wars is as simple as it is. Just to know what the objections to power and who has something that needs to continue exercising power. Take off no more from the account of the fact that wars are just out of pride, and even symbolic images, the more so and predetermination, if necessary. You remember as a child and the most handsome of the guys he painted his mother on the floor and Then I undertook to spit or lewd hip movements on "her." They started a fight, a war, because, although a grandparent from a window fall warned that it was stupid to pineapples because of some lines drawn on the ground.
Or think of the bombing which was applied to Libya after Muammar Khadafi called "mad dog" to Ronald Reagan, then president of the United States. Of course, we will not say that it was because of the insult in question that decided the bombing, but all that is that if we consider that the war against terrorism that began in those years was the pantomime that is known now (a vulgar excuse)! Check them coconut, in that order of ideas, shuffling to the present-day Venezuela, charged with three imperial historical arguments of the war: communism, terrorism and drug trafficking!
War raised in the Middle East has a look of need for the U.S. dominance in the world. Let him clear. It has nothing to do with pride, African dogs or gringos, images or symbols, or in any way due to the much ballyhooed clash of civilizations, which makes us think of a bunch of gringos (and French Sarkozi in particular) going to those places to ban hand amputation for thieves and the use of the burka in women. Nothing further. When the U.S. was positioned in the lands of the Middle East and Persian Gulf waters, in full Cold War, back in 1957 under a doctrine called Eisenhower and Carter then, do so before for oil and mineral resources to contain the Soviet Union.
The Middle East was formed by "rogue" states and was a territory disputed in the Soviet influence, but also contained and contains the "80% or more of the world reserves of oil and natural gas and uranium reserves , copper, cobalt and other key industrial materials. "¹ So his theater of war ─ ─ today is a result of a conscious U.S. profiling in its capacity as end-dependent industrial apparatus energy and is a consequence of military geo-strategic calculations.
is clear that the U.S. and company fired the last round of war and plunder before turning "concerned" to Latin America. Of things not be successful there, soon we will have them at home. Tell
therefore as simple as possible, that the U.S. is the play as an industrial power and military adventure in the Middle East and Persian Gulf waters, although it sounds spectacular. GREATLY today when projected oil reserves depleted in planet and when another competitor emerges voracious giant in the international arena (China). Look at it this way: the U.S. is one of the major oil producers in the world, but are not themselves sufficient for self-sufficient its necessity, have to import. They consume 20 million barrels per day (produces 5), and is estimated at 2,025, along with China, will consume 35% of global reserves. See
northern concern [...] In 1970 the U.S. produced its own crop of more than 10 million barrels a day, now barely reaches 5. They have retained the order of 16 billion and annually consume 7,300 million, ie approximately two years of support. Daily swallowed 19 million barrels and, as I said, produces 5! ²
They knew since middle of last century and before when unusually developed its industrial unit, took geostrategic forecasts, now have to recover the investment. Who dares, ergo to bet that there will be no war? already maintain presence in Iraq and ensure a high percentage of regional conquest, though it is argued that the war was a fiasco, as the country is a mess and there is no optimal security hydrocarbon extraction. But such is the plan! There ─ ─ principle a pacified country taken by the U.S. (Japan, perhaps, a high price), since the doctrine of non-domain is precisely the state of peace but incendiary capsize. It permanently authorizes the imperial intervention and weakness remains the object of the subject. That is, the Machiavellian doctrine in situ and in vivo. Once
made clear the greed and extreme-energy dependence of the U.S., another factor to consider is Zionism that has been pivotal in positioning the apparatus of political and economic power country, to the extent that employees of the CIA, to discuss a significant expression level, complain that they have become an appendage of the Mossad operation. ³ Further, even when you take a look at the U.S. governmental structures, you will notice that the bodies are taken over by personalities and officials who do not seem to hesitate to consider Israel as a sort of "historical homeland", to whose altar is opaque because the oath of allegiance to the U.S.. , Rahm Emanuel (boss in the White House), Hillary Clinton (Secretary of State), Joseph Baiden (Vice Chair), Robert Gates (Defense Minister), Timothy Geithner (Minister Finance) Bill Richardson (Commerce Minister), Tom Dashle (Health Minister), among others, are oxen that tip the balance toward a region imperialized by the State of Israel, that's like saying the United States.
To end and to bring nearer the drama of the Middle East for us, pull you to Latin America, and correlate the situation in the natural resources aspect of the geopolitical and geostrategic. As above, where Middle East was recorded as an asset geostrategic, here there is a record of "backyard", appearing Venezuela and Brazil as strong in natural resource stocks, geopolitical and geostrategic, and Colombia and Chile as the imperial art of the boot on the continent. It is clear that the U.S. and company fired the last round of war and plunder before turning "concerned" to Latin America. Of things not be successful there, soon we will have them at home.
Notes:
1. Michael T. Klare, "The New Geopolitics of Energy" [online]. In Colombia Indymedia . - May 11, 2008. - [Screen 8]. - http://colombia.indymedia.org/news/2008/05/86487.php . - [See: 14 Jul. 2010].
2. Oscar J. Camero: Brief oil portrait of U.S. imperial system "[online]. In Political Animal. - 23 Oct. 2009. - [Screen 9]. - http://zoopolitico.blogspot.com/2009/10/breve-retrato-petrolero-del-sistema.html . - [See: 14 Jul. 2010].
3. Nil Nikándrov: "The Bilderberg conspiracy in Latin America" \u200b\u200b[online]. In Strategic Culture Fund. - 3 Jun. 2010]. - [Screen 5]. - http://es.fondsk.ru/article.php?id=3070 . - [See: 14 Jun. 2010].
0 comments:
Post a Comment