Israel attacked Iran | Alexander Dugin

Israel attacked Iran. In Syria, which is not Israel or Palestine. This is an act of aggression. Now Iran has no choice but to attack Israel. With all the forces of the Resistance. This war will be started by the Shiites, but at some point it cannot but become a war of all Muslims.

  » Everyone can see the tactics that are used to defeat the enemy in war.

But what no one can see is the strategy from which great victory arises. «
Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

We must take into account timing: Biden does not want it at all, as his priority is the election and support for Ukraine against Russians, but Trump, on the other hand, does not care about Russians, but Israel is dear to him. 

 

Therefore, Tehran has every reason to start a war with Israel as soon as possible. Under Biden and before Trump. The US and NATO will definitely get involved, but with great reluctance. In the meantime Russians will take Kiev and strengthen dramatically anti-Western pole. That's where Trump will come in or civil war will break out in the US. And the world will already be irreversibly multipolar.

Quoted from:
Alexander Dugin on X
April 05, 2024

Amazon's Alexa on COVID-19 Vaccines, Social Credit, Cryptos & US Civil War

Alexa was asked about the effects of graphene on the body, social credit linked to vaccines, and the possibility of civil war in the US. Amazon's technology responded with surprising claims: all its concepts coincide with “conspiracy” around the near future.

• Injected graphene causes mitochondrial apoptosis, thrombi and immune cell activation.
• Vaccinations will be mandatory for access to digital currencies. 
• Health data will have the potential to become a form of digital currency and will allow income to be earned.
• The unvaccinated will see their credit score affected.
• A threatened military coup in the US could become a reality after the 2024 election.
• The United States is dangerously close to civil war. Many of the divisions and forms of disinformation that prevailed in the last civil war are occurring now.

 

The Baltimore Bridge Moment

Priceless. A gem for historians.

Tom Cotton │ Xi Jinping

» Don’t take it the wrong way.

You guys seem smart, but you keep funding utterly dumb and clownish politicians in your country. 

What’s up with that? In China, Tom Cotton wouldn’t even be a village chief. «
 

President Xi Jinping, while meeting with US corporate leaders in Beijing. - March 2024. 

The French Road to Nuclear War │ V.I.P.S.

ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The [U.S.] President [Joe Biden]
FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (V.I.P.S.)
SUBJECT: On the Brink of Nuclear War

DATE:  March 24, 2024

Mr. President:

France is reportedly preparing to dispatch a force of some 2,000 troops — roughly a reinforced brigade built around an armored battalion and two mechanized battalions, with supporting logistical, engineering, and artillery troops attached — into Ukraine sometime in the not-so-distant future.

 » From a military-technical point of view, we are certainly ready for nuclear war.

Our nuclear triad is more advanced than any other one. Everyone knows it, all experts do. «
Vladimir Putin, March 13, 2024.

This force is purely symbolic, inasmuch as it would have zero survivability in a modern high-intensity conflict of the scope and scale of what is transpiring in Ukraine today. It would not be deployed directly in a conflict zone, but would serve either as (1) a screening force/tripwire to stop Russia’s advance; or (2) a replacement force deployed to a non-active zone to free up Ukrainian soldiers for combat duty. The French Brigade reportedly will be supplemented by smaller units from the Baltic states.

This would be introducing combat troops of a NATO country into a theater of war, making them “lawful targets” under the Law of War. Such units would apparently lack a NATO mandate. In Russia’s view, however, this may be a distinction without a difference. France appears to be betting – naively – that its membership in NATO would prevent Russia from attacking French troops. Rather, it is highly likely that Russia would attack any French/Baltic contingent in Ukraine and quickly destroy/degrade its combat viability.

» In fact, it would be useful for the good of the cause for the restless French to send a few regiments to Neonaziland.

Their systematic destruction would not be the most difficult task, but the most important. 

And it will be a good lesson for the rest of Europe's restless cretins. «

 Dmitry Medvedev, March 20, 2024.

