Outline of Forum
|I. United States Missile Defense History|
|II. Arab Spring and The Syrian Conflict|
|III. The European Axis of Evil|
|IV. Message Board|
Everything that we have discussed so far in our Meet the War Criminals series (i.e. US led crimes against humanity in the form of sexual violence and same-sex marriages) requires us to closely examine the overall role that the US has played in Europe and world-wide since their Independence was declared in 1776.
We begin with the Monroe Doctrine . The Monroe Doctrine is a US policy which, while limiting the United States' involvement with European colonies and European affairs, held that European powers ought not to have involvement with States in the Western Hemisphere. This policy, still effective, forms the background of today’s FOREX sovereign debt crisis and the NSA spying scandal.
It has managed to keep Europe well away from relevant information relating to America and the expanding debt bubble. The debt crisis has ballooned inside the FOREX market because of the Federal Reserve’s quantitative easing (QE) bond purchasing program.
The Monroe Doctrine is also the root of US-USSR enmity in post-World War II as Cuba's alliance with the Soviet Union was regarded by the US as intolerable and actually sparked the Cold War .
Today, in the Cold War aftermath, we see that Yulia Tymoshenko’s political imprisonment was a big factor behind Ukraine’s EU Association Agreement being signed with the EU. However, it was Russia’s adamant warnings about the EU’s growing debt that has served as the turning point in the ongoing debt crisis that Monroe Doctrine practicing obscures today.
We discussed, in Part III of Meet the War Criminals, how this situation forms the foundations of Cold War 2. We will now reveal the truth about U.S. politics by discussing the following:
Let’s take a moment, before we begin, to reflect over errors about reality, patterns of beliefs, and even split personalities that we discussed in Part III of Meet the War Criminals.
We mentioned how these disorders leads into behavioral finance, thus allowing us to see the delusions looming behind U.S. sanctions on Russia over their reunification with Crimea.
Things such as interpersonal relationships, including communication skills, and the ability to form new relationships and sustain them are all incorporated in these delusions. Thus, we await for the inevitable volcanic US political havoc upon the overall failure of the 2008 US Economic Bailout Plan .
Policies such as the Monroe Doctrine have led to the conflicts that we will discuss here in Part IV of Meet the War Criminals - "Time for War"!
One other mention first, the US has adopted yet another traumatic policy... the devaluation of its currency!
Devaluation almost always results in cries of outrage and calls for the government to be replaced! We will discuss later the correlations between the current dollar devaluation scheme and the current Syrian Conflict.
Now it’s time we examine the relationship between the Cuban Missile Crisis and the European Missile Defense Shield in this close-up look into the U.S.’s overall agenda in Europe.
The Cuban Missile Crisis - known as the October crisis in Cuba and the Caribbean crisis in the USSR - was a 13-day confrontation between the Soviet Union and Cuba on one side, and the U.S. on the other, in October 1962.
It is one of the major confrontations of the Cold War, and is generally regarded as the moment in which the Cold War came closest to turning into a nuclear conflict . It is also the first documented instance of the threat of mutual assured destruction (MAD) being discussed as a determining factor in a major international arms agreement .
It all started after the galling political moves of a failed U.S. attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime (Bay of Pigs, Operation Mongoose). In May 1962 Nikita Khrushchev proposed the idea of placing Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba to deter any future invasion attempt by the U.S.
Cuba, a Latin American country, allying openly with the USSR was regarded as offensive. It was viewed as a direct defiance to Monroe Doctrine guidelines. These political views and the failed U.S. invasion attempt made the East Germans and Soviets consider western control over a portion of Berlin a grave threat to East Germany.
Like Fidel Castro, Khrushchev felt that a U.S. invasion of Cuba was imminent, and that to lose Cuba would do great harm to the communist cause, especially in Latin America. He said he wanted to confront the Americans "with more than words... the logical answer was missiles".
The confrontation ended on October 28, 1962, when Kennedy and United Nations Secretary-General U Thant reached an agreement with Khrushchev. Publicly, the Soviets would dismantle their offensive weapons in Cuba and return them to the Soviet Union, subject to United Nations verification, in exchange for a U.S. public declaration and agreement never to invade Cuba.
