Sunday, April 15, 2018

The Grand Alliance Against Nato

The Grand Alliance Against NATO


By: Kevin Drummond

Overview: 

The Grand Alliance Against NATO, or the Eurasiatic Alliance, formed following a string of US/UK led NATO overreaching intelligence and military actions which were based on "alleged" deployments of chemical weapons by the Syrian Assad regime.

None of the bombings to sanction Syria were proven justified, and the last two gas attacks, April 7, 2017, and April 8, 2018 were proven to have been staged by terrorists operating in the region allied with both Saudi Al Quaida, and British intelligence, funded by Soros's "Open Society" foundation, itself later connected to both US and UK intelligence via the US State Department.


  • The GAAN is a MultiPolar response to an outdated and bygone era in world history; one that is dying a slow death in the US, and in the UK, and in both Israel and S Arabia, as well. You can try a crash course in Geopolitics, or you can use this chart, or a combination of them, both. But this is, on its surface, the substance of the theories of polar world relations, according to  Dr Kenneth Waltz's thesis:


Any re-insistence of the US in Cold War terms, such as any talk of a "new Cold War", is an example of the incorrect theory of UniPolarity. The originator of this view of polar world theory, Kenneth Waltz, expressed his doubts in the balance and security of a UniPolar world, and it was not his creation. Waltz emphasized that two is the minimum number of poles in a given geopolitical relationship.

 UniPolarity is often defended by the argument that, "UniPolarity doesn't mean Imperialism"... Which is then followed by redefining Imperialism. This proves that it is merely fantasy. However, it was sold to US policymakers as flattery during the early days of eu (1999-2009).


Dr Kenneth Waltz may have been so accurate about the rise of the MultiPolar World following the collapse of the Soviet Union, that his predictions actually assisted the US planners in how they avoided the necessary updates to their diplomatic and internal functions.

Like so many of us, Kenneth Waltz was called an antisemite for telling the truth about the Israeli-Iranian conflict, a truth that has no basis in race or religion, but in Geopolitical fact.

When he said that Iran should have the bomb, he merely illustrated that the fictional Unipolar United States could not, and verily, shall fail to reproduce a contrived image of itself, anywhere. And, when this is applied practically in the Cradle of Civilization, Iran having the bomb is inevitable due to two being the least number of powers in a geopolitical relationship. Instead of fighting peace, Waltz stated that the US, and other nations, should unite, and foster that peace in the treaties that unite the world in the question of nuclear industrialization.

To this day he is a despised figure in Israel, but, so is common sense, and so is humanity, and so is tolerance: religiously and politically!

Waltz's major thesis in the balance of power being limited to at least two poles, and that two poles meted out a more balanced geopolitical order.


And this is the reason that the emergence of the MultiPolar World would accompany a de-emphasized definition of military polarity, in favor of a series of interconnected regional trade blocs.

The US, however, spurred on by the myth of UniPolarity as a viable geopolitical concept, has missed every major opportunity to place itself into the position of a world order designed around the evolution of peace. And, the basic goals that the US pursued, across a wide spectrum of influences, made very little progress integrating itself into the MultiPolar World.

Poriah is the result. And, this poriah was bound to seek external validations of its military prowess.


Member States of the Grand Alliance Against NATO: Russia, China, Iran, Turkey, Syria, Pakistan, India, and North Korea. Iraq and Afghanistan are both very close to joining should war versus NATO break out.

  • The Enemy of the Grand Alliance Against NATO (GAAN)


The principal adversary of the GAAN is the Ugly Four Axis, consisting of two NATO members, the US, and the UK, and the nations of Israel and Saudi Arabia. The differences boil down to complicated top-heavy conceptual views of the world, which are held in high value by the Ugly Four, against the practical and functional view of the world observed by the member-states of GAAN. 

The basic differences between the two can be summed up as the difference between the real MultiPolar World, which is supported by the GAAN,  and the UniPolar World, which is pursued by the Ugly Four.

Beside the fact that the UniPolar World is fictional, academic support, outside of one Yale professor, is almost non-existent, as well.

