, but that`s not such a big deal of course.
This covers much of the whole Arab Spring situations: Libya, Egypt, Syria, etc. This is the MO.
I realized exactly what you described through rigorously studying in grad school the situations in Libya and Syria.
It seems that the western military and intelligence services have become smarter in masking their work, even though more people are realizing.
In the good old days like the 50's and 60's, the CIA would simply train rebels and have them overthrow the government, like they did in Guatemala.
Now, I think they realize that they have to demonize the government sufficiently to get public support behind the change.
originally posted by: mbkennel
originally posted by: dr1234
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Or, rather than going into crazy conspiracy territory and blaming the "big bad wolf" that is the United States, maybe some people in China don't like their lot in life and protested to change things? Perhaps, just perhaps, China didn't like the fact that a huge protest happened and want to shift blame to someone that wasn't them. Protests can and do happen without "supa seekrit black ops CIA mossad infiltrations!". Looks at OWS. A protest that happened in the United States. Was that ALSO planned by these black ops people?
Funny you should ask... yes.
It's amazing how far some people enormously overestimate the influence of CIA and supposed "black ops" on changing outcomes.
And yet---CIA couldn't find Osama for 10 years.
In truth, the outcomes of states are determined 99% by their own domestic politics, and 99% of that by the people who live there. Outsiders are bystanders and will cheer and boo, but almost always, they're just spectators.
It's amazing how some people overestimate my seriousness.
originally posted by: mbkennel
originally posted by: dr1234
originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
Or, rather than going into crazy conspiracy territory and blaming the "big bad wolf" that is the United States, maybe some people in China don't like their lot in life and protested to change things? Perhaps, just perhaps, China didn't like the fact that a huge protest happened and want to shift blame to someone that wasn't them. Protests can and do happen without "supa seekrit black ops CIA mossad infiltrations!". Looks at OWS. A protest that happened in the United States. Was that ALSO planned by these black ops people?
Funny you should ask... yes.
It's amazing how far some people enormously overestimate the influence of CIA and supposed "black ops" on changing outcomes.
And yet---CIA couldn't find Osama for 10 years.
In truth, the outcomes of states are determined 99% by their own domestic politics, and 99% of that by the people who live there. Outsiders are bystanders and will cheer and boo, but almost always, they're just spectators.
It's amazing how some people overestimate my seriousness.