Seeking World Domination With A Flawed Policy

 On Memorial Day, I was reminded of the number of men and women who have given their all for the political posturing of those in power.  The number of lives lost in Vietnam fighting for so called democracy was no more than the protection of the U.S. international agenda of world control.  U.S. motives in the Vietnam War, were irrational since the U.S. had no explicit interests in Vietnam. The Vietnamese were not going to attack America, nor were the Russians or Chinese.   

In 1950 the Executive Secretary to the National Security Council on United States Objectives and Programs for National Security gave a report to President Truman on April 14, 1950, that became the guiding agenda for U.S. foreign policy.  This was in response to the Soviet acquisition of nuclear weapons.  The U.S. policy makers felt that the U.S. government should be ready to support states that were threatened by the USSR, particularly states in Europe and within the vicinity of Japan.  The policy was to be prepared to encounter both the USSR and Chinese aggression. The U.S. foreign policy during the 1950’s to the early 1970’s, including the U.S. involvement and presence in the Far East has been guided by NSC 68’s Report.  This report became a flawed policy the was the result of the misconception of both the Soviet and Chinese threats to the United States.

It was a known fact among the U.S. government leaders that the Vietnam War was not going to be won.  In 1965, McNaughton, McNamara’s Assistant Secretary for International Security Affairs, listed the American foreign policy toward Vietnam as follows: 70%- to avoid a humiliating defeat. 20%- to keep South Vietnam territory from the Chinese. 10%- to permit the people of South Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life.  Does this sound like the American soldier was a priority in the Vietnam War?

NSC 68 Report has had a major impact on the foreign policy and continues to this day.  Both Russia and China are portrayed as the evil empires that are out to destroy freedom in America.  It is the responsibility of the U.S. government to make sure that aggression from both Russia and China are stopped.  A policy written in 1950 is still being used by those who need to continue a foreign policy that puts American soldiers at risk for the political agenda of those seeking world domination.  When has either Russia or China put military bases on our borders? When have Russia or China threatened America with invasion?

Relations between Russia and NATO have been tense since the alliance accused Russia of getting involved in the Ukrainian conflict, a claim Russia has continuously denied. By the way, why are we in the Ukraine?

Following Crimea's reunification with Russia in March, the U.S. and Europe bombarded Russia with sanctions and NATO significantly increased its military presence near Russia's borders, especially in Poland and the former Soviet Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia. Who is the aggressor?

It was Hillary Clinton who, as Secretary of State in 2010, elevated the competing territorial claims for rocks and reef in the South China Sea to an international issue; CNN and BBC hysteria followed; China was building airstrips on the disputed islands. In its mammoth war game in 2015, Operation Talisman Sabre, the U.S. practiced “choking” the Straits of Malacca through which pass most of China’s oil and trade. 

Clinton declared that America had a “national interest” in these Asian waters. The Philippines and Vietnam were encouraged and bribed to pursue their claims and old enmities against China. In America, people are being primed to see any Chinese defensive position as offensive, and so the ground is laid for rapid escalation. A similar strategy of provocation and propaganda is applied to Russia.  It is amazing that Russia is going in a direction of giving more freedom to the Russian people and the U.S. government is taking away our freedoms.

Clinton, the “women’s candidate”, leaves a trail of bloody coups: in Honduras, in Libya (plus the murder of the Libyan president) and Ukraine. The latter is now a CIA theme park swarming with Nazis and the frontline of a beckoning war with Russia. It was through Ukraine – literally, borderland - that Hitler’s Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, which lost 27 million people. This epic catastrophe remains a presence in Russia. Clinton’s presidential campaign has received money from all but one of the world’s ten biggest arms companies. No other candidate comes close.  If she is elected, we will put more of our young men and women in harm’s way. 

Sanders, the hope of many young Americans, is not very different from Clinton in his territorial view of the world beyond the United States. He backed Bill Clinton’s illegal bombing of Serbia. He supports Obama’s terrorism by drone, the provocation of Russia and the return of special forces (death squads) to Iraq. He has nothing to say on the drumbeat of threats to China and the accelerating risk of nuclear war. He agrees that Edward Snowden should stand trial and he calls Hugo Chavez – like him, a social democrat. He promises to support Clinton if she is nominated.  He is no different than Clinton.

The election of Trump or Clinton is the old illusion of choice that is no choice: two sides of the same coin. The choice of the lesser of two evils still gives us evil as the final choice.

Here are the questions Americans should be asking our presidential candidates: Why is the United States “everywhere on the globe”? What is NATO’s true mission? Why does the US always pursue regime change in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine? Why does Washington treat Russia and Vladimir Putin as an enemy?  Why are we forcing a confrontation with Russia and China when the loss could never justify the deaths of our young men and women.

Will history show that the policy of the 1950’s cost America the lives of many of our youth because some politician followed and outdated policy that has been a failure from the beginning, based on a flawed assumption that the U.S. government has the responsibility to protect the entire world from Russia and China? 

It would be a blessing if the present wars ended and there were no more names added to those who gave all.  I believe in a strong military.  I believe in the right to defend our nation with whatever means needed.  I do not believe in sending our military to countries that hate us, want to destroy our way of life, or show us disrespect. I do not want to see our soldiers sacrifice their lives for the political agenda of a group of evil politicians who are obsessed with world domination.

The only way to stop evil is for our Nation to seek the wisdom of the LORD, confess our sins and turn from the wicked ways that have become so common in our country.  America has lost its greatness because we are led by evil leaders who have disregarded the commandments of the LORD.