The academic advocacy of the UniPolar World does stubbornly persist, in spite of the system's myriad of theoretically driven failures, such as those in North Africa, and in Iraq, for example. The threat of the failure in Syria to spread into Iran has become the line in the sand most likely to produce a world war.

The particular Yale professor's support of UniPolarity, whose endorsement of it is most vociferous, possibly comes via that institution's Skull and Bones organization, and thus has affected a biased view of the US role geopolitically, and as a result, the flawed doctrine is a major reason for the failures of the US to achieve its goals, as well as has been a major factor in endangering the existence, security, and the citizens of the Ugly Four Axis.

On behalf of a misguided geopolitical ideology, the US has a habit of misleading the American people, and has been lying to them for years...

  • Economic Differences

The GAAN plans to replace the oil/military Fiat US Dollar with CryptoCurrencies. I believe that Italy should use CC's to divorce itself from the destruction of the collectivized Euro. CC's at such a nation state level would ultimately un-crypticize the subject, and for this reason, the emergence of a dollar-less liquid economy structured within alliance states, and anti Globalist states, is viewed as a disaster in the eyes of current Western methodologies.

And NATO member-states are behind the 8-ball on this...

  • Member States

Russia is the primary member state and the host nation of the Grand Alliance. The membership grew from dissatisfaction within European, PanArabic, and PanPacific nation states concerned with unchecked US led annexation, international diplomacy of violence and unbridled greed, and a general disagreement with the scope and latent purposes behind the intelligence agencies of Western nations, the resulting violence, and the corrupting of their regimes.

Much of this was made possible by Western media outlets, who soon discovered that at least, as far as Russia is concerned, they remained welcome to report the truth or the propaganda, as they wish. While other nations, particularly Syria, have regarded the international press with extreme suspicion since it is an entertainment effort, and not at all academic.
Syria was the nation around whose defense the Grand Alliance formed in 2015, which also brought in a Shia Iran, looking to halt US/Israeli expansionism, and to drive Israel off of the Golan Heights.

Saudi Rebels, Qatari Rebels, and Yemeni Rebels are also part of the network, following the failed Saudi military missions against Qatar and Yemen.

  • European Members

As of April, 2018: NATO has assured Israel that, if it succeeds in starting war in Iran, that NATO has no intentions, nor interests, in defending Israel.....

The dissatisfaction with NATO, especially in 2018, resulted in the application for Russian help by the Višegrad Group, which was threatened with military action by EU, presumably, either via NATO, or the Common Security and Defense Policy, the Army of EU, (which also superceded the OSCE) should they refuse to comply with eu policies of Islamacization, or converting European to Muslim culture: thereby destroying it.



    (The Wikipedia Page regarding the V4 is actually missing things.... The V4 is geographically correct, as described: but the V4 is, in reality, a United Bloc within EU, itself. V4 disagrees intensely with EU in every aspect, and is frequently threatened with legal actions, and sometimes even military conflict. The V4 is typically regarded as breakaway states of eu, while NATO publishes propaganda to appear as if there is no stress at all between the 28 EU member-states. The V4 actually united in order to consolidate their complaints, which take root from cultural, religious, and economic differences, as well.)    


The policy of Islamacization indicates a long-reaching Globalist goal of consolidating two extremely different classes, and eliminating the middle class entirely. This includes polarizing the populace into one very rich class, and the other class, an extremely poor class of peoples; and to accomplish this in two different geographic regions, separating the rulers, from the ruled.

This is the purpose for open borders, and the flooding of Europe with desperately poor, and violent, non-Europeans.

This ultimate goal, of accomplishing a two class society, is most basically: Globalism; in a nutshell. That consolidation of the poor would be in Europe, separating them from the rich class of oligarchs looking to transfer themselves to where the oil is, and in those Arab states' many lawless playgrounds, such as those of the United Arab Emirates, and Kuwait.

When, in April of 2018, anti-globalist Hungarian PM (and 1/4 of V4) Viktor Orban, overcame the Soros Open Borders Foundation's efforts to fix his re-election for the mildly pro eu opposition, and won 70% of the vote, this signaled to NATO that the four members of the Višegrad Group would eventually join the Grand Alliance Against NATO; with the only possible exception of Poland.

