Making The World A More Dangerous Place

[jim-h-2 (Jim H)]

Mememonkey said in his most excellent comment,

One thing is clear it is impossible to discuss this subject without tripping on those emotional land mines.   It takes a bit of work to see how and who laid down those land mines in our collective consciousness  but the information is there if you chose to look.

Indeed.  Here we can see a new section of third rail actually being built.. equating those who would dare to think about the truth behind 9/11 as being, "Holocaust deniers" along with a neat little strawman argument that would suggest conspiracy theorists don't believe planes went into the buildings.  The question is;  which planes?  Start at about 4:00...

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcM2yBTCmK8

 

[sand_puppy (sand_kitty)]

I greatly appreciate your comments above.

What we are discussing is the devolution of the Post War status quo. Into the emerging world war. This development was architected and declared by the Israeli likudniks, (Clean Break Strategy) during the Clinton Administration and implemented and continues to be implemented via the hegemonic power of the US by the NeoCons. see PNAC. This is the group we are discussing and while they are not all Jewish, they are all  Zionists.

Could you please recommend reading material on this topic that sounds correct and trustworthy to you?

 

 

[sand_puppy (sand_kitty)]

Transend,
I really appreciate your inclusion here and leaning about your thoughts and experiences traveling in Israel and the middle-east.  I want to keep inviting our Jewish members to participate and to know that we value the Jewish people, culture and religion.

I want to very clearly support your impression:

...the 75% Jews and 20% Arabs who live there [in Israel] are not all bad and certainly the trees, deserts, wildlife, lakes, rivers, mountains, and ancient structures are not bad.

Absolutely support this and agree.

---

As you know, we have the exact same problem in the USA.  The moral developmental level of the American population (and majority of government and LEO) exceeds that of the NeoCon faction that holds quite a bit of power.  Yet they seem to be able to bomb, assassinate and invade fairly freely.

 

 

[arthur-robey-2 (Arthur Robey)]

After a troubled sleep, it is clear to me. 
The Wolfowitz doctrine. 

The document was widely criticized as imperialist as the document outlined a policy of unilateralism and pre-emptive military action to suppress potential threats from other nations and prevent any other nation from rising to superpower status.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wolfowitz_Doctrine

Merkel gave a speech in which she said that multi-culti was dead.  Then she was seen in tears saying "No, I will not commit suicide. " 

Something changed.  Let me guess.  Merkel was ordered to attack the Ukraine. She refused. They said "If you don't we will destroy Europe. "

She was given an option she could not refuse,  to coin a phrase.  

Germany has been occupied for 80 years. The fault lies with the occupiers. Switzerland,  not so much. They are required by law to be armed at all times. 

I am not a Lamb of God I am a Wolf of Odin. Germany, Denmark and Sweden are little lambs.  Norway. Jury is out. They have Breivik. But are they armed?

[sand_puppy (sand_kitty)]

I am very new to this line of inquiry.  It looks like James Bamford's book "Pretext For War" reports on the complex relationships between the Israeli Likund and the US Neocon factions during the early Bush II years and the way they cooperated to fabricate WMD "evidence" and sell wars in the middle east. 
Corruption and immorality at the highest levels of both nations.

And yes, Arthur, the Wolfowitz doctrine was a core part of this story.

Pretext for War (with discussion and exerpts)

[thatchmo]

Something to the effect that Congress has failed "actually sitting down and thinking through, in a bi-partisan way", to formulate a legal method of dealing with terrorism.  Yeah, sure, we'll do that tomorrow…Aloha, Steve.

[dogs_in_a_pile]

@jgritter

Anyone want to weigh in on the speculation that the missiles launched off the coast of California were Russian?

John G.

Yes.  They were not Russian.  Any such speculation is bunk.

[dogs_in_a_pile]

@lmcdel

The article says "The test on Saturday featured the launch of a missile outfitted with a dummy warhead toward the Kwajalein Atoll, a missile test site that’s part of the Marshall Islands in the western Pacific."

I know absolutely nothing about missiles, but I do know that numerous people here in western Colorado saw the Saturday night missile.  How does a missile launched off hte coast, and headed further west get seen in western Colorado? Is it that high in the sky that it can be seen here just as well as in so. Cal?

