Désolé, je viens d´écrire ça sur un forum anglophone, j´ai pas le temps de traduire.
The thrid biggest war from the Us point of view : (In France, we sank our own fleet to don´t leave them to the german, and we collaborate, that is not nice also)
WWI.
The american people wanted nothing to do with this war between Germany and Britain.
The president Wilson pubicly declared neutrality.
However, under the surface, the US admninistration was looking for any excuse to get involved in.
In a observation of William Jennings, the secretary of the State : "The large banking interests were deeplys interested int he world war because of the wide opportunities for large profits".
It is important to understan the the lucrativly thing which can happem ta international bankers is a war.
Because it force the counrtry to borrow again and again more money from the Fed Reserve with hight interest rate.
Woodrow Wilson´s top advisor was the colonel Edward House, a man higly connected with international bankers who wanted to get in the war.
In a documented conversation beteween Colonel House and Sir Edward Grey, the foreign secretary of england, regarding how to make American enter into the war. grey inquired : "What will americans do if germans sinl an ocean liner with american passengers on board ?"
House responded : "I believe that a flame of indifnation would sweep the united states and that by itself would be sufficient to carry us into war".
So, on may 7th 1915, as suggested by Grey, the ship Lusitania was deliberatly sent in the german controlled waters where we know U boat were.
As expected, german sunk the ship, 1200 deaths.
To further understand the deliberate nature of this set up : german ambassy actually gave warning in the New York Times telling people that if they get in aboard the Lusitania, it would be at their own risk because every ship sailing from American to England, crossing a war zone, would be destroyed.
In turn, and as anticipated, the sink of the Lusitania caused a wave of anger in the american population. And USA enter the war a short time after.
The WWI cost 323 000 american deaths.
JD Rockefeller made 200 millions dollars of profit, equal to 1.9 billion of actual dollars.
Not to mention that war cost 30 billion to the USA.
Most of it was borrow to the Fed with interest, increasing the profits engaged by international bankers.
WWII.
On the 7th december 1941 (or the 8th, don´t remember), the Japan attacked the american fleet at Pearl Harbour. Triggering the entry of the USA in this war (war cause by the treaty of Versailles), Roosevelt said declared the attack was "a day that will leave if infamy".
A day of infamy indeed, not because of the surprised attack of Pearl harbour. After 60 years, on the surface information it is clear that the Pearl Harbour attack was known weeks in advance, it was directly wished and provoked.
Roosevelt, which family belong to bankers established since the 18th century in New York, whose uncle Frederik was at the head of the Fed Reserve at its set up, was very sympathic to the interest of the international bankers, and the interest was to enter the war. As have we seen, nothing is more lucrative to an international banker than a war.
In a contribtion of the Secratary of War of Roosevelt, Henry Stimson (25th november 1941), in a documented conversation he had with Roosevelt : "The question was how should we maeuver them into firing the first shot... it was desirable to make sur the japanese be the ones to do this so that there should remain no doubt as to who were the aggressors".
In the months leading up to Pearl Harbour, Roosevelt have done everything of his power to anger the japanese, showing a posture of agression :
he halted traded of oil with japanese (while declaring pubicly his neutrality), he froze the japanese assets in USA, he made public borrow to nationalist chinese et provided a military help to the british - both ennemy of the Japan. It is against every international martial laws.
On 4th December, australian intelligence services warned Roosevelt that a japanese task force moved toward pearl Harbour. Roosevelt ignored.
So, as hoped and allowed, 2400 soldiers were killed in Pearl harbour.
Before Pearl Harbour, 83% of the american people didn´t want to be involved in this war.
After Pearl Harbour, 1 millions of (brave) volunteers get into.
it is important to note that the nazi war effort was largely supported by two organizations :
one of them was the IG Farbem which product 84% of the german explosives and even the Zyklon B, used to test and killed millions of people in concentration camp.
One of the unspoken partner of IG Farbem was the Standard Oil Caompany of J.D Rockefeller.
In fact, most of the german air force couldn´t fly without a special additive which the patent belong to the Standard Oil.
the drastic bombing of London by the Nazi, was for example only possible by 20 million dollars sale of fuel to IG Farben by the Standard Oil Company of Rockefeller. (From "All honorable men", an war economist claimed that more than 100 allied firms were involved in the rise of the Nazi such as General Motors, Ford, Dupont - a french one - etc..)
This one example of how america negociated the both side of the WWII.
One other treator of is the Union Banking Corporation of New York, not only by financing the rising up of the power influence of Hitler, it was also a stream (thanks to Thyssen) of million dollars to and from the nazi.
The Union Banw was eventually taken for violation of the commercial law with the enemy.
Guess who was the vice director of the Union Bank ?
Presccot Bush, the grand father of the dumder George W Bush.
Keep that in mind, considering the moral disposition of the Bush´s policy.
Vietnam.
The USA officially get against Nam in 1964, following the so called incident of 2 US destroyes attacked by north corean ship in the Gulf of Tonkin.
This single situation was the pretext to the massive depoloyment in war. One problem however, this attack of the US destroyes never happened.
It was a completly stage to make an excuse to enter into war.