The Cuban Missile Crisis is one of the gravest examples of provocative political moves by the U.S. allowable from Monroe Doctrine practice. It correlates with the NATO Missile Defense Shield plans of using warlike moves by the U.S. to sustain the FOREX Sovereign Debt bubble by creating permanent overseas military bases. On November 16, 2013 the U.S. launched an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (AHW) to create a Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) situation in Hawaii by way of a new Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement for US Forces in Asia. This along with the Ukraine’s Association Agreement with the EU is needed for the US-NATO Missile Defense Shield to have psychological effect!
Russia has already responded in a manner that underscores the use of nuclear force from the Pacific Fleet over this TPP-FOREX scheme! Let's take a closer look at U.S. National Missile Defense plans from the beginning!
US intrusive political plans were revealed on 23 March 1983, President Ronald Reagan announced a new national missile defense program formally called the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) but soon nicknamed "Star Wars" by detractors. President Reagan's stated goal was not just to protect the U.S. and its allies, but to also provide the completed system to the USSR, thus ending the threat of nuclear war for all parties.
SDI was technically very ambitious and economically very expensive. It would have included many space-based laser battle stations and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites
designed to intercept hostile ICBMs in space, along with very sophisticated command and control systems. In other words, "Washington DC... went Hollywood" at the height of the nuclear arms race !
A partisan debate arose in Congress, with Democrats questioning the feasibility and strategic wisdom of such a program, while Republicans talked about its strategic necessity and provided a number of technical experts who argued that it was in fact feasible (including Manhattan Project physicist Edward Teller). Advocates of Reagan's initiative prevailed and funding was initiated in fiscal year 1984. The goal was to totally defend against a robust, all out nuclear attack by the USSR.
In other words, Ronald Reagan's planned missile program (SDI or Star Wars) during the Cold War also supported the early 1980’s US bond market which was designed to ward off global inflation during the nuclear arms race. In essence, this meant that the US dollar was believed to be in a position to stabilize the global economy (regardless of it being floated on FOREX or gold-backed) because of its military situation!
Thus, in the 1990s and early 20th century (after the 1987 stock market crash ), the stated mission of the U.S. National Missile Defense changed to the more modest goal of preventing the U.S. from being subject to nuclear blackmail or nuclear terrorism by a so-called rascal state. This actually was the U.S. response to its October 1987 stock market crash from the ‘Star Wars’ bond market!
The October Crash of 1987 made the feasibility of this new more limited National Missile Defense goal somewhat controversial. Under President Bill Clinton some testing continued, but the project received little funding despite Clinton's supportive remarks, near the end of his term, that "such a system, if it worked properly, could give us an extra dimension of insurance in a world where proliferation has complicated the task of preserving peace."
On 16 December 2002 (post 9/11), President George W. Bush signed National Security Presidential Directive 23 which outlined a plan to begin deployment of operational ballistic missile defense systems by 2004.
The following day the US formally requested from the UK and Denmark use of facilities in Fylingdales, England, and Thule, Greenland, respectively, as part of the National Missile Defense program. The projected cost of the program for the years 2004 to 2009 was about $53 billion, making it the largest single line in the Pentagon's budget.
Since 2002, the U.S. has been in talks (yes... in secret) with Poland and other European countries over the possibility of setting up a European base to intercept long-range missiles. A site similar to the U.S. base in Alaska would help protect the U.S. and Europe from missiles fired from the Middle East or North Africa.
Poland's Prime Minister, Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz, said in November 2005 he wanted to open up the public debate on whether Poland should host such a base.
In February 2007, the US started formal negotiations with Poland and Czech Republic concerning placement of a site of ground-based Midcourse Defense System . The announced objective was to protect most of Europe from long-range missile strikes from Iran. Public opinion in both countries opposed. 57% of Poles disagreed, while 21% supported the plans; in Czech Republic it was 67% to 15% respectively. More than 130,000 Czechs signed a petition for a referendum against the base, which is by far the largest citizen initiative since the Velvet Revolution.
Russia threatened to place short-range nuclear missiles on their borders with NATO if the US refused to abandon plans to deploy 10 interceptor missiles and a radar in Poland and the Czech Republic. In April 2007, Putin warned of a new Cold War if the Americans deployed the shield in Central Europe. Putin also said that Russia is prepared to abandon its obligations under a Nuclear Forces Treaty of 1987 with the US.
