BF2S Forums The only way is war.

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Our current "war" isn't the same.  The fighting is very localized compared to WWII.  Under our current economy we are no longer the manufacturing giant we once were.  We've outsourced much of that to China, and the rest of the worlds infrastructure and manufacturing are still in tact, so it's not like we are seeing an increase in business through exports. 

In this particular war there are a few companies getting rich, but don't expect this war to do anything but strain our economy.

Very true.

To bust a deflation cycle, a war would need to employ millions of men and destroy trillions of dollars' worth of assets.

It isn't even that important whose men are employed and whose assets are destroyed, as long as the global supply glut is gone & demand picks up.

Now if I was Mr. Burns...

...I would instruct Smithers to go and arrange a war between Pakistan and India.



A nuclear one.

The majority of the Western World doesn't have the stomach or patience for a war that's just on their T.V for more than a few months.

There isn't a red chance in hell that the current Western World could ever deal with a proper "Oktober Revolution" scenario.

Once you take away their Supermarkets, Malls, and everything-on-demand-economy -- 90% of the population is going to curl up and wait to die, 9% is going to riot and loot like mad, and the remaining 1% is going to grab their "bugout bag" and head for the hills.

Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

ATG wrote:

It sucks, but it's true.
Our government created the housing bubble, not questionable borrowers. Banks would never have over extended themselves making loans to the poorer people without some sort of promise of a safety net. This all begins and ends with politicians.
I have searched long and hard for an answer as to why this is all happening.
Those familar with the stated goals of the PNAC may know what I'm getting at. You think those people are going to stop their insidious machinations because Obama got elected? Hah!

The only thing that will " save " our economy is the same thing that pulled it out of the great depression.

In not too many years the american people will be offering up our treasure and children for a global war of domination. It may be called a NWO, or a one world government but you can bet your ass we are getting into position to be the defacto dictator of it all, as such is our nature.

This war will be embraced by a desperate and hungry population.

I would go so far as to say the peoples of the world should stop us, while there is still a chance of that, because otherwise the center of power in the world shall be based here ( as it basically is now anyway ), except that whereas now we appear to be benevolent and bumbling and misguided, I believe we ( meaning the insane behind the scenes real leadership ) have the socio-pathic potential to make the Holocost a memory of the good old days.

So when people ask you why the worlds economies are going to hell, now you can answer; it is all by OUR design.

Brilliant, oh fearless leader!

But as usual, I have to dispute a couple things and add some additional conspiracy banter.

Firstly, the politicians serve the lobbies which serve the corporations, which serve the banks, which serve an ancient and private world order. The people are ignorant of this structure due to their almost complete dependence on news media and established science and their past dependence on religion. If nobody has said it in a religious text, rag, on TV, or in an academic journal, then it's not true.

Secondly, this center of power is, by any reckoning, European (or Middle Eastern if you go way back in history). It's the same tradition that conquered, or has tried to conquer, all of the world continuously throughout the last millenia, culminating in the >95% of countries that are controlled by a central bank and were demarcated in Europe before being "liberated." Funny coincidence that the couple dozen countries remaining without central banks are also the same countries that we are taught "harbor terrorism." Don't forget that the USA was founded by a bunch of people that attempted to escape that world order and persistently failed throughout our 200 year history because the "federalists" followed them here and helped stage the "revolution" and "the Union." Anyway, we are certainly not a center of political power today, we are just the more prominent barracks of the world military, a source of material and human resources, and the former nursery for the imperialist multi-national corporations and universities, raised under the protection of the "free market" double think. Now that the corporations have taken flight, the cocoon can degrade and we may implement socialism.

