RE: U.S. Presidents & The Natural-born-citizen Clause
February 7, 2016 at 1:55 am
(This post was last modified: February 7, 2016 at 2:13 am by Sterben.)
(February 7, 2016 at 1:40 am)scoobysnack Wrote:You forgot one the best example of false flag, the Reichstag fire.(February 7, 2016 at 12:57 am)Sterben Wrote: You do make some good points but I have to disagree with you on some of them. I'm not saying for countries to give there national sovereignty, I'm just calling for a better system when other countries commit such acts as contributing financially to other countries elections. This form of power brokering should not be not be tolerated. If a invasion of others country is not provoked as in America's invasion of Iraq, the actions done by The Bush administration was an injustice to Iraq. Rigging some evidence together and launching an invasion for your own befit is a war crime. We had no right to take away Iraq's national sovereignty as we do not have a right to control the world as an Empire. Internal disputes inside of country is hardly a concern, unless there is formal alliance between two powers and the other requests assistance. I think of it this way, if your out with friends and one couple starts fighting in front of you. Should you try to deescalate the situation? If your out with a friend and you see a couple fighting, it's there sovereignty your invading if you try to interfere based on your views that a major
issue is at hand.
I think it comes down to a human rights issue as well, and even that gets sketchy. To your example of seeing a couple fighting should I intervene. I would say yes, but at the same time I wouldn't know the whole story, but I would still try to deescalate as you mentioned. Problem with applying that to nations is that we for example will claim a regime is a threat to their own people and world stability, so we intervened in Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan etc, based on what the government was saying, and in the end, they lied but took us to war anyway. Should there be consequences for that? Absolutely!
Sounds like we are mostly in agreement, and I don't know if you are familiar with the psyop called the false flag. Basically a nation will attack itself and blame it on another nation as an excuse to justify war. Happens quite a bit actually, and it taught in the special forces as a way to implement psychological warfare.
Saddam for example wanted to start selling oil in Euros instead of dollars, which is actually the reason we took him out and put them back on the petrodollar. Same thing happened with Ghadafi, he wanted to start a new African Union currency backed by gold. In fact the main reason we go to war is because of the petrodollar dominance which was an agreement made by Kissinger with OPEC in the 1970's that all oil had to be purchased in US dollars. So all nations had to buy our currency, and bonds in order to trade for oil. This is why the House of Saud is our ally, as it was them who we made the agreement with. This is what guaranteed the US supremacy and full spectrum dominance in the world.
This is now coming to an end, as nations are abandoning that agreement, with Russia now selling oil and natural gas to China in their own currencies. If you really want to get to the bottom of all war, it comes down to the banking systems, which is why they want the world order on their terms.