In September 2009, President Barack Obama announced that plans for missile defense sites in Central Europe would be scrapped in favor of systems located on US Navy warships.
On 18 September 2009, Russian Prime Minister Putin welcomed Obama's plans for stationing American Aegis defense warships equipped with the Aegis RIM-161 SM-3 missile system , which complements the Patriot missile systems already globally deployed by American units. However, once the USS Monterey was actually deployed to the Black Sea the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement voicing concern about the deployment for one reason: the U.S. housing crisis!
This uphill U.S. missile defense situation actually led into Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment and the Ukraine’s EU Association Agreement as opposed to it seeking the end of nuclear war for all parties by still providing access to the complete system on U.S. navy ships to Russia.
In 2009, several US Navy ships were fitted with SM-3 missiles to serve this function, which complements the Patriot systems already deployed by American units. Also, warships of Japan and Australia were given weapons and technology to enable them to participate in the American defense plan as well.
On 12 November 2009, the Missile Defense Agency announced that six additional US Navy destroyers would be upgraded to participate in the program. In fiscal 2012, USS Carney (DDG-64), USS Ross (DDG-71), and USS Donald Cook (DDG-75) would be upgraded. USS Cole (DDG-67), USS McFaul (DDG-74) and USS Porter (DDG-78) will be upgraded in fiscal 2013. The goal of the program is to have 21 ships upgraded by the end of 2010; 24 in 2012; and 27 around 2013. On 4 February 2010, Romania agreed to host the SM-3 missiles starting in 2015.
The U.S. is now facing game changing circumstances daily with this current structure. Be very mindful of the ever-increasing amount of Defense Department budget cuts made from the U.S. debt reaching its Treasury bond limits. U.S. Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta was forced to create a defense strategy within the confines of a dwindling US budget .
Thus, on 23 August 2012, theWall Street Journal reported that the U.S. is planning a major expansion of missile defenses in Asia. According to American officials this move is designed to contain threats from N. Korea, but one that could also be used to counter China's military.
The planned buildup is part of a defensive posture that could cover a large swath of Asia, with a new radar in southern Japan and possibly another in S. East Asia tied to missile-defense ships with land-based interceptors. Thus on 16 November 2013, the Department of Defense launched an Advanced Hypersonic Weapon (AHW) from Hawaii to marshal in a new Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement to develop and demonstrate the technology for Conventional Prompt Global Strikes (CPGS) from Asia.
US Defense officials told the Wall Street Journal that the core of the new anti-missile shield would be an early-warning radar, known as an X-Band , sited on a southern Japanese island. Discussions between Japan and the US are currently underway. The new X-Band would join an existing radar that was installed in northern Japan in 2006 and a third X-Band could be placed in S. East Asia.
The resulting radars would cover N. Korea, China and possibly even Taiwan. According to US Navy officials and the Congressional Research Service, the US Navy has drawn up plans to expand its fleet of ballistic missile-defense-capable warships from 26 ships today to 36 by 2018. Officials said as many as 60% of those are likely to be deployed to Asia and the Pacific.
Some U.S. officials have noted that defenses built up against North Korean missiles would also be positioned to track a Chinese ballistic missile . A land-based radar would also free the Navy to reposition its ship-based radar to other regional hot-spots, officials said. This is the real situation behind today’s Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement.
A U.S. team landed in Japan in September 2012 to discuss where the second facility will be located, according to a U.S. defense official. Officials have said they want to locate the radar, formally known as AN/TPY2, in the southern part of Japan, but not on Okinawa , where the US military presence is deeply controversial. On 16 October 2012 two U.S. service members were charged with rape of a 12-year old Okinawa girl.
There’s one more thing that we must consider when discussing U.S. Missile Defense systems in SE Asia... US Forces Korea . The bread and butter behind the US Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement lies on the burden of households and the corporate sector in which case to justify a fattier U.S. Force build-up. These apparent household and corporate sector burdens create a greater playing field for same-sex marriage proposals from an openly gay military . This has inevitably sparked Korean Unification talks from the apparent crisis.
What's left of the correlation between the Cuban Missile Crisis and the US-NATO Missile Defense Shield is sitting inside the Syrian conflict awaiting Russia's final response! Let's now take a closer look into the current Syrian conflict.