The religions that were previously used to propagandize and control the people in the early urban world have given way to Science as the contents of scripture became obsolete and undemonstratable. Science is empiricism, but in practice, it is the process of selecting and propagating demonstrable truths. Practiced independently, it is ancient and the essence of human progress and technology. As it has developed in our modern paradigm, it represents the process of monopolistic academic journals selecting and propagating certain conclusions and ignoring others. It's structurally the same as our news media, except modern journalistic methods are even more selective, less scrupulous/analytical, and directly reach a larger group of people. This aside regarding science may seem like a non sequitur, because most people do not identify the modern crusade in common with the historical religious crusades. We genuinely believe that the selection of observations constituting Science today is as true as the Bible ever was--to the extent that it is, once again, our responsibility to teach it and hold people accountable to it's conclusions, even if it means taxation, imprisonment, and murder.

The average European doesn't have a thing to do with the political structure, and the average scientist doesn't have a thing to do with scientific imperialism. They are as much colonists as us, and equally in the dark. This is why most of them would vehemently dispute these points. It's sort of like mentioning the "Jewish conspiracy." It may be true that the banks, instrumental to the "NWO," are predominantly controlled by Jews, yet the average Jew doesn't have a thing to do with it and probably regards the topic as antisemitic when it is plainly descriptive. Draw yourself a Venn diagram.

As for whether there will be a global war, it's hard to say. There are at least a dozen ways for the globalists to accomplish their stated goal of an 80% population reduction without something so imprecise as conventional war. The spread of the new world religion, Gaia/Science, only demonstrates how people would probably impoverish themselves voluntarily.

Marinejuana wrote:

ATG wrote:

It sucks, but it's true.
Our government created the housing bubble, not questionable borrowers. Banks would never have over extended themselves making loans to the poorer people without some sort of promise of a safety net. This all begins and ends with politicians.
I have searched long and hard for an answer as to why this is all happening.
Those familar with the stated goals of the PNAC may know what I'm getting at. You think those people are going to stop their insidious machinations because Obama got elected? Hah!

The only thing that will " save " our economy is the same thing that pulled it out of the great depression.

In not too many years the american people will be offering up our treasure and children for a global war of domination. It may be called a NWO, or a one world government but you can bet your ass we are getting into position to be the defacto dictator of it all, as such is our nature.

This war will be embraced by a desperate and hungry population.

I would go so far as to say the peoples of the world should stop us, while there is still a chance of that, because otherwise the center of power in the world shall be based here ( as it basically is now anyway ), except that whereas now we appear to be benevolent and bumbling and misguided, I believe we ( meaning the insane behind the scenes real leadership ) have the socio-pathic potential to make the Holocost a memory of the good old days.

So when people ask you why the worlds economies are going to hell, now you can answer; it is all by OUR design.

Brilliant, oh fearless leader!

But as usual, I have to dispute a couple things and add some additional conspiracy banter.

Firstly, the politicians serve the lobbies which serve the corporations, which serve the banks, which serve an ancient and private world order. The people are ignorant of this structure due to their almost complete dependence on news media and established science and their past dependence on religion. If nobody has said it in a religious text, rag, on TV, or in an academic journal, then it's not true.

Secondly, this center of power is, by any reckoning, European (or Middle Eastern if you go way back in history). It's the same tradition that conquered, or has tried to conquer, all of the world continuously throughout the last millenia, culminating in the >95% of countries that are controlled by a central bank and were demarcated in Europe before being "liberated." Funny coincidence that the couple dozen countries remaining without central banks are also the same countries that we are taught "harbor terrorism." Don't forget that the USA was founded by a bunch of people that attempted to escape that world order and persistently failed throughout our 200 year history because the "federalists" followed them here and helped stage the "revolution" and "the Union." Anyway, we are certainly not a center of political power today, we are just the more prominent barracks of the world military, a source of material and human resources, and the former nursery for the imperialist multi-national corporations and universities, raised under the protection of the "free market" double think. Now that the corporations have taken flight, the cocoon can degrade and we may implement socialism.