Former secretary of the Defense McNamara (again, look the report about Cuba, officially released and reported by the newspaper), said years later that the incident of the Tonkin Gulf was a - are you ready for this - "mistake".
Whereas many other officiers said publicly it was a joke invented et a full lie.
Once in the war, it was again a nice business.
October 1966, Lyndon Johnson erase the restriction on the soviet bloc, knowing that the soviet provided 80% of the weapons to the North Vietnam.
Consequently, the business of the Rockefeller financed the factories in Soviet Union, which were used to be sent in the North Vietnam (to fight brave, but unfortunatly poor guys.)
Howeverm the financing of the both side is only one side of the coin.
In 1985, the vietnam´s rules of engagement were unclassified. The details givs stupid bullshit as "North vietnamese anti aircraft missil systems could not be bombed until they were known to be operational", "no enemy could be pursued into the surrounding arreas between Laos and Cambodge, and most revelant : "the most critical strategic targets to be engaged via high approval only".
Apart fron this unbelievable restriction, North Vietnam was informed of these restrictions and could base their entire strategy according these restrictions.
This is why this war during so long.
The battlelin is this : the Nam never meant to be won. But sustained.
This war cost 58 000 american death, and 3 million of vietnamese.
So, where are we now ?
the 911 was a pretext to two illegal war : Afghanistan and Iraq.
And also, the war against YOU : Patriot act, and other insane legislations are completly and entirely designed to destroy your civil liberties and limit your ability to fight back against these events.
Your home can be search, without warrant, when you are not in, and arrested with no charge revealed against you. Detained undefinitly without the right to a lawer et TORTURED legally, all under the cover to be a potential terrorist (I thought terrorsit was from Iraq...lol)
It has been done in 1933 by Hitler, exactly the same "security" laws.
history repeat, and repeat, again.
War never changes, war will always be war. An economic issue for powerful international bankers.
you don´t believe me ? (good, you are right to trust no one, you should trust no one, me as bush, as CBS and FOX), check this quote :
"An evil exists that threatens every man, woman, and child of this generation. We must take steps to ensure our domestic security and protect our homeland" George W Bush ?
Nearly, also Adolf Hitler when he presented the Gestapo to the german people : "on the matter of communism, and its front organizations should not obscure the issues !" from Hitler = "our enemy is a terrorist network, mostly hidden, and every government that support them" george W Bush.
It is time to WAKE UP.
Patriot Act
Iraq Invasion
Afghanistan
Torture
wiretaps
Money
oil
Weapon´s Industry
Propaganda
9/11
Just wake up,
you´ve been told lies.
Prescoot Bush/george Bush/ george W Bush
Bush family Tree
In 1942, The New York Tribune dubbed grandfather Senator Prescott Bush, "Htiler´s Anglel", for his treasonous banking role in financing and arming the nzis. That profit began the Bush fortune.
Three generations of War profiteering. Genocide. Gamgsterism. Corruption. And rape of the US Constitution.
Reichstag, WTC. When history repeats, can we notice ?
Osama Bin Laden is NOT wanted by the FBI for the events of 9/11. The reason, according to the FBI´s Chief of Investigative Publicity Rex tomb, "the FBI has NO hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11" Source : FBI
Most americans believe that their government is not capable of attacking its own citizens. However, a declassified plan from 1962, entitled Operation Northwoods, consisted of : hijacking American airlines, attacking US military bases, blowing up US military ships, and shooting and TERRORizing innoncent Americans, all to be blamed on Cuba as a pretext for a US invasion. This plan was rejected by JFK. (oops, he´s been murdered, and a large part of his family has been killed in strange condition, but not the Bush one...) Source : Department of Defense
World Trade Center 7 was the third bulding that was completely destroyed on 9/11, but it was NEVER hit by a airplane ! This was a 47- story governement building that was taller than any building in San Diego, CA. This was the first, last and only time in history that a steel framed building has ever collapsed due to fire and on 9/11, three did ! Source : CNN
A put option is a financial bet that a stock will fall and lose tremendous value. On the days just prior to 9/11, the put options placed on United Airlines were 285 times higher than average. On Spetember 10, put options placed on American Airlines were 60 times greater than avergae. United & American were the only tow airlines involved in 9/11. Source : CBS, AP
Two of the alleged nineteen hijackers lived in the same house with a FBI agent in San Diego, CA. Also, according to Pentagon officials, five of the alleged hijackers were trained at secure US military bases in Florida. Source : CBS, MSNBC
George W Bush´s cousin (Wirt D. Walker) and brother (Marvin, P. Bush) were acting Chairman and Director of Stratesec Inc, A multinational security company, which was in charge of the WTC, United Airlines, and Dulles International Airport. All three of these "secure" locations were breached on 9/11. Source : SEC
When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace. Source : Jimy Hendrix
Bombing for peace is like fucking for virginity. Anonymous
![]()
Pour la première guerre mondiale. Les relations avec l'Allemagne se sont délabrées dès le début. Il n'y a, du reste, pas que le Lusitiana. D'autre part, il n'y a pas besoin de la guerre pour faire du profit. Et pire, la guerre est mauvaise pour le commerce : cf la guerre sous marine allemande.