McD - I know quite a bit about SLBMs.  I should.  I spent 13 of my 37 (and counting) years of service to this country either on an SSBN or working direct support on the staff of major submarine and strategic shore commands.  Anyways…

All phases of flight are tested - prelaunch, launch, booster ignition, boost phase, transition to ballistic flight, transition to exoatmospheric flight, exoatmospheric flight, midcourse guidance, transition to re-entry, re-entry, pre-arming, arming, impact.
On a clear day you can see forever.  On a clear night you can see even foreverer.  Depending on the downrange flight distance to the impact range, the loft or boost "up" distance could easily be high enough to be seen in CO.  (Must have been quite the shocker for those Coloradoans enjoying the local "foliage"…I digress)
That was a long "yes" answer to your question about whether or not  a launch from the SOCAL OPAREA is that high in the sky to be seen in CO.

[time2help]

@Dogs_In_A_Pile

Yes.  They were not Russian.  Any such speculation is bunk.

I'm inclined to agree. The idea of Russia or China lobbing a SLBM or ICBM over downtown Los Angeles as a "show of resolve" just seems…too provocative. Really easy to start a shooting war that way. Stranger things have happened though.

The shot going visibly south-to-north near major population centers (San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco) is a pretty clear signal…this was purposely done for show and effect (whether to intimidate Russia/China or psyop Americans, or both).

As a general note - it would be really nice if people would stop lobbing nuclear weapons platforms around whilst thumping their chests…

[dogs_in_a_pile]

@Time2help

[quote]  The test range is a massive area northwest of Los Angeles.

This section of freeway is heading almost perfectly southwest, so the plume above appears to originate south of this location, and appears to be heading left-to-right, roughly south to north.

@Jason Dell

Jason Dell 1 day ago - The problem with the missile test explanation is that the officials say it occurred in the Pacific Test Range which is Northwest of Los Angeles. So why did the object move from South to North as viewed from Los Angeles? I saw it myself, and all the video from Los Angeles clearly shows movement from left to right. All the film footage is facing West towards the ocean, so left to right means South to North. It's impossible for a projectile like a missile to originate in the Northwest and move from the South TO the North. Also, what I saw originated far in the Southwest.

[/quote]
The problem with Jason's postulation is his fatally flawed assumption that the launch platform was in the PTR NW of LA.  Facing west with a left to right component only means that there is some cross range track distance traveled in a northerly direction, but not necessarily cardinal north.  The other assumption that may be flawed is location of the impact area.  If the impact area was anything WNW of the launch point…

[dogs_in_a_pile]

@Time2help

As a general note - it would be really nice if people would stop lobbing nuclear weapons platforms around whilst thumping their chests…

Actually, there is a very good reason to periodically lob these platforms around.  We have a robust test program for two reasons.  We have to make sure these things will work when they are supposed to just as much as we have to make sure that they don't "work" when they aren't supposed to.

[time2help]

Yeah, I get it. They can extend the range well south if so desired (see bottom left of map below). Your track makes sense as well, the left to right in the picture above could easily mask a westerly trajectory component. Guess you would just have to be there to observe the actual track.

Spartan 1 day ago - This object flew right above my place , I live 50 Miles east of San Francisco.

The timing and location of the shot were obviously for show.

[quote]As a general note - it would be really nice if people would stop lobbing nuclear weapons platforms around whilst thumping their chests…[/quote]

Sucks for poor Jason to be fatally flawed…RIP dude. What did Jason ever do to anyone?

[time2help]

@Dogs_In_A_Pile

Actually, there is a very good reason to periodically lob these platforms around.  We have a robust test program for two reasons.  We have to make sure these things will work when they are supposed to just as much as we have to make sure that they don't "work" when they aren't supposed to.

Yeah, I get that. But given the location, timing and that everyone with a friggin' cellphone on the west coast could record it for posterity…given the geopolitical atmosphere, my impression is that it was done primarily for psychological impact. Raising the tension level between the US and Russian (and possibly China).

What is being toyed with here is nothing less than massive death. So my point stands.

@Time2help

As a general note - it would be really nice if people would stop lobbing nuclear weapons platforms around whilst thumping their chests…

Just sayin'

[dogs_in_a_pile]

@Time2help

Yeah, I get that. But given the location, timing and that everyone with a friggin' cellphone on the west coast could record it for posterity…given the geopolitical atmosphere, my impression is that it was done primarily for psychological impact. Raising the tension level between the US and Russian (and possibly China).