The religions that were previously used to propagandize and control the people in the early urban world have given way to Science as the contents of scripture became obsolete and undemonstratable. Science is empiricism, but in practice, it is the process of selecting and propagating demonstrable truths. Practiced independently, it is ancient and the essence of human progress and technology. As it has developed in our modern paradigm, it represents the process of monopolistic academic journals selecting and propagating certain conclusions and ignoring others. It's structurally the same as our news media, except modern journalistic methods are even more selective, less scrupulous/analytical, and directly reach a larger group of people. This aside regarding science may seem like a non sequitur, because most people do not identify the modern crusade in common with the historical religious crusades. We genuinely believe that the selection of observations constituting Science today is as true as the Bible ever was--to the extent that it is, once again, our responsibility to teach it and hold people accountable to it's conclusions, even if it means taxation, imprisonment, and murder.

The average European doesn't have a thing to do with the political structure, and the average scientist doesn't have a thing to do with scientific imperialism. They are as much colonists as us, and equally in the dark. This is why most of them would vehemently dispute these points. It's sort of like mentioning the "Jewish conspiracy." It may be true that the banks, instrumental to the "NWO," are predominantly controlled by Jews, yet the average Jew doesn't have a thing to do with it and probably regards the topic as antisemitic when it is plainly descriptive. Draw yourself a Venn diagram.

As for whether there will be a global war, it's hard to say. There are at least a dozen ways for the globalists to accomplish their stated goal of an 80% population reduction without something so imprecise as conventional war. The spread of the new world religion, Gaia/Science, only demonstrates how people would probably impoverish themselves voluntarily.

A few things...  the War on Terror is rather farcical in certain regards, but why we designate certain countries as harboring terror doesn't have anything to do with banks.

Secondly, you give far too much credit to the powers that be.  Humans are far too fractious to be as organized in their intentions as you're assuming here, even if it's a small group of people like the Bilderberg Group.  While history shows certain trends, none of them really solidify some of the claims you're making here.

Thirdly, why would any group that profits from human consumption intentionally want to decrease the population by 80%?  That doesn't make much sense.  There's certainly enough evidence to suggest that wealth disparity seems to be a goal in globalization (via the formation of a global aristocracy), but decimating the human populace really doesn't seem too profitable.

Now, letting Africa slowly rot is another discussion.

In conclusion, I must say that you seem to hold certain ideas as gospel as much as others hold religion or science that way.  Conspiracy can be a religion too, you know?

Still, I have to admit that I agree with many other things you've said.

Turquoise wrote:

A few things...  the War on Terror is rather farcical in certain regards, but why we designate certain countries as harboring terror doesn't have anything to do with banks.

No, like I said, it's just a funny coincidence. The official reason we say they "harbor terrorists" is because clandestine intelligence agencies tell us so and we are not capable of confirming or disconfirming their statements so they are accepted as fact--quite like the studies published in journals or news rags. As long as there is a rationale and we do not have the capacity as individuals to conduct research on the same scale, their words are fact and defensible dissidence is deductively impossible.

Turquoise wrote:

Secondly, you give far too much credit to the powers that be.  Humans are far too fractious to be as organized in their intentions as you're assuming here, even if it's a small group of people like the Bilderberg Group.  While history shows certain trends, none of them really solidify some of the claims you're making here.

Maybe I do, maybe not. Did you know the US government owns well over a billion guns (yeah, more than triple the population of our country)? We have military bases in all but <30 countries, numbering about 1000 military bases worldwide, not including secret underground bases which may not exist but have been described by engineers repeatedly and intelligence bases, as in the CIA. And that's just the US, let alone NATO, the UN, and it's members. The central banks own about 80% of the world's gold. Oil is owned by royalty and corporations that profit equally. A fraction of the world's population owns half the world economy outright. And this is of course in a time of cheap money printing where small fortunes are obviously exaggerated and the fortunes of the families and appointees of those that actually own the right to create credit appear minimized. The world stratification of wealth is at an all time high. All of the central banks are member banks of the BIS, the WB, and the IMF. People own less of the industry and land that supports them now than at any previous moment in history, and coincidentally, the media scarcely uttered a word of this until practically every family farm had been sold to multinational agriculture. Monsanto (creator of the terminator seed and several other debacles) has already finished buying out all of the world's largest seed producers and seed banks.