Most likely, however, Poland will not choose to fight eu's constant criminal charges and EU High Court cases, alone.

Meanwhile, Austria and Italy continue to bear extreme dissatisfaction with both NATO and eu, and currently it is unclear whether or not that neutrality will spread into full blown membership into the Grand Alliance States.

Turkey joined the Grand Alliance against NATO in October of 2017. This makes Turkey the first NATO state to do so. This was apparently the result of an attempt by NATO centcom, and the CIA, to overthrow the regime of Turkish PM Erdogan, in the summer of 2016. As a result, the Turkish autocrat was armed by Russia, signaling his distrust of any further NATO actions.

At the outbreak of hostilities, Erdogan only needs to immediately nationalize the US installations within it's borders.

When a hesitant eu will not wish to exacerbate further the tensions, NATO will agree to abandon the installations in exchange for the safe return of personnel attached to them. This would easily became an established practice, which could quicken the resolve of the Višegrad Group, as well as Serbia and Croatia. The Balkans would most likely vote to enter the Alliance within six to eight months of any US action against Iran.

Ukraine is not going to remain NATO for two reasons: 1) the pro eu Millennials and Gen Z are weak morally, and haven't the will to fight, and, 2) the political tug of war between Europe and Russia will end as they all do: the geography determines the alliance. It is hair splitting to deny the NATO Charter's definition of a member-state, and the whimsical, and ultimately, unsuccessful effort to avoid that exact use of words yet, still be a member-state engaged under the guidance of pro eu Ukranian politicos. It has failed, anyway.

  • India/Pakistan


  • India
US intelligence and the military planning contingent continue unitedly to eye the apparent unprecedented military cooperation between Russia and India as a genuine threat to the US positioning geopolitically, as well as militarily on the Subcontinent, as well as the Indian Ocean Command.

The initial observation, that Indian politicians are less than impressed with the US commitment divided between India, and their enemy, Pakistan, seems to be driving the emergence of the alliance between the two. And that alliance is, also, tenuous. But with the Indian withdrawal from the next gen Russian aircraft project, the US felt that their concerns were no longer necessary: until India honored a previously cancelled purchase agreement for Russian aircraft, which now casts serious doubts that India has not joined the Grand Alliance. All outward appearances say that it has....


  • Pakistan

The tendency for western policy makers to rely on poorly understood analysis criteria, specifically in regards to the Arab World, has cost the lives of soldier and spy, alike. The simplest form of inability has also dominated the analysis criteria in regards to the two adversarial states of Pakistan, and India.

According to the Assyria Principle, adversarial states will shelf those cultural animosities, mutual though they are, in favor of an alliance to halt an enemy which threatens both of their states. This effect of the Assyria Principal is bound to unify the two factions vying for control inside Afghanistan, eventually.

But, and more dangerously to the ill-fated UniPolar analysis criteria which designed the conquest of Afghanistan: this effect has already resulted in an unprecedented set of military, economic, and political steps in cooperation between these two nations.

Reasons

The nations of India and Pakistan share similar diplomatic goals with China. If attacked, they share military goals. They are regionally close to China and Russia, and through the SAFTA, South Asian Free Trade Alliance, and the APEC the Asian Pacific Economic Community, these nations enjoy robust trade. But the reasons for shifting political relationships with the United States are many in number, and they all share a couple of very broad and sensitive issues to both nations.


The reasons for this all boil down to the landmark efforts to sign both the nations of Pakistan, and India, to the Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, as both nations arrived upon the technology at similar times (in the late 1990's) and also, to assert their participation in recognizing the spirit of START goals aimed at peacefully integrating nuclear technology into the landscape of the third world.

In the pre-1960's view of nuclear power, and the tremendous responsibilities which are part and parcel to the science: nuclear technology was exclusively a privilege of the first world nations...

Thus, the sphere of influence beneath the umbrellas of each of the US, and USSR, offered to those nations, with which the privilege of nuclear technology was granted, the privilege also of association to the first world nation ideal.

China, however, did not receive enough of an invitation from the USSR to prevent Nixon's divide and conquer exploitation of a US/Sino relationship.