America's reputation of persistent invasive political moves is very evident within the Syrian Conflict. The Syrian uprising, is an ongoing armed conflict in Syria between forces loyal to the Syrian Ba'ath Party government and those seeking to oust it. It resembles the Cuban Missile Crisis by the failed U.S. attempt to overthrow the Cuban regime.
The conflict began on 15 March 2011 with nationwide demonstrations, as part of the wider Arab Spring movement. Anti-government protesters, formed the Syrian National Coalition and demanded the resignation of President Bashar al-Assad and the end to nearly five decades of Ba'ath Party rule.
To review, the wider Arab Spring movement began in December 2010 with mass anti-government protests in Tunisia and has spread across the Arab world, particularly into Syria. By February 2011, uprisings occurred in Tunisia and Egypt , while Libya began to experience a civil war. Numerous other Arab countries also faced protests, with some attempting to calm the masses by making concessions and governmental changes.
The uprisings began with President Obama’s campaign to withdraw U.S. troops in Afghanistan knowingly not having gained more regional political ties other than the existing ties with Saudi Arabia and Turkey. This led to positioning troops to introduce a U.S. Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) situation in Asia after a long Treasury bond bubble . This U.S. political power issue exist because the U.S. refuses to abandon the M. East militarily for future crimes against humanity.
As the uprisings grew, the Syrian government waged a campaign of arrest that had caught tens of thousands of people, according to lawyers and activists in Syria and human rights groups.
As part of the response to the uprising, Syrian law had been changed to allow the police and any of the nation's 18 security forces to detain a suspect for eight days without a warrant. Arrests focused on two groups: political activists, and men and boys from the towns that the Syrian Army would start to besiege in April.
Even before the uprising began, the Syrian government conducted numerous arrests of protesters, political activists and human rights campaigners, many of whom were labeled "terrorists" by Assad. In early February, authorities arrested several activists including political leaders Ghassan al-Najar, Abbas Abbas, and Adnan Mustafa.
As the protests and unrest continued, the Syrian government began launching major military operations to suppress resistance, signaling a new phase in the uprising. On 25 April 2011, Daraa, which had become a focal point of the uprising, was one of the first cities to be besieged by the Syrian Army. An estimated hundreds to 6,000 soldiers were deployed, firing live ammunition and searching house to house for protesters, arresting hundreds. Tanks were used for the first time against demonstrators, and snipers took positions on rooftops. Mosques used as headquarters for demonstrators and organizers were especially targeted.
Security forces began shutting off water, power and phone lines, and confiscating flour and food. Clashes between the army and opposition forces, which included armed protesters and defected soldiers, led to the death of hundreds. By 5 May 2011, most of the protests had been suppressed, and the military began pulling out of Daraa, with some troops remaining to keep the situation under control.
During the crackdown in Daraa, the Syrian Army also besieged and blockade several towns around Damascus. Throughout May, situations similar to those that occurred in Daraa were reported in other besieged towns and cities, such as Baniyas , Homs , Talkalalch , Latakia , and several other towns. After the end of each siege, the violent suppression of sporadic protests in the area continued throughout the following months.
On 29 July 2011, a group of defected officers announced the formation of the Free Syrian Army (FSA), which would become the main opposition army. Composed of defected Syrian Armed Forces personnel and civilian volunteers, the rebel army seeks to remove Bashar al-Assad and his government from power.
This began a new phase in the conflict, with more armed resistance against the government crackdown. The FSA would grow in size, to about 20,000 by December, and to an estimated 40,000 by June 2012.
On 23 August 2011, alongside of the new Free Syrian Army (FSA), a coalition of anti-government groups formed the Syrian National Council . The group, based in Turkey, attempted to organize the opposition. However, the opposition, including the Free Syrian Army, remained an awkward collection of political groups, longtime exiles, grass-roots organizers and armed militants, divided along ideological, ethnic or sectarian lines.
The conflict in Syria has received significant international attention. The Arab League, European Union, the United Nations, and many Western governments condemned the Syrian government's violent response to the protests, and many expressed support for the protesters' right to exercise free speech. Initially, many M. Eastern governments expressed support for Assad, but they switched sides as the death toll mounted. Both the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation suspended Syria's membership.