I suspect "history" does not show the the trends I discuss because "history" is something that is only written by people that own billion dollar equipment, such as satellites and printing presses/the capacity for circulation.

Turquoise wrote:

Thirdly, why would any group that profits from human consumption intentionally want to decrease the population by 80%?  That doesn't make much sense.  There's certainly enough evidence to suggest that wealth disparity seems to be a goal in globalization (via the formation of a global aristocracy), but decimating the human populace really doesn't seem too profitable.

Now, letting Africa slowly rot is another discussion.

Common misconception. Nobody profits off of consumption long term. Once you own the means of production, there is nothing further to gain from distribution and the price of labor can be driven down to the arbitrary limit of demoralization and survival (as in China). Now I am not saying I actually know how or why they would reduce the population to the extent of 80%, I believe the figure comes from the UN Conference on Human Settlements.

Turquoise wrote:

In conclusion, I must say that you seem to hold certain ideas as gospel as much as others hold religion or science that way.  Conspiracy can be a religion too, you know?

I don't really understand how being critical of any and all accepted facts can be construed as dogma. It's really the opposite. I do not forget all of the things I learned from the media and education system about world history, I simply weigh them against information I have heard elsewhere. From what I have read, there is certainly a scam going on, but it is impossible to draw the line to say how large and inclusive it really is. There are certainly facts that would support the contention that power is profoundly centralized, although the "elite" is easily powerful enough to command privacy for their agendas and proceedings. We all know they can wiretap you, but you can not wire tap them.

I state extreme conclusions only so that you or anyone else can earnestly attempt to disprove them and discover that they are as plausible as their antitheses. It is impossible to say what goes on behind closed doors. Logical deduction is impossible. We are left making inferences and inductions about what is possible and what is likely. It's been said that inductions are not logic, but without inductions man would surely starve. The domination of all world industries and property is clear, the question is whether it is a conspiracy or a coincidence. Is it really just a coincidence that the media/press that raises us and educates us has never even considered the former? I can say that they have, but they certainly didn't pay to print it off and cram it down our throats like every other week's big media hit:

"Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the [U.S.] media." -Noam Chomsky, Harvard, MIT

"I don't say you're self-censoring - I'm sure you believe everything you're saying; but what I'm saying is, if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." -Noam Chomsky on the news media

"Many journalists now are no more than channelers and echoers of what Orwell called the official truth. They simply cipher and transmit lies." -John Pilger, Journalist, Reuters

"This is a media alert for editors and television producers who thought they could safely ignore all news outside the United States ... It would be unwise to expect trustworthy information from Washington...." -Max Frankel, former editor, NY Times

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." -John Swinton, former editor, New York Times

Turquoise wrote:

Still, I have to admit that I agree with many other things you've said.

I appreciate the open-mindedness of your reply. Mine was a vague post (how could I possibly go into detail about the most enormous topic without writing a book?) and I do not expect to actually change anyone's views with a forum post. By now I'm probably not even saying anything new, but I post so that the ideas are available and people are not left without alternate interpretations of world events/history (the way they were 15 years ago without the internet and the way they will be if the corporations and academic institutions decide to stop letting us rent access to the network that they "built" and own).

Last edited by Marinejuana (2009-01-17 01:54:09)

Marinejuana wrote:

I suspect "history" does not show the the trends I discuss because "history" is something that is only written by people that own billion dollar equipment, such as satellites and printing presses/the capacity for circulation.

I see what you're saying, but at the same time, Occam's Razor is a good principle to adhere to, when it comes to logically analyzing things of this nature.