Dès janvier 1915, du reste, Morgan a prété de l'argent aux français et brittanniques. Le chiffre est de 2 300 Millions jusqu'en 1917, jusqu'à la guerre. Aux allemands, 27 Millions. Ce n'est surement pas pour protéger les débouchés, ou pour faire du profit, que les américains rentrent en guerre.
D'un point de vue économique, tu analyse mal la situation, en plus. Parce que la guerre n'aboutit pas à la montée en puissance des entreprises que l'on dit "privées". La guerre aboutit, au contraire, a la mise au pas de l'économie, qui est alors commandée -temporairement, mais c'est un prélude à l'interventionnisme de la seconde guerre mondiale- par l'Etat. Je ne crois pas que les grands entrepreuneurs aient vu d'un bon oeil le War Industrie Board, ou bien la Food administration.
De même, tu as un problème chronologique : le Lusitania est coulé en 1915; la guerre débute pour eux en 1917. L'incident du Lusitania a causé des problèmes sur le plan de la politique intérieure : réveil de l'opposition par Théodore Roosvelt.
Il faut d'ailleurs rappeller l'hostilité, au tout début du XX, des faucons aux marchands de canons. Cela s'est vu dans la guerre américano-mexicaine de 1848.
Ta thèse est dépassée. Les américains se sont posé la question en 1935, avec la comission de Gerald Nye. Ils en ont conclu la même chose : les responsables de la guerre sont les marchants de canon. Mais aujourd'hui, a posteriori, ces thèses sont dépassées...
Quant a Pearl Harbor, les américains disposaient en effet de "preuves" montrant l'imminence d'une attaque japonaise. Mais ils ne savaient pas où, ils ne savaient pas quand. Surtout, ils méprisent alors les japonais (Roosvelt, comme tous les responsables américains de l'époque, est raciste : les japonais sont des sous hommes) et pensent qu'ils n'en seront jamais capables. Surtout, l'administration pense qu'ils attaqueront plutôt dans les Philippines, en Inde, en Australie, ou en Nouvelle Zélande.
Désastre préparé pour l'entrée en guerre dis-tu ? Mais alors pourquoi l'armée est-elle tout autant (non) préparée qu'en 1917 ? 1 Million et demi d'hommes, une marine détruite, les bâtiments commandés pas encore finis, l'économie toujours pas reconvertie ?
Que la guerre ait redoré le big business, c'est indéniable. Des types comme Kaiser, il y'en a eu. Mais ça ne veut aucunement dire que le big businesse a commandité la guerre.
Là aussi, même remarque quant aux divers offices dirigistes par rapport à l'économie, qui disparaissent une fois la guerre finie.
Quant au Vietnam, l'incident de Tonkin n'est pas faux. Le commandant du Maddox (utilisé dans le cadre de la surveillance par la CIA du Nord Vietnam) a cru voir des torpilles; torpilles qui n'ont, semble-t'il aujourd'hui, jamais existé. Par contre, Johnson a effectivement utilisé cet incident pour lancer l'escalade. Mais bizarrement, tu oublie de mentionner que si l'escalade est voulue, c'est pour des raisons politiques.
Là aussi, c'est un pétard mouillé. Les "pentagon papers" sont sortis 7 ans seulement après la déclaration de guerre.
La région est l'objet d'un interêt ancien : notre guerre d'indochine a été financée aux 3/4 par les américains. Ils ont occupé Saigon à partir de 1954. Ils ne sont certes pas intervenu lors de Dien Bien Phu [Nixon était pour, Eisenhower contre]
D'abord, l'inflitration de la CIA n'a que peu d'effet. Comme Kennedy [Je rappelle d'ailleurs qu'en 1962, il y'a 149 hélicoptères, et 73 avions, qui ont effectué 2048 sorties. Du reste, les berets verts et autres conseillers sont là depuis longtemp, et il y'a déjà des centaines de morts. Enfin, 16 000 soldats stationent au Sud du 17°parallèle.], il en arrive à la conclusion que les Sudistes se battent mal, et que pour écraser la subversion, il faut américaniser le conflit.
D'où la mise en place dès le 1 Février 1964 du plan 34A de la CIA, qui n'avait plus besoin que du vote de la guerre.
D'autre part, des raisons de politique intérieure : Johnson est menacé par Goldwater sur sa droite; et par les faucons placés par Kennedy avant de mourir; a savoir : Mc Namara, Bundy, Rusk; respectivement à la défence, au secrétariat d'Etat, et à la sécurité nationale.
Quant à l'enrichissement économique, il est réel; tandis que l'Etat se ruine puisqu'il mène deux guerres : celle du Vietnam, et celle de la Great Society. Il faut prendre cela en compte : l'Amérique en sort quand même mal en point. Alors je veux bien que les industriels y prennent du bénéfice; mais il est débile de dire qu'un dirigeant conduit sciemment son pays à la ruine...
Quant à l'aide aux soviétiques, et aux communistes, tu découvre, là aussi, un fait établi depuis longtemps...