The US and its NATO allies have pressed for al-Assad's departure, but Russia and China have consistently blocked any United Nations resolution that would impose sanctions on Syria. Russian officials stated that plans for Syria's political future should not be forced on it from outside and claimed that terrorists are present within the opposition's ranks.
In 2012, the U.S., UK, and France provided opposition forces with non-lethal military aid, including communications equipment and medical supplies . The UK was also reported to have provided intelligence support from its Cyprus bases, revealing Syrian military movements to Turkish officials, who then passed on the information to the Free Syrian Army.
The CIA was reported to be involved in covert operations along the Turkish-Syrian border, where agents investigated rebel groups , then recommended arms providers which groups to give aid to. Agents also helped opposition forces develop supply routes, and provided them with communications training. The majority of the weapons provided to rebel forces by Saudi Arabia and Qatar have ended up in the hands of hardline Islamic jihadists, who it is feared will create problems elsewhere once the Syrian conflict comes to a close.
Turkey, once an ally of Syria, has condemned Assad over the violent crackdown and has requested his departure from office. In October 2011, Turkey began sheltering the Free Syrian Army, offering the group a safe zone and a base of operation.
Together with Saudi Arabia and Qatar, Turkey has also provided the rebels with arms and other military equipment. Following border clashes between Turkey and Syria in late 2012, Turkey requested American Patriot missile batteries to help defend its borders against Syrian aggression; the missiles were delivered by NATO in January 2013.
Russia, whose Tartus naval base, electronic surveillance facility in Latakia, and airbase facilities at Tadmur (Palmyra) are its only military outposts outside the former Soviet Union, has supplied the Syrian government with arms as part of a business contract signed before the uprising began. Most Syrian military equipment such as tanks, missiles, and artillery was acquired from Russia which continues sales and support.
Russian-built air defense systems and anti-aircraft missile batteries purchased by Syria have been upgraded by installation of new equipment and modification of existing systems by Russian suppliers during the civil war; sometimes these installations are manned by Russian military advisers.
According to Russian Ground Forces Air Defense commander Major General Alexander Leonov Syria's Russian-supplied air defenses are sophisticated and effective. Overcoming them, as would be required in the event of threatened intervention should Syria use chemical weapons , has already proven to be a major challenge for U.S. and NATO forces. Western diplomats have frequently criticized Russia's behavior, but Russia denied its actions have violated any international law.
Iran, which sees Syria as a key regional ally, has not only provided the Assad regime with arms and technical support, but has also sent combat troops, specifically the Revolutionary Guards, to support Syrian military operations.
Technical support has reportedly included unmanned aerial vehicles to guide Syrian military planes and gunners in their bombarding of rebel positions. It has been reported that Iran also trained personnel from Hezbollah , a militant group based in Lebanon which has deployed pro-Assad fighters to Syria.
Let’s now discuss how former U.S. President George W. Bush's axis of evil label and the Monroe Doctrine has led to Arab Spring from the US War on Terror. Altogether this U.S. scandal is known as the so-called New World Order and is powered by the FOREX debt bubble! Bear in mind, the US/NATO Missile Defense Shield is targeted at governments that are labeled by and affiliated with the so-called axis of evil. Be advised, this discussion will lead us into Cold War 2.
Arab Spring is an international string of government protests designed to overthrow governments while disguising US/NATO troops withdrawing in Afghanistan. This of course all started by the US decision to rage war against the so-called axis of evil beginning with Afghanistan and the US War on Terror.
Jihadist, however, realize that the US is only trying to control a global opium market in Afghanistan from these wars. The so-called Axis of Evil are nations who are obviously against foreign-state ownership of national goods and resources!
Let’s now look at the correlation between the axis of evil label and the Monroe Doctrine to understand clearly how it has led to Arab Spring. Keep in mind, Monroe Doctrine practice actually started the Cold War.
The axis of evil is a term originally used by the former U.S. President George W. Bush in his State of the Union Address on 29 January 2002, and often repeated throughout his presidency, describing governments that he accused of helping terrorism and seeking weapons of mass destruction .
Iran, Iraq, and North Korea were portrayed by George W. Bush during the State of the Union as building nuclear weapons. This in itself ignited mass fears behind US attempts to seize opium fields in Afghanistan.