In that case, French President Macron may calculate that, after Russian attacks on the troops of NATO members – NATO mandate or not – he could invoke Article 5 of the NATO Charter and get the NATO alliance to intervene. Such intervention would likely take the form of aircraft operating from NATO nations – and perhaps include interdiction missions against tactical targets inside Russia. 

 

Doctrinally, and by legal right, Russia’s response would be to launch retaliatory strikes also against targets in NATO countries. If NATO then attacks strategic targets inside Russia, at that point Russia’s nuclear doctrine takes over, and NATO decision-making centers would be hit with nuclear weapons.

» REGULAR TROOPS from France, Germany and Poland have arrived, by rail and air, to Cherkassy, south of Kiev. «

 Pepe Escobar via Telegram, March 22, 2024.

 

We do not believe Russia will initiate a nuclear attack against the U.S., but rather would leave it up to the United States to decide if it wants to risk destruction by preparing to launch a nuclear strike on Russia. That said, Russian strategic forces have improved to the point that, in some areas – hypersonic missiles, for example – its capability surpasses that of the U.S. and NATO. 

 

In other words, the Russian temptation to strike first may be a bit stronger than during past crises, and we are somewhat less confident that Russia would want to “go second”. Another disquieting factor is that the Russians are likely to believe that Macron’s folly has the tacit approval of some key U.S. and other Western officials, who seem desperate to find some way to alter the trajectory of the war in Ukraine – the more so, as elections draw near.

 

 » Not ISIS-K: US, Britain, Ukraine behind Crocus City Hall attack. «
March 27, 2024.

What Needs to Be Done

Europe needs to understand that France is leading it down a path of inevitable self-destruction.
The American people need to understand that Europe is leading them to the cusp of nuclear annihilation. 

[...]

Quoted from:
ALERT MEMORANDUM FOR: The President. FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. DATE:  March 24, 2024. 

 

 

» After France, Poland threatens attack on Russia. «

March 27, 2024.

From Prison to Palace │ Senegal's Faye will destroy French Neocolonialism

Historical events are brewing in yet another West African country: Senegal is getting rid of the neocolonial dependence on its former metropolis France. Bassirou Diomaye Faye, a charismatic opposition candidate who sought to break the treaty with France and improve relations with Russia won the presidential election last weekend. The 44-year-old was only freed from prison 10 days before. As part of his election campaign, Faye promised to review oil and gas deals with Western companies, including agreements with British Petroleum, Endeavor Mining and Kosmos Energy. The collapse of France's colonial empire in Africa continues. Hence the pitiful growl of Rothschild stooge Macron, who squandered the entire inheritance of the French colonialists.

 

 » The departure of Senegal from the CFA franc zone puts a final 

cross on the entire system of French neocolonialism. «

Faye advocates a radical revision of relations between Senegal and France. And as part of this, Faye is going to follow neighboring Mali, Niger and Burkina Faso to leave the French currency system by abandoning the CFA franc. And the French military will have to leave Senegal. Sensing something was wrong, Paris had already announced a little earlier that it was sharply reducing the military contingent in Senegal (probably so that it would not be so shameful later). In return, Faye promises to take a course towards rapprochement with Russia.

 

Thus, France's next major foreign policy defeat on the African continent looms on the horizon. Moreover, last year Senegal still was a servile French key player in the issue of the blockade of Niger, Burkina Faso and Mali, which had previously freed themselves from the influence of Paris. And the departure of Senegal from the CFA franc zone puts a final and fat cross on the system which brought huge profits to France and on which the entire system of French neocolonialism was essentially built. 

 

 » France is the equivalent of an overfed Chihuahua, and you don't want to get in the ring with the really 

beefed up Rottweilers, especially when they've been trained to eat overfed Chihuahuas their entire life. «
Scott Ritter - March 21, 2024.

And hence all of Macron’s current anti-Russian hysteria. He lost access to Niger's gold and uranium last year, and now, like a plucked rooster, understands that France is also losing to Russia. Ukraine for him is the last chance to spoil Moscow. He will be disappointed there too.