And this became one of the points of contention between USSR Sino relations, resulting in the welcoming of the entreatment of the United States, and Nixon, to break the deadlock....the BiPolar World began to end with Chinese admittance to the Nuclear Power Nations, and as a permanent member of the UN Security Council, independent of the clarified BiPolar lines of divide....as a third power to consider.

China had been a third world nation. By the time that China had a nuclear program well underway, in 1964, it was clear that the diplomatic relationship with the USSR had become somewhat divisive.

This technology, to the outward view, may have been easily perceived as instrumental for Chinese admittance into the club of first world nations, making its path into this status revolutionary.

But later, in the cases of Pakistan and India, Chinese admittance into the first world was viewed as a model, an archetype, one which could be imitated.

When, however, China became the target of an insane direction launched by the orders of an amateur statesman in the form of one Donald Trump, the ramifications this held for India and Pakistan were immediately a cause for their national concerns: if China is going to suffer American led reneging, then, each of their nations' time as nuclear nations is, at least, in grave danger.

This, above all, has driven the pathway to alliance with China and Russia against The Ugly Four Axis, and temporarily, at least, cooled the hostilities between the governments of both nations.

The secondary reason for IndoPakistani cooperation, and alliance against the US and her three major powers to which she is allied, would be the exit by Trump from the Iranian JCPOA.

The treaties permitting the nations of Pakistan and India to enter the group of Nuclear Nations, to which the US is a cosignator, are both practically identical to JCPOA. Both nations have a large Muslim population, and an out of control president in pursuit of bloody Zionism is understandably a considerable threat to their security.

To date, India is only an Acceding State to the Non Proliferation Treaty. And Pakistan is not in any clarified position at all. These decisions seem to be validated by the Zionism driving the US's geopolitical goals since 1949.


The reservations to singing are over real concerns that India and Pakistan have, which the US diplomatic players are just not addressing. The JCPOA exit was a decision made not by Washington, but by Netanyahu. It could have just as easily been one, or both of them.

Allying with the Russians and Chinese seems a better fit, as well as offering them, and the world, a more stabilized environment in a post WW3 world. It seems that in exiting JCPOA, an attack of Iran is implied, and almost guaranteed to be inevitable, falling sometime after the deadline for eu to close shop in Iran, by November, 2018. That will escalate the 3rd World War from Syrian back pages, and back into the headlines.


Due to the standard of Jewish bias in the analysis departments for the military, the intelligencia, and the State Department, as well; the United States is still not keen to acknowledge that Pakistan and India have joined the Grand Alliance Against NATO, already.

But, they have joined. Meanwhile, the narcotic of media assurance has yet to diminish long enough for the American public to be informed that, yes: Donald Trump, and Israel, have touched off a third world war in their psychoses, and in their mutual incompetence.

And, those who lead the intentional blindspots about the danger that we are in may have other reasons for their silence than ignorance.

Perhaps, they were keen to let the media/public in on the new, alarming pace of alliance against NATO, but had second thoughts, as their heads were filled with visions of the idiot president threatening already starving third world nations with even more starvation, via Tweets, and his amateur "Israel first" alienating policies. Perhaps their humanity extended itself towards the preservation of somebody's nation.

At any rate, the US media is, and continues to be, quiet about Indian and Pakistani membership in the Grand Alliance Against NATO.






  • China


  • The Nuclear Non Proliferation Treaty, and/or Accession to it, whether by signatory, or by recognized accession, is one of two major pillars in modern Geopolitical relations. The New Start Treaty is the other. China signed the Non Proliferation Treaty, at the same time France signed it, in 1992. At that time, allies Pakistan and India were not yet nuclear powers.


While NATO felt it understands Chinese motivations, it had grossly underestimated the basic instinct of the Chinese people: simplicity, honor, and function. The fact that China is the Russian Federation's eldest ally remains a total loss for Western policy makers, who believed that the Chinese could be bribed or would not hold out of hostilities until the last possible minute; in an effort to collect the money that the United States and the European Union still owe them. Trump's idiotic tariffs have an immediate payoff, but they also have immediate downsides in stressing the geopolitical predicament the US is about to find itself in should war break out.

