The Geopolitics of WWIII

[Ron Mauer Sr]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=TC3tINgWfQE

Video: (21 mins)
Text copied from ForbiddenKnowledgeTV

If you watched the Webster Tarpley interview
a few days ago, this excellent summary of
world geopolitics today might be even clearer
to you but SCG does a phenomenal job, here:

"...[W]hen you see the mouthpieces of the
ruling class begin to demonize a foreign
country, the first question in your mind should
always be "what is actually at stake here?"

"For some time now Russia, China, Iran, and
Syria have been in the cross hairs. Once you
understand why, the events unfolding in the
world right now will make much more sense."

9/11 and the seeds of WWIII cannot be fully
understood without understanding the yoke
of the Petrodollar, which has been placed
around the neck of any country that wanted
to buy oil, since the 1970s...as SCG says here,
with the establishment of the Petrodollar,
"...the dollar went from being a gold-backed
currency to a oil-backed currency. It also
became America's primary export."

====

"This petrodollar system stood unchallenged
until September of 2000 when Saddam Hussein
announced his decision to switch Iraq's oil sales
off of the dollar to Euros. This was a direct attack
on the dollar, and easily the most important
geopolitical event of the year, but only one article
in the western media even mentioned it.

"In the same month that Saddam announced he
was moving away from the dollar, an organization
called the 'The Project for a New American Century',
of which Dick Cheney just happened to be a
member, released a document entitled
'REBUILDING AMERICA'S DEFENSES Strategy,
Forces and Resources For a New Century'. This
document called for massive increases in US
military spending and a much more aggressive
foreign policy in order to expand US dominance
worldwide. However the document lamented that
achieving these goals would take many years
'absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -
like a new Pearl Harbor'.

"One year later they got it.

"Riding the emotional reaction to 9/11, the Bush
administration was able to invade Afghanistan
and Iraq and pass the Patriot Act, all without any
significant resistance.

"There were no weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq, and this wasn't a
question of 'bad intelligence'. This was a
cold calculated lie, and the decision to
invade was made in full knowledge of
the disaster which would follow.

"They knew exactly what was going to happen
but in 2003, they did it anyway. Once Iraqi oil
fields were under US control, oil sales were
immediately switched back to the dollar. Mission
accomplished.

"Soon after the invasion of Iraq, the Bush
Administration attempted to extend these wars
to Iran. Supposedly the Iranian government was
working to build a nuclear weapon...[but] after
the Iraq fiasco, Washington's credibility was
severely damaged. As a result, they were unable
to muster international or domestic support for an
intervention...However, the demonization
campaign against Iran continued even into
the Obama administration.

"Why?

"Well, might it have something to do with the
fact that since 2004 Iran has been in the
process of organizing an independent oil
bourse? They were building their own oil market,
and it wasn't going to be tied to the dollar. The
first shipments of oil were sold through this
market in July of 2011.

"Unable to get the war that they wanted, the US
used the UN to impose sanctions against Iran. The
goal of the sanctions was to topple the Iranian
regime. While this did inflict damage on the Iranian
economy, the measures failed to destabilize the
country. This was due in large part to Russia's
assistance in bypassing US banking restrictions.

"In February of 2009 Muammar Gaddafi, was
named chairman of the African Union. He
immediately proposed the formation of a
unified state with a single currency. It was
the nature of that proposed currency that got
him killed.

"In March of 2009 the African Union released a
document entitled 'Towards a Single African
Currency'. Pages 106 and 107 of that document
specifically discuss the benefits and technicalities
of running the African Central bank under a gold
standard. On page 94, it explicitly states that the
key to the success of the African Monetary Union
would be the 'eventual linking of a single African
currency to the most monetary of all commodities
- gold.'

"In 2011, the CIA moved into Libya and began
backing militant groups in their campaign to
topple Gaddafi and the US and NATO pushed
through and stretched a UN no-fly-zone resolution
to tip the balance with airstrikes. The presence of
Al-Qaeda extremists among these rebel fighters
was swept under the rug.

"Libya, like Iran and Iraq had committed the
unforgivable crime of challenging the US
dollar.

"The NATO intervention in Libya segued into a
covert war on Syria. The armories of the Libyan
government were looted and the weapons were
shipped via Turkey to Syrian rebel groups working
to topple Assad.