 

Reference:
Reuters (March 25, 2024) - From prison to palace: Faye's road to Senegal's presidency.
Ibrahim Traoré (2023) - Terminating French Neocolonialism & the CFA Zone in Africa.

Egon von Greyerz (2023) - The Financial System Has Reached The End.

500 Years of Western Dominance - What Comes Next | Glenn Diesen

Felix Abt: A great European religious war and the first pan-European conflict over superpower status came to an end in 1648. After 30 years of devastating wars and chaos, especially on German soil, with millions of deaths and shattered economies, the Peace of Westphalia brought a new, rules-based order to Europe, as the Western political class would call it today. This included the inviolability of borders and non-interference in the internal affairs of sovereign and equal states; it is regarded as a milestone in the development toward tolerance and secularization. How did this affect the new powers that emerged afterward and their quest for hegemony?

Glenn Diesen: The lesson from the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) was that no one power could restore order based on hegemony and universal values, as the other states in Europe would preserve their own sovereignty and distinctiveness by collectively balancing the most powerful state. This was evident when Catholic France supported Protestant Sweden to prevent the dominance of the Catholic Habsburgs. The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 gave birth to the modern world order, in which peace and order depend on a balance of power between sovereign states. The Westphalian system prevents hegemony as other states collectively balance the effort of an aspiring hegemon to establish economic and military dominance, and universal values are rejected to the extent they are used to reduce the sovereignty of other states.

» The Westphalian system prevents hegemony. « 

The 1648 peace treaty between the parties in the Thirty Years' War established the Westphalian system.

 

The principle, known as the Westphalian principle of sovereignty, prohibits interference in the internal affairs of another state, and every state is equal before international law, regardless of its size. Thus, every state has sovereignty over its territory and its internal affairs, to the exclusion of all external powers. But when the European colonial powers used violence to impose their will on other continents, they violated this ideal. Was this the beginning of this principle’s demise?

 

The Westphalian system should in principle be based on sovereign equality for all states. However, it originated as a European security order that later laid the foundation for a world order. Under the original Westphalian system, the Europeans claimed special privileges and the principle of equal sovereignty for states did not apply to everyone. Sovereignty was deemed to be a right and a responsibility assigned to “civilized peoples”, a reference to the Europeans as white Christians. The international system was divided between the civilized and the barbarians. There was one set of rules for the Europeans in the civilized “garden”, and another set of rules when the Europeans engaged with the so-called despotic barbarians in the “jungle”. The interference in the internal affairs of other peoples and the development of vast empires was framed as the right and the responsibility of civilized states to guide the barbaric peoples towards universal values of civilization. This responsibility to govern other peoples was termed the “white man’s burden” and the “civilizing mission”.

 » The gardeners have to go to the jungle. «

Josep Borrell's universal mission.

In our current era, we have abandoned the civilized-barbarian divide, but we have replaced it with a liberal democracy-authoritarian divide to legitimize sovereign inequality. The West can interfere in the domestic affairs of other states to promote democracy, invade countries to defend human rights, or even change the borders of countries in support of self-determination. This is the exclusive right and a responsibility of the West as the champions of the universal values of liberal democracy. As the EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell explained: “The gardeners have to go to the jungle. Europeans have to be much more engaged with the rest of the world. Otherwise, the rest of the world will invade us”.

International law in accordance with the UN Charter defends the principle of sovereign equality for all states. The so-called “rules-based international order” is based on sovereign inequality, which introduces special privileges under the guise of universal liberal democratic values. For example, the West’s recognition of independence for Kosovo was a breach of international law as it violated the territorial integrity of Serbia, although it was legitimized by the liberal principle of respecting the self-determination of Kosovo Albanians. In Crimea the West decided that self-determination should not be the leading principle, but territorial integrity. The US refers to liberal democratic values to exercise its exclusive right to invade and occupy countries such as Iraq, Syria and Libya, although this right is not extended to countries in the jungle.  