What is being toyed with here is nothing less than massive death. So my point stands.

You would likely be surprised at the level of advanced notification and observable launch preparation that occurs beforehand to ensure tension levels aren't raised.  At least with state actors that matter.
Now some of the stuff being floated around out there is priceless.  Natural News had a few fabulously written articles, but I had to stop reading periodically to clean the vomit off my monitor…not really, but my point is, hopefully, also made.
(Damn…a run-on sentence with three split infinitives.  Profuse apologies to Mrs. Wamsley, my 4th grade English teacher)
PS - Jason was (likely) not fatally flawed…but some of his assumptions were.  Carry on…

 

[time2help]

I'm sure that this was, in no way, shape or form, intended to influence or disturb.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxP7GL4J3Ro

Frankly, after the other big topic of conversation in this thread I feel tired.

[dogs_in_a_pile]

I'm sure that this was, in no way, shape or form, intended to influence or disturb.

Intended?  Probably not.  Launch windows vary all the time depending on conditions at the launch site, flight observation points along the way and the impact range.  This (to me) was little more than a routine test launch.  It just happened to be a night.  I've done these…they're boring and frankly all we wanted to do was shoot the bird(s), return to port and get the techies and wonks and all their gear off the boat so we could get on with the business of training the crew and getting our proficiency at underway operations back up to speed.  These shots are typically done following a major upkeep or overhaul period to certify the launch platform and its supporting systems.  That's all.
I saw it for what it was and shared that information - but I'm kinda infamous around here for swimming against the stream.  Other people see what they want to see.  Sometimes that disturbs them.  I am of no help there.

Frankly, after the other big topic of conversation in this thread I feel tired.

Thankfully I missed that part and probably have no interest in engaging.

[wildlife-tracker]

I put this dashboard together to show you where the US invests it's military resources. Basically, there are two ways the US can invest in a global position using military resources. One way is through boots on the ground and the other way is to invest in a puppet army through military aid. I've never seen anybody put the two together before, so I present the following dashboards.
https://public.tableau.com/profile/brendan8450#!/vizhome/AmericanEmpire/Dashboard1

There are 3 dashboards. The first dashboard shows total estimated military investment by country by summing the costs of military aid as well as boots on the ground.  I make the assumption that each soldier on the ground is an investment of $100,000 per year. That is a wayyy low-ball figure because a soldier stationed in Afghanistan is actually estimated at $850,000. The only way to standardize the globe would be to assume the national average of $100,000 which is salary, healthcare, etc. for each soldier.This does not include all of the other massive expenses for each military base, such as overhead, equipment, etc. I'm not sure where to get figures for that.

So Estimated Total Investment = Military Aid ($) + (Number of soldiers * $100,000)

The dashboard is interactive, but I didn't include any filters or anything because I'm lazy. Hover over each country for more details as well as navigate across the map by clicking and dragging

The second dashboard shows where US troops are stationed across the globe. Darker red means more troops and grey means fewer. This does not include any deployments under 100, so embassies alone are not included.

The third dashboard shows military aid by country. Only countries that receive military aid are identified.

Clicking between dashboard 2 and 3 you will see there is very little overlap. Only 7 countries in the world have both boots on the ground as well as military aid. 

So knowing that these charts only include troop expenses and not all the other massive investments in maintaining a military base etc., you will understand that Israel is nothing but a strategic low-cost military investment for the US government (outsourced military).

I know that is a "bold" statement, but there have been a few already in this thread. My point is that Israel is both militarily and economically reliant on the US and therefore Israel is a slave to the US and her dollar… not the other way around.

[time2help]

There are other avenues for “aid”. Who, exactly, are the primary shareholders of the Federal Reserve System? I’d imagine that a bit of “aid” flows through that.

[time2help]

Just curious, off the books, have we “given” anybody else nuclear weapons?

[wildlife-tracker]

That's an assumption because we don't know who owns the federal reserve The bank of Israel may own a bit, but nobody but the federal reserve knows that.
I also forgot to mention that the military aid numbers were figures from 2014, and the military deployment data is from June of this year.