"It was already clear, at this point that many of these
fighters had ties to terrorist organizations. However,
the US national security apparatus viewed this as a
necessary evil. In fact the Council on Foreign relations
published an article in 2012 stating that 'The influx of
jihadis brings discipline, religious fervor, battle
experience from Iraq, funding from Sunni
sympathizers in the Gulf, and most importantly, deadly
results. In short, the FSA needs al-Qaeda now.'...

"Let's be clear here, the US put ISIS in power.

"In 2013, these same Al-Qaeda-linked Syrian rebels
launched two sarin gas attacks. This was an attempt
to frame Assad and muster international support for
military intervention. Fortunately, they were exposed
by UN and Russian investigators and the push for
airstrikes completely fell apart when Russia stepped
in to broker a diplomatic solution.

"The campaign for regime change in Syria, as
in Libya has been presented in terms of human
rights. Obviously, this isn't the real motive.

"In 2009, Qatar put forth a proposal to run a natural
gas pipeline through Syria and Turkey to Europe.
Assad however rejected this, and in 2011 he forged
a pact with Iraq and Iran to run a pipeline eastward
cutting Qatar and Saudi Arabia out of the loop
completely.

"Not surprisingly Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Turkey
have been the most aggressive regional players in
the push to topple the Syrian government.

"But why would this pipeline dispute put Syria in
Washington's cross hairs? Three reasons:

1. This pipeline arrangement would significantly
strengthen Iran's position, allowing them to export
to European markets without having to pass through
any of Washington's allies. This obviously reduces
the US government's leverage.

2. Syria is Iran's closest ally. It's collapse would
inherently weaken Iran.

3. Syria and Iran have a mutual defense agreement,
and a US intervention in Syria could open the door to
open conflict with Iran.

"In February of 2014 this global chess game heated
up in a new venue: Ukraine. The real target,
however was Russia.

"You see, Russia just happens to be the world's
second largest oil exporter, and not only have they
been a thorn in Washington's side diplomatically, but
they also opened an energy bourse in 2008,
with sales denominated in Rubles and gold.
This project had been in the works since 2006.
They have also been working with China to pull
off of the dollar in all of their bilateral trade.

"Russia has also been in the process of organizing
a Eurasian Economic Union which includes plans to
adopt common currency unit, and which is slated to
have its own independent energy market.

"Leading up to the crisis in Ukraine had been
presented with a choice: either join the EU under an
association agreement or join the Eurasian Union.
The EU insisted that this was an either-or-proposition.
Ukraine couldn't join both. Russia on the other
hand, asserted that joining both posed no issue.
President Yanukovich decided to go with Russia.

"In response, the US national security apparatus
did what it does best: they toppled Yanukovich
and installed a puppet government...

"Though this all seemed to be going well at first, the
US quickly lost control of the situation. Crimea held a
referendum and the people voted overwhelmingly to
secede from Ukraine and reunify with Russia. The
transition was orderly and peaceful. No one was killed,
yet the West immediately framed the entire event as
an act of Russian aggression, and this became the
go-to mantra from that point on.

"Crimea is important geostrategically because of its
position in the Black Sea which allows for the projection
of naval power into the Mediterranean. It has also been
Russian territory for most of recent history.

"The US has been pushing for Ukraine's inclusion into
NATO for years now. Such a move would place US
forces right on Russia's border and could have potentially
resulted in Russia losing their naval base in Crimea.
This is why Russia immediately accepted the results of
the Crimean referendum and quickly consolidated the
territory.

"Meanwhile, in Eastern Ukraine, two regions declared
independence from Kiev and held referendums of
their own. The results of which overwhelmingly
favored self-rule.

"Kiev responded to this with what they referred to
as anti-terrorist operations. In practice this was a
massive and indiscriminate shelling campaign which
killed thousands of civilians. Apparently, killing
civilians didn't qualify as aggression to the West.
In fact, the IMF explicitly warned the provisional
government that their 17 billion dollar loan
package could be in danger if they were not able
to put down the uprising in eastern Ukraine.

"While the war against eastern Ukraine was raging,
elections were held and Petro Poroshenko was elected
president. It turns out that Poroshenko, was exposed
by a leaked diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks in
2008, as having worked as a mole for the US State
Department since 2006. They referred to him as 'Our
Ukraine insider' and much of the cable referred to
information that he was providing. (A separate cable
showed that the US knew Poroshenko was corrupt,
even at that point.)