Therefore, the axis of evil label was used to pinpoint this threat among the U.S. and their allies to draw support for the U.S. led War on Terror as being appropriate countermeasures. The term has stirred controversy, as it turned out Iraq did not actually possess any weapons of mass destruction at the time of his speech or anytime afterwards to pose any creditable threat!
The phrase was credited to former Bush speech-writer David Frum, originally as the axis of hatred and then evil. Frum explained his rationale for creating the phrase axis of evil in his book The Right Man: The Surprise Presidency of George W. Bush.
Essentially, the story begins in late December 2001 when head speech-writer Michael Gerson gave David Frum the assignment of articulating the case for removing the government of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in only a few sentences for the upcoming State of the Union address.
Frum says he began by rereading President Franklin D. Roosevelt's date which will live in infamy speech given on December 8, 1941, after the Japanese surprise attack on Pearl Harbor . The axis of evil label however, needed a smoking gun in order to be suitable within the 2002 State of the Union script as infamous! This is why the phrase developed into the so-called "New World Order" derived from Arab Spring! Let’s look closer.
On May 6, 2002, then-Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton gave a speech entitled Beyond the Axis of Evil. In it he added three more nations to be grouped with the already mentioned rogue states: Cuba, Libya, and Syria.
The criteria for inclusion in this grouping were: "State sponsors of terrorism that are pursuing or who have the potential to pursue weapons of mass destruction (WMD) or have the capability to do so in violation of their treaty obligations". The speech was widely reported as an expansion of the original axis of evil.
In January 2005, at the beginning of Bush's second term as President, the incoming Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, made a speech regarding the newly termed outposts of tyranny, a list of six countries deemed most repressive. This included the two remaining Axis members, as well as Cuba, Belarus , Myanmar , and Zimbabwe .
In January 2006, Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz implicated the axis of terror that maneuvers between Iran and Syria following a suicide bomb in Tel Aviv.
In April 2006 the phrase axis of terror earned more publicity. Israel's UN Ambassador, Dan Gillerman, cautioned of a new axis of terror - Iran, Syria and the Hamas run Palestinian government; Gillerman repeated the term before the UN over the crisis in Lebanon. Some three months later Israeli senior foreign ministry official Gideon Meir branded the alleged alliance an axis of terror and hate.
The name or reference to the term axis has also been slated as incorrect. One criticism is that the Axis Powers of World War II signed diplomatic treaties with one another, such as the Pact of Steel and the Tripartite Pact, that created a military alliance between them, none of the nations that make up the axis of evil have taken similar steps to organize publicly, nor have they done so secretly according to present intelligence records.
Furthermore, Iran and Iraq fought the long, Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s under basically the same leadership as that which existed at the time of Bush's speech leading some to believe the linking between the nations under the same banner as misguided. Others argue that each of the three have some special characteristics which are obscured by grouping them together.
U.S. President George W. Bush’s use of the label axis of evil aimed to overthrow governments who were unaware of U.S. plans to seize control of opium fields after the attacks of 9/11. The overall U.S. strategy in its War on Terror was to gain enough political influence in the M. East to seize control over opium (and petroleum) production. This plan actually ignited Arab Spring. It was considered affordable because of Monroe Doctrine practice. Let's take a closer look at how the U.S. used the Monroe Doctrine as their guide to venture into Afghanistan with War on Terror thus, igniting Arab Spring!
The Monroe Doctrine was a policy of the U.S. introduced on 2 December 1823. It states that further efforts by European nations to colonize land or interfere with states in North or South America would be viewed as acts of aggression, requiring U.S. intervention.
The Doctrine noted that the US would neither interfere with existing European colonies nor meddle in the internal concerns of European countries. The Doctrine was issued at a time when nearly all Latin American colonies of Spain and Portugal had achieved independence from the Spanish Empire (except Cuba and Puerto Rico) and the Portuguese Empire. The US, working in agreement with Britain, wanted to guarantee no European power would move in.
President James Monroe first stated the doctrine during his seventh annual State of the Union Address to Congress. It became a defining moment in the foreign policy of the U.S. and one of its longest-standing tenets, and would be invoked by many U.S. statesmen and several US presidents, including Theodore Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon B. Johnson, Ronald Reagan and many others.