Marinejuana wrote:

I don't really understand how being critical of any and all accepted facts can be construed as dogma. It's really the opposite. I do not forget all of the things I learned from the media and education system about world history, I simply weigh them against information I have heard elsewhere. From what I have read, there is certainly a scam going on, but it is impossible to draw the line to say how large and inclusive it really is. There are certainly facts that would support the contention that power is profoundly centralized, although the "elite" is easily powerful enough to command privacy for their agendas and proceedings. We all know they can wiretap you, but you can not wire tap them.

I state extreme conclusions only so that you or anyone else can earnestly attempt to disprove them and discover that they are as plausible as their antitheses. It is impossible to say what goes on behind closed doors. Logical deduction is impossible. We are left making inferences and inductions about what is possible and what is likely. It's been said that inductions are not logic, but without inductions man would surely starve. The domination of all world industries and property is clear, the question is whether it is a conspiracy or a coincidence. Is it really just a coincidence that the media/press that raises us and educates us has never even considered the former? I can say that they have, but they certainly didn't pay to print it off and cram it down our throats like every other week's big media hit:

"Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the [U.S.] media." -Noam Chomsky, Harvard, MIT

"I don't say you're self-censoring - I'm sure you believe everything you're saying; but what I'm saying is, if you believed something different, you wouldn't be sitting where you're sitting." -Noam Chomsky on the news media

"Many journalists now are no more than channelers and echoers of what Orwell called the official truth. They simply cipher and transmit lies." -John Pilger, Journalist, Reuters

"This is a media alert for editors and television producers who thought they could safely ignore all news outside the United States ... It would be unwise to expect trustworthy information from Washington...." -Max Frankel, former editor, NY Times

"There is no such thing, at this date of the world's history, in America, as an independent press. You know it and I know it. There is not one of you who dares to write your honest opinions, and if you did, you know beforehand that it would never appear in print. I am paid weekly for keeping my honest opinion out of the paper I am connected with. Others of you are paid similar salaries for similar things, and any of you who would be so foolish as to write honest opinions would be out on the streets looking for another job. If I allowed my honest opinions to appear in one issue of my paper, before twenty-four hours my occupation would be gone. The business of the journalists is to destroy the truth, to lie outright, to pervert, to vilify, to fawn at the feet of mammon, and to sell his country and his race for his daily bread. You know it and I know it, and what folly is this toasting an independent press? We are the tools and vassals of rich men behind the scenes. We are the jumping jacks, they pull the strings and we dance. Our talents, our possibilities and our lives are all the property of other men. We are intellectual prostitutes." -John Swinton, former editor, New York Times

These are all good points.  I suppose I find myself somewhere in the middle.  While I definitely agree that media and so many other things are too corporate right now, I would also say I'm skeptical of any grand designs being in place.  I do believe that the Federal Reserve and other institutions like the IMF have too much power and have rather insidious agendas, but one of the only things that comfort me about the future is the general incompetence of many people in power.

It's kind of a funny thought, but while we complain about how our leaders are often inept, it is their ineptness that has likely afforded us many of the freedoms we enjoy.  More clever powermongers would have already stripped us of all our freedoms.

So, ironically, take comfort in knowing that the elite haven't yet figured out how to get along with each other to the point of actually outright oppressing us all.

Marinejuana wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Still, I have to admit that I agree with many other things you've said.

I appreciate the open-mindedness of your reply. Mine was a vague post (how could I possibly go into detail about the most enormous topic without writing a book?) and I do not expect to actually change anyone's views with a forum post. By now I'm probably not even saying anything new, but I post so that the ideas are available and people are not left without alternate interpretations of world events/history (the way they were 15 years ago without the internet and the way they will be if the corporations and academic institutions decide to stop letting us rent access to the network that they "built" and own).

Well, thanks for the input then.  I always enjoy good counterpoints.