"Having a puppet in place, however hasn't turned out
to be enough to give Washington the upper hand in
this crisis. What does Washington do when they
have no other leverage? They impose sanctions,
they demonize and they saber rattle (or pull a
false flag).

"This isn't a very good strategy when dealing with
Russia. In fact, it has already backfired. The sanctions
have merely pushed Russia and China into closer
cooperation and accelerated Russia's de-dollarization
agenda. And in spite of the rhetoric, this has not led
to Russia being isolated. The US and NATO have put
a wedge between themselves and Russia, but not
between Russia and the rest of the world (look up
BRICS if you are unclear about this).

"This new anti-dollar axis goes deeper than economics.
These countries understand what's at stake here. This
is why in the wake of the Ukrainian crisis, China has
proposed a new Eurasian security pact which would
include Russia and Iran.

"Consider the implications, here as the Obama
Administration begins bombing in Syria, which also
has a mutual defense agreement with Iran.

"This is not the cold war 2.0. This is World
War 3.0. The masses may not have figured it out
yet, but history will remember it that way.

"Alliances are already solidifying and and a
hot war is underway on multiple fronts. If the
provocations and proxy wars continue, it's only a
matter of time before the big players confront each
other directly, and that is a recipe for disaster.

"Does all of this sound insane to you? Well, you're
right. The people running the world right now are
insane, and the public is sleep-walking into a
tragedy.

"If you want to alter the course that we are on,
there's only one way to do it. We have to wake up
that public. Even the most powerful weapons of
war are neutralized if you reach the mind of
the man behind the trigger.



"How do we wake the masses you ask? Don't wait
for someone else to answer that for you. Get
creative. Act like you children's and grandchildren's
futures depend on it, because they do."

[heather6thsense]

Thanks Ron this is so informative.

[Stephanie]

Posted by Ron Mauer Sr (here)

"Does all of this sound insane to you? Well, you're
right. The people running the world right now are
insane, and the public is sleep-walking into a
tragedy.

"If you want to alter the course that we are on,
there's only one way to do it. We have to wake up
that public. Even the most powerful weapons of
war are neutralized if you reach the mind of
the man behind the trigger.[/FONT][/COLOR]



"How do we wake the masses you ask? Don't wait
for someone else to answer that for you. Get
creative. Act like you children's and grandchildren's
futures depend on it, because they do."

This is the most comprehensive,overview on the situation taking place,I have read and understood. Thank you Mr.Mauer

[Snookie]

Wow! One of the best explanations of geopolitics I have ever seen.

Bravo!

[Snookie]

For those who enjoyed the video above, you would most likely find this book enlightening as well. It is called The War Against Putin by M S King. Here is a review of it on Amazon:

"In the West, politicians and journalists of all stripes have referred to Russian President Vladimir Putin as a "thug", a "tyrant", a "murderer", a "Communist", a "Nazi", the next "Hitler" and more. But amongst the Russian people, his popularity rating has reached levels as high as 85%. There is even a very popular hit 'disco' song about him - 'A Man Like Putin'. So, who's right? Why such hatred for Vladimir Putin? Is it justified? Or has Putin been targeted merely for standing up the US-EU Axis of Internationalism? In clear, simple, powerful and concise language - supported by more than 100 illustrations - 'The War Against Putin' takes readers on an exciting 'crash course' journey from Russia's Medieval founding, through the days of the Czars, through the Communist Revolution and bloody Civil War, through Stalin & World War II, through the Cold War, through the Soviet collapse, through the Yeltsin disaster, and finally the Putin-led rebirth of the Russian nation. It is one of the "greatest stories never told", and will shed badly needed light on the new Russia, its dynamic leader, the dark forces aiming to bring about its demise, and maybe even World War III. Says Dr. William Carlucci: "I was glued to the edge of my seat with jaw wide open as I read this gem of a book from start to finish, in a single sitting. The clarity and simplicity with which King's masterpiece demystifies current events represents a rare ability to speak to the reader with entertaining and understandable prose. This piece really needs to go viral, and fast. 5 Huge Stars!"

[Milneman]

"If you're born yesterday you'll believe what anyone in authority tells you.... With a little history it doesn't prove that the government is lying to you...it just asks you to inquire if it is."

I wonder. Is the same kind of sceptical inquiry of history permitted in our own cases as theoreticians of conspiracy?

"If you're born yesterday, you'll believe what anyone in authority tells you.... With a little history it doesn't prove that the alt community is telling you the truth...it just asks you to inquire if it is."

Food for thought.