The intent and impact of the Monroe Doctrine persisted with only minor variations for almost two centuries. Its primary objective was to mirror the newly independent colonies of Latin America and confront any European intervention and control that would make the New World a battleground for the Old. The doctrine put forward that the New World and the Old World were to remain distinctly separate spheres of influence , for they were composed of entirely separate and independent nations.
The full document of the Monroe Doctrine is long and couched in diplomatic language, but its essence is expressed in two key passages; the first is the introductory statement:
The occasion has been judged proper for asserting, as a principle in which the rights and interests of the US are involved, that the American continents, by the free and independent condition which they have assumed and maintain, are henceforth not to be considered as subjects for future colonization by any European powers.
The second key passage, a fuller statement of the Doctrine, is addressed to the allied powers of Europe (that is, the Holy Alliance); it clarifies that the US remains neutral on existing European colonies in the Americas but is opposed to inter-positions that would create new colonies among the newly independent Spanish American republics:
We owe it, therefore, to candor and to the amicable relations existing between the US and those powers to declare that we should consider any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety. With the existing colonies or dependencies of any European power we have not interfered and shall not interfere. But with the Governments who have declared their independence and maintained it, and whose independence we have, on great consideration and on just principles, acknowledged, we could not view any interposition for the purpose of oppressing them, or controlling in any other manner their destiny, by any European power in any other light than as the manifestation of an unfriendly disposition toward the US.
Because the U.S. lacked both a credible Navy and Army at the time, the doctrine was largely disregarded internationally. The Doctrine, however, did have extraordinary British approval silently, and the Royal Navy mostly enforced it implicitly, as part of the wider Pax Britannica, which enforced the neutrality of the seas. This was in line with the developing British policy of laissez-fair free trade against mercantilism.
Fast-growing British industry was ever seeking outlets for its manufactured goods, and were the newly independent Latin American states to become Spanish colonies once more, British access to these markets would be cut off by Spanish mercantilist policy. Therefore, the Monroe Doctrine was viewed as a precursor to the US/UK Special Relationship.
As a matter of fact, the London Eye Ferris Wheel resembles a bicycle wheel specifically: to symbolize the U.S. Pacific Exchange’s laissez-fair market system roots internationally. In other words, the US/UK’s special relationship in fact actually involves Gay Pride standing ready to even engage militarily at any anti-US/UK sentiment! Let’s take a closer look!
The story of the Pacific Exchange was produced into the movie Quicksilver in 1986. It depicted a market maker that blew out his trading account and redeemed himself by becoming an infamous bicycle messenger. Bicycle messaging subsequently led to the close of the exchange!
We now know the answer to the question of how Europe is currently entangled in the FOREX debt bubble! It's all because of U.S. led crimes against humanity. The proof lies within one more U.S. political label: Big Brother! Let’s go on.
The Big Brother label was actually a policy extension of the Monroe Doctrine formulated by James G. Blaine in the 1880s that aimed to rally Latin American nations behind U.S. leadership and to open their markets to U.S. traders. Blaine served as Secretary of State in 1881 in the cabinet of President James A. Garfield and again from 1889 to 1892 in the cabinet of President Benjamin Harrison. As a part of the policy, Blaine arranged and led the First International Conference of American States in 1889.
The Special Relationship, Big Brother, and Monroe Doctrine policies form the political foundation and gives evidence to the well-defined geographic trail between North America, South America, and parts of Europe that the U.S. chose to use for crimes against humanity and pursue same-sex marriage laws.
Currently, the U.S. is attempting to expand within the M. East from Asia in pursuit to control the world's natural resources and opium market using government debt. This becomes more evident once we review The Roosevelt Corollary and today’s US Global Strike Program currently awaiting the U.S. led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement in Asia. This program is actually supposed to support the FOREX debt bubble in the form of U.S. protectionism . Let’s take a look.
As the U.S. began to emerge as a world power, the Monroe Doctrine came to define a recognized sphere of control that few dared to challenge. Before becoming president, Theodore Roosevelt had proclaimed the rationale of the Monroe Doctrine in supporting intervention in the Spanish colony of Cuba in 1898. After he became president, and following the Venezuela Crisis of 1902-1903, Roosevelt added the Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine in 1904. This corollary asserted the right of the U.S. to intervene in Latin America in cases of flagrant and chronic wrongdoing by a Latin American Nation.