China's power-minority position in the UN Security Council has always held a tremendous amount of power as specifically balancing out the two poles of the BiPolar World of 1946-91. Indeed, Nixon's invitation to China was solely for the purpose of raising eyebrows in Moscow. MultiPolarity was Chinese before it was anything, and this view of Geopolitics is hard-wired into China's diplomatic DNA.

However, Western policy makers, heavily reliant on the objective of protection of Israel, have fallen well short of demonstrating that they have a grasp on China's status as First MultiPolar Nation, on several occasions.

The most poignant example would be the unannounced priority of Trump's first state visit to Beijing, in which he repugnantly insulted his hosts, by openly praising his betrayal of the US/Russian Alliance in favor of Israeli petitioned staged gas attacks, which were, in reality, NATO sea power violating international law and assisting the terror groups that the Ugly Four Axis of Israel, US, UK, and Saudi Arabia have employed since 2001 in order to overthrow regimes Israel identifies as, "...hostile" for any reason.

This held double the normal insult value due to the request Trump proposed having no reliable positive effects for China, as well as the post 1991 extremely close ties to Moscow, and vice versa, which are the results of the Treaty of Good Neighborliness.

China will stay true to her treaties, Russia is a lot more trustworthy than the US, in terms of both regime structures, which permit no sudden exit from international agreements, as well as the begrudging role of the US's two-faced sanction diplomacies.

The prospect also, of honoring a world order of MultiPolarity, which exists, and dismissing the militarization and violent tragedies of the US against her enemies, her allies, and against even her own citizens, which is typified by the mythology of a UniPolar world, must appear much more attractive to a sanction-strapped and unpaid China.

But, the question of betraying friend, neighbor, and similarly interested Russia is positively out of the question.

The Treaty of Good Neighborliness became a military treaty by demarcating the Russo-Sino border in 1991. But, it became mutually engaged in MultiPolar regional defense in 1996, no matter how narrowly one prefers to regard cooperation as specifically military, or not.

This is the longest currently observed international agreement in Russia's Federated system. To suggest China betray an ally for unscrupulous reasons does not appeal to the Chinese people as an opportunity. It appears, to anybody, as cajoling from a world view of the US that it may have espionaged and warred itself into falling from power.

That unique MultiPolar world, implied by the establishment of Chinese membership to the Nuclear Nation Community in the mid to late 1960's, became a much more powerful element in geopolitical terms, with the fall of the Bipolar World, in 1991.

This role expanded from simply breaking ties in the UN Security Council, and urging balance and restraint in the heady BiPolar military world; by easing tensions, and shoring up the frontiers where the two opposing superpowers actually touched....

It has elevated China to a superpower, which no current analysis does much, except hesitate, to admit.

China has become the one nation whose vote, for whatever reason, being cast with Russia spells the end of the political science fiction of the UniPolar World, which is rather bigoted, as well as a decaying, core set of analytical values which were dashed to pieces by China refusing to support the role of the US as repugnant global moron.

As Trump departed the May, 2017 meeting, he was certain President Xi would capitulate to US might.

As he heard Trump's remarks, Xi incredibly pre-lated Trump's predicament, directly due to Israeli brainwashing, as, "desperate, and amateur..."

These two were speaking of the same meeting.

Chinese President Xi's signature shall appear on the Grand Alliance Against Nato's Articles of the Declaration of War, it should not astonish NATO axis planners: whose bloodthirst, paganism, and greed will finally catch up with them. 


  • North Africa: Courtroom of Perspectives

No other region on Earth better demonstrates the failure of the UniPolar approach to US led hegemony-construction than the absolute contempt for the US, and by extension, for NATO, which was demonstrated by the entire region of North Africa.

Here, by a variety of strategies and efforts, and to varying degrees of success, North African nations experienced a cross-sectional application of UniPolar war power, and boasts near 100% success rates in thwarting the hostile US/Ugly Four Axis efforts to subjugate their nations.

This is due to a "once bitten, twice shy" distrust of Nato as believably loyal, or concerned, at all, with their individual national contemporary needs.