» The so-called “rules-based international order” is based on sovereign inequality, 

which introduces special privileges under the guise of universal liberal democratic values. «

In 1945 fifty countries established the United Nations System. With the help of this supra-national governance

system the Anglo-Frankish-Zionist-Dönmeh-Wahhabi-Takfiri elites of the UK, France, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, the US and

some others, expected to secure their hegemonies beyond the foreseeable demise of traditional colonialism. 

The Bretton Woods conference, World Bank, IMF, nuclear bombing of Japan, dividing Korea 

and creating the State of Israel in Palestine are early show cases of what Pax Americana and UN are all about.

[...] The Ukrainian conflict is essentially an extension of American geopolitics, which aims to carry out Mackinder’s aforementioned stanza, “He who rules Eastern Europe rules the world.” What are your thoughts about it?

Preventing Germany and Russia from controlling Eastern Europe means that much of the Eurasian continent becomes landlocked. US control over Eastern Europe implies that Russia can not bridge Europe and Asia, but rather becomes an isolated land-locked region at the dual periphery of Europe and Asia.

Brzezinski outlined the strategy for developing and preserving US global primacy, which relies on the age-old wisdom of divide-and-rule. Brzezinski wrote that the US must “prevent collusion and maintain security dependence among the vassals, to keep tributaries pliant and protected, and keep the barbarians from coming together”. Historically, the British and the Americans have worked to prevent Germany and Russia from coming together as it would form an independent pole of power. Hegemony requires conflict between Germany and Russia, as Germany becomes a dependent ally and Russia is weakened. This logic is also applied to why it is beneficial to perpetuate tensions between the Arabs and Iran, or between China and its neighbors. The US has been very concerned about the economic integration between the Germans and Russians, which is why the US was so hostile to the Nord Stream pipelines and most likely was behind the attack on these pipelines. 

 

 Anka Feldhusen, a fine example of a German Neonazi apparatchik of the 21st century.

March 22, 2023.

 

 Wehrmacht 2.0 south of Kiev. 

There will be hell to pay.

March 22, 2024.

The problem is that the world is no longer Western-centric and by pushing Russia away from Germany, the US has pushed Russia towards China – a technological and industrial power much greater than Germany. In the mid-19th century, the British fought against Russia in the Crimean War with the explicit purpose of pushing Russia back into Asia, where it would remain technologically and economically backward and stagnant. NATO’s war in Ukraine is a repeat of the efforts to push Russia back into Asia, although this time Asia is much more dynamic than the West. The failure of the West to adjust our grand strategy to this new reality has been a mistake of immeasurable proportions. We have not subordinated Russia, rather we ended Russia’s 300-year-long Western-centric policies in which Moscow looked to the West for modernization.

What is driving this stunning anti-Chinese obsession in the United States against a country that upholds the principle of non-interference in other countries, that used its mighty navy only for trade and not for gunboat politics when it was a superpower in the past, and that follows the millennia-old concept of “Tianxia” (天下), which literally means “everything under heaven”, that is, an inclusive world full of harmony for all?

China does not threaten the US, but it threatens US dominance as the foundation for the unipolar world order established after the Cold War. The US is currently attempting to weaken China through economic warfare, convincing its allies to decouple from the Chinese economy, and knocking out Russia in Ukraine as a vital partner of China. If the US fails to achieve its objectives, then it will likely stoke conflicts between China and its neighbors to make the neighbors more dependent and obedient, and also create instability for the Chinese that will bleed it of resources. The ideal would be greater tensions between India and China, as India would have to make itself more reliant on the US and it would be an important ally to weaken China. If all fails, then the US could also fight an indirect war through a proxy similar to the way they are using Ukrainians to fight Russia – by for example pushing for Taiwan’s secession. Besides securing its supply chains and building a military for deterrence, China should prioritize resolving its disputes with India as any friction with China can be exploited.

