- 20 Nov 2015 01:06
#14621957
Experiencing the Nemesis of hubric exceptionalism
The usual problem with any analysis of post war US foreign policy is making some kind of sense of its reactive incompetence and general cluelessness.
Yet even nihilism is a policy of sorts. One can make the case there is an underlying consistency and an actual plan being implemented. According to the linked article above the modern version of The Plan originated with the Project For a New American Century (1997), or PNAC. Members of the "The Cabal" (Colonel Lang named it The Borg) include the Bush-Cheney group, Hillary, and Obama and a coterie of theorists.
Some theoretical background:
Andrew Horybko -The Colour Revolution - A Core Model
Russia and the “Color Revolution”
These techniques are employed in support of Brzezinski’s key idea of a Balkanized Crescent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geogr ... of_History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimland
The core idea is an adaptation of Gene Sharp's theory of using non-violent movements to achieve regime change. Instead of an indigenous vanguard, these movements are directed and managed by Western intelligence agencies, "using various types of provocateurs, special forces, spies, NGOs, community organizers, paid peasant soldiers, and a comparatively small amount of money to work towards destabilizing the Balkanized Crescent. Andrew Horybko has given the strategy a usable meme name, Colour Revolution. Horybko makes an interesting argument that the Balkanize-the-Crescent strategy is being actively and currently pursued by the US in the present to further the goals set forth last century by the PNAC..."
The Crescent around Asia’s Rimland has been destabilized through a masterful series of Colour Revolutions and supported insurgencies going back to the Carter Administration’s first support to the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan when Brzezinski enticed the Soviet Union into a fatal quagmire. The strategy has continued up until the present as we send arms to the “moderate” jihadists in Syria, all the while supporting the Iraqi Army and the Shia militias trying to fight the brothers of the “moderate’ jihadists in Syria and helping KSA to bomb Shia Houthis in Yemen.
Application of this principal means that we truly have no allies and no friends because we subvert them all.
The whole process in the MENA can be visualized as a stoking and damping of three fires, Jewish, Sunni, and Shia; making sure all burn hot, but none burns brighter than the others, while making sure that the three consume all of the fuel, so none becomes overly fierce so as to escape confinement. Russia is intended to suffer burns from all three.
In this analysis, Obama is seen not as a weak reed but as a subtle player in this game. At the same time Netanyahu was playing the US Congress, Obama has been playing Israel, alternately "supporting" and "undermining" its interests for a larger geopolitical goal. Hillary's contribution was to extend the policy from the Balkans into eastern Europe, pressing against other spheres of influence of the former Soviet Union.
Just trying to keep my scorecard straight. Let’s see. The Americans are using a Turkish airbase to bomb ISIS and protect our allies the Kurds.
The Turks are bombing our allies the Kurds while we are using their airbase. The Americans are supplying human shields for terrorists in Syria who are being bombed by the Russians.
On the Iraqi side, American air power is being used to protect and support the new Iranian puppet regime in Iraq installed by the Americans after the gulf war. The Mahdi army that we fought in Sadr City are now advanced element of the Iraqi army we are protecting.
Officers of “the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism” the Iranians are standing next to Iraqi officers who are standing next to American officers all cooperating to kill ISIS soldiers who have been receiving weapons from Americans through American proxies we consider”moderate rebels”.
Meanwhile, our “enemies” the Iranians are supporting Houthi rebels in Yemen while our “allies” the people who destroyed the trade centers have involved the U.S. in yet another unauthorized war by aggressively attacking the houthis who were helping the U. S. fight Al Queda in Yemen before .
In the meanwhile “moderate rebels” are undoubtedly being furnished weapons capable of bringing down Russian war planes. So while Russia is bombing ISIS, we are encouraging our proxies to shoot down their planes.
Will someone tell me whose side we are on today?
The usual problem with any analysis of post war US foreign policy is making some kind of sense of its reactive incompetence and general cluelessness.
Yet even nihilism is a policy of sorts. One can make the case there is an underlying consistency and an actual plan being implemented. According to the linked article above the modern version of The Plan originated with the Project For a New American Century (1997), or PNAC. Members of the "The Cabal" (Colonel Lang named it The Borg) include the Bush-Cheney group, Hillary, and Obama and a coterie of theorists.
Some theoretical background:
Andrew Horybko -The Colour Revolution - A Core Model
Russia and the “Color Revolution”
These techniques are employed in support of Brzezinski’s key idea of a Balkanized Crescent.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geogr ... of_History
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rimland
The core idea is an adaptation of Gene Sharp's theory of using non-violent movements to achieve regime change. Instead of an indigenous vanguard, these movements are directed and managed by Western intelligence agencies, "using various types of provocateurs, special forces, spies, NGOs, community organizers, paid peasant soldiers, and a comparatively small amount of money to work towards destabilizing the Balkanized Crescent. Andrew Horybko has given the strategy a usable meme name, Colour Revolution. Horybko makes an interesting argument that the Balkanize-the-Crescent strategy is being actively and currently pursued by the US in the present to further the goals set forth last century by the PNAC..."
The Crescent around Asia’s Rimland has been destabilized through a masterful series of Colour Revolutions and supported insurgencies going back to the Carter Administration’s first support to the Mujahedeen in Afghanistan when Brzezinski enticed the Soviet Union into a fatal quagmire. The strategy has continued up until the present as we send arms to the “moderate” jihadists in Syria, all the while supporting the Iraqi Army and the Shia militias trying to fight the brothers of the “moderate’ jihadists in Syria and helping KSA to bomb Shia Houthis in Yemen.
Application of this principal means that we truly have no allies and no friends because we subvert them all.
The whole process in the MENA can be visualized as a stoking and damping of three fires, Jewish, Sunni, and Shia; making sure all burn hot, but none burns brighter than the others, while making sure that the three consume all of the fuel, so none becomes overly fierce so as to escape confinement. Russia is intended to suffer burns from all three.
In this analysis, Obama is seen not as a weak reed but as a subtle player in this game. At the same time Netanyahu was playing the US Congress, Obama has been playing Israel, alternately "supporting" and "undermining" its interests for a larger geopolitical goal. Hillary's contribution was to extend the policy from the Balkans into eastern Europe, pressing against other spheres of influence of the former Soviet Union.
The old world is dying, and the new world struggles to be born: now is the time of monsters. -Antonio Gramsci