The  entire region of North Africa, with exception possibly of Egypt, stands testament to failure, loss of life, and the low quality of intelligence guiding policy makers in the United States and UK. Therefore, while remaining neutral, the exploitation of Egyptian bases may possibly be a fall back position to house former eu Muslims, while the Grand Alliance Against NATO permits the immediate secession of former member states of the EU. With this as a staging ground for the deportation of Muslims whom flooded into Europe following the bloody NeoCon policies of several US presidents, the future of eu and Globalism within Europe would be undeniably certain.

  • Libya:

The Libya debacle is the epitome of the the flaws in how the US applies Hegemony, and views long term goals. 

Libya was of zero strategic value to the US. It was to the Israelis. And, by clandestine relationship, UK. But, not to the US. 

The origin of the exposure of Clinton's emailgate, Libya, represents a turning point in the procession of the "coincidental" revolutionary activities of the nations, centered in the the Arab World, as a result of the thunders of the huge blunder of UN Binding Resolution 1441, reverberating into the destruction of the US led Western efforts to recast it's previous role as a superpower by co-opting the inhabitants of these mostly third world nations.

These activities included creating ISIS, among other things, and have resulted in a bipartisan betrayal of the American public trust, against whom, the rage of the afflicted peoples, visited by pointless violence, is justifiably aimed.

Yet, this failure was neither the first, nor the last. Nor were the solutions to sickening US blood fests templated in Libya. Instead, in Libya, the US was defeated by backstab diplomacies, the types that have spurned and alienated the rest of the world in terms how the US has used betrayal to great effect...only this time, the US was in no way prepared for the horrifying consequences of this sickening foreign policy backfiring.

And, Donald Trump is no better than Obama: the Hebrew centric US foreign policy, which is doubly dosed Hebrew, by an inexplicable alliance with UK, failed in Libya. But the same advisors and identically misgiven hegemonial values surround Trump, as meanwhile, these elements are in an unceasing state of conspiring towards a conflict, hurling the nations of the Ugly Four Axis towards war against what is ostensibly the rest of the 124 nations on Earth.


  • Tunisia:

 Tunisia is vastly complicated as far as the details of the failed mission by NATO on behalf of Israel, but the defeat of the NATO/Israeli goals in Tunisia cannot be oversimplified.

Though spin doctors have tried, the 2011 Tunisian debacle reads like a second grader planned to overthrow his wing of an elementary school, and the principals simply locked them into the classroom until they got hungry.

It is further proof of a manifest US/Israeli rift that played out in the press, alone. The reality is that Obama and Netanyahu's cooperation, being based on UniPolarity, which is flawed, added to the latent mutual dissatisfaction against one another. And, that fact seemed to add a bit of method acting type reality to the role each had expected of the other. The fact is, the pair simply played on the appearance of distrust, loudly accusing the other, while behind the scenes, these UniPolar invasions and intelligence agency driven North African "revolutions" prove the two were working together.

The policies' failures were in the UniPolar DNA that had been present in every aspect of this agenda. When the source of the failure couldn't be resolved, the demonstrative conflict between Netanyahu and Obama just seemed that much more real. It was still fake.


  • Sudan:

Sudan was used by the militaries of the Ugly Four in order to cloak the military influx of assets into the region of the Sudan, and her neighbors.


The familiar, two-faced approach towards international diplomacy, in particular, did not spare the victims of genocide in Southern Sudan. To cut to the chase, the US employed "humanitarian" aid, which, in reality, only was used by Obama in 2011 to stage his Libyan operation.

His efforts to contain the genocide were merely paper and lies, just like with the BP/native uprisings in the Niger Republic and Chad. In reality, these humanitarian missions were just a rouse that the Obama Administration used in order to attempt to conceal the influx of US military personell into the regions.


  • Niger/Chad/BP

Why the US military is in Chad is to help BP rob the ancient inhabitants of the river wetlands, and hunting plains, of their birthright. We are in Chad for Wall Street and London Brokers, and Opec, as well. This is why the US is in Chad, in the first place.