» This is a Westphalian system with Eurasian characteristics. « 

Since 2009 BRICS is establishing a Multipolar World Order based on Westphalian principles and controlled by the 

Eurasian great powers China, India and Russia. Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates joined BRICS

on January 1, 2024. To date 15 more countries have formally applied to join.

Finally, in your new book you say that a new Westphalian world order is reasserting itself, albeit with Eurasian characteristics. Can you explain this in more detail?

We are returning to a Westphalian system based on a balance of power between sovereign states. However, the former Westphalian system was based on sovereign equality among the Western powers while the “barbarians” or “despots” outside the West were not deemed to be qualified for the responsibility of sovereignty. It was a dual system of collective hegemony of the West, with sovereign equality between the Western states. In the new Westphalian system, there are several powerful states that are not Western, with China as the leading economy in the world. The Eurasian powers such as China, Russia, India and others are developing the economic foundations for this system with new technologies, transportation corridors and financial instruments. The Eurasian powers are more prepared to include the Global South as sovereign equals. The Eurasian powers reject the so-called “rules-based international order” based on sovereign inequality, as Western dominance should not be legitimized by a civilized-barbarian or liberal democracy-authoritarian divide.

The Western powers over the past centuries have had an inclination for dominance and empire by controlling limited maritime corridors. Russia’s Eurasianism in the 19th century was a hegemonic strategy by dominating the Eurasian landmass through land corridors, although under the multipolar distribution of power the Russians do not have the capability or intentions to pursue hegemony. Instead, Eurasian integration entails moving from the dual periphery of Europe and Asia, to the center of a new Eurasian construct. Even China as the leading power does not have the capability or intention to pursue hegemony. Countries like Russia are content with China being the leading power, although they would not support China if it demanded dominance and hegemony. The Chinese demonstrate that they are not attempting to limit Russia’s economic connectivity with other states to make itself the only center of power. In the Global Civilization Initiative, the Chinese are also advocating for respecting civilizational differences and that all states have their own path to modernity, which implies that China is not claiming to represent universal values that legitimizes interference into the domestic affairs of other states. The West assumed that the Russia-China partnership was a “marriage of convenience” and that they would clash over influence in Central Asia, but this never happened because neither side demanded hegemony. Instead of sabotaging each other’s relations with the region, China and Russia harmonized their interests in Central Asia. China, Russia, India and other Eurasian powers have different visions and interests in terms of Eurasian integration, but they all need each other to realize their goals and pursue prosperity. Hegemony is not an option. This is a Westphalian system with Eurasian characteristics.

Quoted from:

500 Years of Western Dominance: Is it Coming to an End and What Comes Next?

Felix Abt talks with Glenn Diesen. In: Eastern Angle - March 22, 2024.

 

See also:

Glenn Diesen (2024) - The Ukraine War & the Eurasian World Order. 

Zbigniew Brzezinski (1997) - The Grand Chessboard: American Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives.

Carl Schmitt (1950) - The Nomos of the Earth in the International Law of the Jus Publicum Europaeum.

Europe’s Catastrophic Russian Problem | Wang Xiangsui

Europe is becoming the biggest loser in the Ukraine conflict, despite having fostered closer ties with Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. Europe is now actively cutting these ties in an effort to align with the US policies aimed at punishing Russia.

But the price is dear. The largest economy prior to the Ukraine war, Europe is now facing the prospect of political divisions and security threats. Its insensible actions are not only compromising Europe's autonomy and increasing its military reliance on the US, but also disrupting its energy supply chains, in which Russia played an important part. So what does the US stand to gain from this situation? 

 

 China called the Nord Stream pipeline blast of September 26, 2022 an 

'act of international terrorism' and an 'act of war against Germany and Russia'.