The Roosevelt Corollary to the Monroe Doctrine was invoked to intervene militarily in Latin America to stop the spread of European economic influence. This actually forms the foundations of today's Arab Spring. Here’s how: the U.S. seeks to position their troops in Asia hoping as the M. East erupts in violent government protests Asians would tout about U.S economic relations. This is to disguise U.S. withdrawal in Afghanistan while attempting to ignite World War III. This plan is designed to ideally put the U.S. back in the spotlight of the international community concerning the votes on the next global economic agenda!
The Roosevelt Corollary was the most significant amendment to the original doctrine and was widely opposed by critics, who argued that the Monroe Doctrine was originally meant to stop European influence in the Americas. This amendment was designed to preclude violation of the doctrine by European powers that would ultimately argue that the independent nations were mismanaged or unruly.
Critics, however, argued that the corollary simply asserted U.S. domination in economic manipulation, by essentially making the U.S. a hemispheric policeman.
In other words, any independent nation formed by European powers ideally were considered mismanaged or unruly subsequently including the Allied Powers if they mingled in North or South American business! What does this say about the European Union’s relations with the U.S. inside today’s U.S. led sovereign debt crisis? These practices actually led to Yulia Tymoshenko's political imprisonment. The Cold War reveals the disquieting details.
During the Cold War, the Monroe Doctrine was applied to Latin America by the framers of U.S. foreign policy. When the Cuban Revolution (1953-1959) established a Communist government with ties to the Soviet Union, after trying to establish fruitful relations with the U.S., it was argued that the spirit of the Monroe Doctrine should be again invoked, this time to prevent the further spreading of Soviet-backed Communism in Latin America.
The U.S. thus has often provided intelligence and military aid to Latin and South American governments that claimed or appeared to be threatened by communist subversion. This, in turn, led to some controversy within the US, especially among some members of the left who argued that the communist threat and Soviet influence in Latin America was greatly exaggerated.
The debate over this new spirit of the Monroe Doctrine reached a climax in the 1980s, as part of the Iran-Contra affair within the Cold War. Among other things, it was revealed that the US Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) had been covertly training Contra guerrilla soldiers in Honduras in an attempt to destabilize and overthrow the Sandinista revolutionary government of Nicaragua and its President, Daniel Ortega. CIA director Robert Gates vigorously defended the Contra operation, arguing that avoiding U.S. intervention in Nicaragua would be "totally to abandon the Monroe Doctrine".
This fits today’s all so familiar resistance movements started by the CIA’s covert training operations in the M. East which ignited Arab Spring! Remember, these are the current situations lingering behind the U.S. led War on Terror and current EU Missile Defense Shield talks.
The Monroe Doctrine is often related with the idea of American isolationism - the idea that America keeps to itself and does not get involved with other countries. However, according to historian Hilde Restad and other dissenters from the old paradigm, America has never been isolationist.
It was around the presidency of James K. Polk that the idea of Manifest Destiny with relation to the Monroe Doctrine developed. Polk used the Monroe Doctrine to gain support for Manifest Destiny or expansion westward.
People do not tend to commonly think of western expansion as a highlight of U.S. foreign politics, however, Polk was able to keep Europeans out of America under the Monroe Doctrine while he grabbed land westward subsequently discovering gold and silver. The California Gold Rush thus provided solid ground to establish a British-based laissez-fair system of free trade with little interruption. Westward expansionism then became viewed as of form of intervention as opposed to isolation.
We hope that everyone now sees that Cold War 2 actually commences from the U.S. attempts to overthrow governments behind the veil of Monroe Doctrine practicing in order to claim control of over 40% of today’s global economy!
Be advised, the U.S. led War on Terror was the first step in this process. Meaning, the U.S. actually ventured out to seize control of opium production envisioning government uprisings as a result of 9/11. George W. Bush reveals these plans by using the label axis of evil which would ignite the uprisings. Arab Spring actually arose to be called the New World Order!
The Russian Federation is ready to meet the challenges facing globalization and Bio-Age namely this New World Order threat that’s actually global terrorism full-blown! Let's now move forward starting with grabbing a hold of gold while the U.S. continues to take the debt plunge.