The facts about the ongoing US "War on Terror", lead to the inexorable conclusion that the US is exporting terrorism as an export item it trades with either compliant, or non-conpliant nation states. And Niger is no different. North African countries were merely used as a staging ground for a wider US takedown of the whole of North Africa...and, due to the press's conspiracy and corruption of culpability, and the general lack of interest in this potentially destructive set of paradigms valued in the planning of this type of association between democracy and depraved oligarchal rule: North Africa provided a stage which exposed it all, as well as demonstrated conclusively that, though they needed to be quick on their feet to beat the US, the Ugly Four Axis is not invincible.

While, in typical Napoleonic invincibility rhetoric, the US neither learned anything, nor, can the US, in any way, hope to be prepared for the revisitation come due for this seventy year path of regret its misgiven analytical values have launched.

By this point, it is hubris causing the creases, and the bubbles, and folds of ill-fitting superimpositioning upon relevant and regional resistance to culminate in a showdown in Syria. The US was finished in Syria following the second attack by Trump against Assad. An attack which OPCW branded Trump a war criminal after clearing Assad for the latest time....

Thus, with the same diplomatic and military analytical advice, the inauguration of Donald Trump brought only less-concealement of Israel's indivorceable role as the principle agitator in the hostilities driving us towards economic and military showdown.

In fact, in Trump's wake, the pace towards a global resolution against the abuse of the Ugly Four Axis via world war has only quickened.

  • North Korea

Eventually Kim Jong Un recognized the shifting global political relationships, but met with president Trump, anyway. After an influx of cash and a few border crossings opened to civilians, any progressive detente will cease, and this theater will grow hot quickly. If Un invades, and conquers South Korea, it can only follow a brief Sea of Japan campaign that goes down as a victory for the Russian and Chinese navies against those of the NATO states.

  • Former Soviet States

The most high profile former Soviet Republics to join the Grand Alliance will be Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan: both NATO territories.

To unite the factions in the fragmented picture of Afghanistani politics, that was left by the US invasion in 2002, the two camps, the former Soviet allied Northern Alliance, and the Taliban, could reach terms that mutually benefit the whole of their country..."
Afghanistan, though not a former Soviet republic, would be able to easily unify the warring factions against NATO, and changing relationships between the US, and both Pakistan and India, have effectively cut off the land access to NATO personnel in Aghanistan.

Meanwhile, the US continues to deny this emergent crisis, and will be slow to arrive to their senses.

High Profile Military Campaigns

  1. The Invasion of Saudi Arabia/The Blockade of Hormuz
  2. The Invasion of The Fertile Crescent/Suez Canal Blocked
  3. The Invasion of UAE
  4. The Invasion of Kuwait
  5. The Destruction of Israel
  6. The Battles of Scandinavia
  7. The Counter Invasion of Estonia/Norway
  8. The Bombings of Britain, Brussels, Washington, and New York
  9. The Destruction of the Old Internet



These battles shall ultimately result in the establishment of a new Slavic and Chinese led World Order, with the remainder of the United States reorganizing and executing surviving members of it's bloodthirsty state, and moving the capitol into the center of the nation under the same Bill of Rights but ending gun control, limiting the rights of violent criminals, and separating the facilities for violent offenses and non violent offenses.

The United Kingdom will need to be partitioned into safe zones, with southern Ireland most likely being the largest.

*NATO has publicly stated that Israel will not receive support if the US and Israel continue playing with fire in the Middle East.



1 comment:

  1. To date: there is an effort in the pro Satanic publication, Haertz, the Israeli propagandist, to drive a wedge between Iran, and Russia, which does not exist.

    This has driven a much stronger Alliance consolidation, and this comes weeks prior to the Four Uglies starting a war which they are doomed to lose.

    Haertz, however, may be trying to issue false comfort to its citizens, the illegal occupational Zionist government in Israel.

    However: it is yet proof that US, UK, S Arabia, and Israel, created IS, and have failed to overthrow everybody except Egypt.

    ReplyDelete

The Legal End of Trump's Ousting

By: Kevin Drummond No reason to water this down. Though rhetoric slams both sides of the issue, the fact is, Donald Trump, in a mani...