Monday, June 9, 2014

The Purposeful Demise of Empire

If the title sounds repetitive to recent posts…it is; continuing my thread of musings about the changing (or not changing) world of power-elite struggles….

What if Kerry’s offer to Syria regarding the chemical weapons was no gaffe?

What if Obama’s backing down on Syria was the desired outcome?

What if Germany’s continuing straddle is merely a play for time?

What if the selection of Obama was for more than pacifying the anti-war crowd, but for pacifying an out-of-control US military-industrial complex?

What if the elite are not on the same team, or have just decided that their primary tool has grown too big for its britches?

Supposedly the US was going to shut Putin out of the G-8 / now G-7 (once again).  It didn’t go as planned:

The Russian leader also had a meeting on Friday with German Chancellor Angela Merkel.  "It was quite long - we were talking for about an hour. The same issues were raised. The most substantive conversation, of course, was my conversation with the president of the French Republic.

We had a more detailed discussion on our bilateral contacts, on our economic ties, and on international problems, including the Iranian nuclear problem and Syria," Putin said. "It seems to me that that exchange of opinions was very useful," he said.

The meeting between Russian President Vladimir Putin and French President Francois Hollande lasted more than an hour and a half on Thursday evening.

Putin was invited to a private dinner on the same night that Hollande hosted Obama at a French restaurant.

On Thursday, the Russian leader held separate talks with British Prime Minister David

…the Russian and US presidents had a 15-minute informal encounter at a lunch

Merkel and Hollande spent hours with Putin; Obama spent minutes.

An acquaintance recently asked me who I thought would be a better president for the US – Putin or Obama.  I suggested that if one wanted to dismantle the empire or cause it to take a few steps back (while maintaining the faith of regulatory democracy) Obama would be the perfect choice.

These things don’t happen by accident; Obama didn’t come out of nowhere to overrun Hillary in 2008 because a few college kids got excited about him.  The mainstream media didn’t all jump on the bandwagon because Obama wrote an audacious book about hope.

Had Hillary or McCain been elected six years ago, is there any doubt what would have become of the situation in Syria and the Ukraine today?

I suggested in an earlier post (also linked above) that the outcome of the story being played out between and amongst Russia, Germany/Europe and the US regarding Ukraine would tell much about the desires of the elite.  Have they concluded that their one-world-enabling creation – now evolved into a continuously belligerent US state – would lead the world to a nuclear catastrophe, one that even the elite would not survive?  This might cause a pause toward the march to world government.

Another clue will be offered by the next US presidential election; will a war hawk be chosen (there are many candidates) after the relative respite of Obama, or will it be one with a slightly more passive, yet acceptable tone?


  1. Putin is the only apparent stumbling block of the march towards world government. The ultimate aim of the troubles in Syria and Russia is to destabilise Russia and make it subordinate to the dominant empire.

    I believe that aim has not been abandoned.

  2. Ever heard of the "Rope a Dope?"

  3. When Hitler and the Nazis came to power in Germany, the financial and other business elites there hoped to keep them under control. Apparently they failed.