Quite a lot. In a scenario where Europe is on friendly terms with Russia and economically, militarily, and politically strengthened, Europe poses too significant a challenge for the US to handle. Hence, the estrangement between Europe and Russia is one of the US's most crucial strategic goals. As anticipated, Europe is now gripped by fear of Russian expansion and Russia fears NATO's eastward movement. And this prisoner's dilemma is further exacerbated by US intervention. 

 

It is evident that the European leaders struggle to discern who their allies and rivals truly are. It is their crucial mistake to view Russia, a potential provider of economic strength and security assurances, as a threat, and the US, a saboteur of the Euro and Europe's regional stability, as a friend. The rationale behind Europe's alignment with the US stems from their belief that Europe holds a prominent position within the US-led uni-polar world.

But time and again, the US disregarded and even intentionally harmed European interests. Europe's political stage is now occupied by liberal leftists whose obstinacy to ideology and blind loyalty to the US have deprived them of strategic foresight. If Europe fails to awaken to the reality, more losses will inevitably befall the European people. Acting as a suicide bomber in the Ukraine conflict will achieve nothing but harm Europe itself. Europe's tragedy is rooted in its failure to recognize the significance of the Ukraine conflict. What we are witnessing is merely the precursor to a brand new world order, an order of multi-polarity which neither the US nor Europe can prevent.  

 

If the current situation continues, Ukraine's status as an independent country will be called into question. At first glance, the US appears to be the biggest winner. To avoid instability, numerous European financial assets and capital are now being redirected to the US, bolstering its pandemic-stricken economy and positioning it as the best-performing developed country. Additionally, Europe is once again brought under the American security umbrella, abandoning its pursuit of strategic independence. Furthermore, the US has profited during the war by selling its own energy at high prices to Europe through sanctions on Russia's energy exports. However, when considering the bigger picture in the long run, the Russia-Ukraine conflict significantly weakens the US-dominated world order and damages the credibility of the US. To many countries, the war exposed the unreliability of the US and the precariousness of the uni-polar world order it perpetuates. 

 

Russia, on the other hand, is making leaps and bounces despite its losses. It has already achieved the initial goals outlined at the beginning of the special military operation. By deepening cooperation with China, India, and the global south, Russia's economy was able to withstand the blow after decoupling from the West. Two years into the war and nearly 20,000 sanctions from 48 countries, Russia maintains relative political and social stability, even experiencing a 3.6% GDP growth in 2023. And most importantly, through this war, Russia is reshaping its image and status as a formidable major power in the emerging multi-polar order. Therefore, in the long run, Russia may emerge as the real long-term winner of this conflict; a conflict that draws the curtains on the hegemonic uni-polar world order dictated by the US.

Quoted from:
Wang Xiangsui (Feb 29, 2024) - Europe’s Catastrophic Russian Problem.

 

Military strategist Professor Wang Xiangsui is a retired senior Colonel in the People's Liberation Army. Wang's 1999 book 

'Unrestricted Warfare' reportedly shifted the views of former White House chief strategist Steve Bannon regarding China.

Israeli Army Celebrates

Israeli Army celebrates the destruction of Gaza’s nonprofit Society for Deaf Children. 

These specimens do not even qualify to the sub-zoology realm.

On Realism and War with China | John Mearsheimer

Lex Fridman: The communication gap between China and the United States seems to be much greater than that of what was the former Soviet Union and the United States.

 

Mearchiavelli, Machiavelli's revenant.

 

John Mearsheimer: It’s an interesting question. A lot of people describe the Cold War as an ideological competition above all else.

Communism versus liberal democracy or communism versus liberal capitalism, whatever. I actually don’t believe that. The Soviets were realists to the core. Stalin was a realist par excellence, and ideology did not matter much in Stalin’s foreign policy. And if you look at Soviet foreign policy after World War II, throughout the Cold War, they were realists to the core. And in those days the Americans were realists. Sure, a lot of liberal ideology floating around out there, but the Americans were realists. One of the reasons we avoided a shooting match between the United States and the Soviet Union from 1947 to 1989 was because both sides understood the basic balance of power logic.

 

The US-China competition is somewhat different. But first of all, the Chinese are realists to the core. I’ve spent a lot of time in China. I am basically a rock star in China. The Chinese are my kind of people. They are realists. They speak my language. It’s the United States that is no longer very realist. American leaders have a very powerful liberal bent and tend not to see the world in realist terms.

 

That’s fascinating. So the Chinese are pragmatic realists and think of the world as a competition of military powers?

 

Yeah, you are actually right. And I think we will avoid war. The problem with the Americans is, it’s not just their liberalism. It’s the possibility that we will pursue a rollback policy. During the Cold War the American grand strategy towards the Soviet Union was: containment, containment, containment. We now know from the historical record that the United States was not only pursuing containment. We were trying to rollback Soviet power to put it bluntly. We were trying to wreck the Soviet Union. And I would not be surprised moving forward with regard to China if the United States pursues a serious rollback policy.

 

So you’re saying throughout history the United States was always pursuing rollback policies? 

Look, you don’t respect the power of other nations. You fear the power of other nations.

 

Will there be a war with China in the 21st century?

 

I don’t know. But my argument is yes, there will be war with China. 

 

Quoted from:
Lex Fridman interviews John Mearsheimer - Nov 17, 2023. (transcript) (video)

 

 See also:
John Mearsheimer (2001) - The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. 

The Destruction of the United States as we know it | Martin Armstrong

I have studied many forms of government. I have found that Republics have always crumbled to dust because they are the most corrupt form of government one can create. Even a Dictatorship or Monarchy is never so corrupt, for they are not suspectable to bribery as Republics. The criticism of Democracy has come from the Greek philosophers who saw the people as too stupid to make decisions. Our representatives look down upon us the same way. 

 

 » If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, 

you will succumb in every battle. «
Sun Tzu, The Art of War.

Many wanted to believe that the Roman Republic was a democracy. Yet, this democracy was a total facade, for it was always under aristocratic rule – not the common people. We too live in a facade where they tell us who is the enemy and we are expected to fight and die who their pleasure. We have no right to vote should we go to war against Russia or China. Rome was the same way. The people had no real rights in this regard.

Assuming they do not take up Alexander Soros’ bold implicate to assassinate Trump so he can flood the United States with his Open Society that disregards culture, religion, and ethics, the computer is forecasting a tumultuous post-2024 election in 2025. History repeats for human nature never changes. What we will see post-2024 is the destruction of the United States as we know it.

Quoted from:
Martin Armstrong (Mar 05, 2024) - The 2024 Election – Will Your Vote Even Matter? 

 

See also:

L. David Linsky (2023) - War and Regime Change soon in the US?

Pentagon Staged COVID-19 Plandemic Years in Advance | Sasha Latypova

Some four hundred contracts worth 50 billion dollars between the United States Department of Defense (DOD) and the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) indicate that these agencies pre-planned and orchestrated the global COVID-19 pandemic years before February 2020. COVID-19 was classified as a national security threat by the US government in the Department of Defense on February 4, 2020, and at the time this information was allegedly kept from President Donald Trump. 

 

Dr. Anthony Fauci, an alledged Israeli Mossad asset, was the White House 

Covid-19 Czar and Chief Medical Advisor to alleged Mossad asset POTUS Donald Trump.

» What was the role of Mike Pompeo, former director of the CIA, in all of this? «

A leaked audio and the coverage of Sasha Latypova, a former US pharma executive and investigative journalist, seem to prove this. She is exposing fraud and cover up of the US government and pharmaceutical industry as well as lies told during the COVID-19 pandemic which according to her was all planned and preset years in advance.

 

 

 Clayton Morris interviews Sasha Latypova, Feb 28, 2024.

Reference:
Clayton Morris & Sasha Latypova (Feb 28, 2024) - Here's what REALLY happened with the Covid vaccine. (video)

 

See also:
J. Bart Classen (2022) - COVID-19 mRNA Vaccines are Mossad Bioweapons developed in the US.