STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
NATO on the Ground in Somalia?
By Staff News & Analysis - July 05, 2011

American Boots Hit the Ground in Somalia After Drone Attacks … Somalia is now the sixth country over which the United States is flying attack drones. Last month, the same Special Operations Command unit currently operating in Yemen carried out an attack on two leaders of the Somali militant group al-Shabab in a June 23 mission. The Washington Post reported the attack on Wednesday, and on Friday, Somalia's defense minister says that American military forces touched down to collect the bodies of the insurgents. – The Atlantic Wire

Dominant Social Theme: NATO is at war with numerous states now, but these wars are not its fault. They are defensive struggles.

Free-Market Analysis: Are America's wars expanding? NATO's wars are really America's wars, so that in a sense wherever NATO goes America's military-industrial complex follows. NATO is an engagement force of the Anglosphere. We would argue (as we have before) that as the size and intensity of these wars increase, the Anglosphere power elite behind them is gradually creating a regional World War III.

It is difficult to tell in this day and age why wars are being fought. The answers given by the powers-that-be have not proven especially convincing in the past decade. NATO is said to be bombing Libya to protect citizens, but sometimes it seems as if the bombs are murdering more civilians than strongman Muammar Gaddafi.

It is hard to avoid the conclusion that there is some level of an economic component to these wars; Western economies are so bad that any distraction is good. And with what now seems to be six separate engagements in and around the Middle East, there are plenty of such distractions.

The wars are increasingly hard to track. America's (NATO's) current engagements apparently include Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen and now Somalia. What is the common denominator? it is not merely economic distraction. In our view, Western powers that be are trying to wipe out the last vestiges of resistance to a one-world order. They have declared war on tribal culture.

Tribal culture is resistant to Westernization. Somalis, Pashtuns, Bedouins and Punjabis (if one includes Pakistan) are tribes with millennial cultures. Uprooting persistent cultural trends is a long-term project. First violence is applied to fracture the culture and then massive amounts of foreign aid to rebuild it. What looks like generosity is actually self-interest. The powers-that-be use aid like gesso, whiting over what once was to paint an entirely new picture.

Look back in time and we think there is plenty of evidence the ongoing and expanding wars may be part of a long-term project. World War I we could speculate was designed in part to overwhelm German culture. World War II shattered Japanese culture. The Korean and Vietnamese wars did the same in Asia. Only the Middle East and Africa are left.

Is it a coincidence then? Or is it the start of a kind of regional World War III, as we have suggested in the recent past as these regional wars have gathered force. America, Britain and NATO are acting especially belligerent these days. The article excerpted above from The Atlantic Wire (Atlantic magazine) shows us that not only has the American military begun to use drones dropping bombs, they have no compunction about "touching down" on Somalia soil to take the bodies of the enemies, presumably for identification of some sort.

In addition to this, there are numerous reports that NATO (basically an American invention) is about to launch a ground war in Libya along with the British and French. This makes sense; this seems to be the national trilogy driving the Anglosphere elite's wars around the world. The Germans, ironically, remain uncooperative.

We noticed Nicolas Sarkozy's increased belligerence when French troops took the lead in the Ivory Coast incursion that deposed lawfully elected President Laurent Gbagbo. France charged that his opponent Alassane Ouatarra (a former IMF bureaucrat) had won the election even though an Ivory Coast electoral commission had denied him victory and claimed his campaign had participated in electoral fraud.

It seems clear that Sarkozy, more than any other French president in recent memory, is willing to join France in common cause with Britain and America in what is basically a one-world quest of conquest. People – especially in the West – don't want to admit it (or may not be paying attention to it), but the Anglosphere elites seem to have embarked on the final leg of a globalist consolidation.

After observing these wars carefully, we believe we discern a deliberate strategy behind how they work. First of all, the actual objective is never explained anywhere by anyone. There are apparent phony objectives floated by the US and British (and now French) governments. The mainstream media presents these justifications as true even though it is increasingly obvious they are obviously not. This happened in Afghanistan and iraq.

Next comes the alternative media, leftist-influenced in some cases; the blogs and websites echo with analyses that feature Anglosphere corporate greed. The reasons for the invasion have to do with oil and gold, the alternative media darkly mutters. (It may, but again in our view these are not usually the primary reasons, or not now anyway.)

Yes, when one examines the actual operative procedures a DIFFERENT operative pattern emerges. In any recently attacked state, a central bank is the first thing set up. And then a private banking industry (fiat money distribution network) is created. It may have Islamic aspects or not, but it is intended to introduce (drown) the populace to (in) Western style banking (debt).

What else is set up immediately? Public schools with elaborate facilities for girls, as girls may not receive much formal education in Muslim nations. (Nor may boys for that matter.) The education they do get is usually surprisingly nationalistic. The idea is to break down tribal identity. In order to facilitate this, foreign aid is brought to bear.

Increased literacy has other benefits from the point of view of Western elites. it allows the whole mechanism of elite mind-control to be leveraged, from faux-history about Western superiority to the role of Keynesian economics in the "success" of the nation state. It evidently and obviously uses divide and conquer tactics in which women in tribal states are encouraged to see their roles not as traditional but as repressed.

The Pashtun in particular have a culture and society that has granted a kind of individual (or at least tribal) freedom for 2,000 years. Let Western powers-that-be provide "literacy" and "education" to the Pashtuns and they too can participate in the "advantages" of Western civilization, including massive militarization and a prison-industrial complex that incarcerates millions.

Western civ surely includes good things like the scientific method and free speech. But as we have seen in the 21st century much of the most impressive elements of Western society were apparently tolerated by elites that needed a positive mythos to counteract the authoritarianism to come. it was a kind of "beard."

Today, those depredations have arrived with a vengeance. A central-banking-based regulatory democracy is simply not sustainable, or at least not as regards prosperity. The ramifications of the Western system include foreclosures, currency debasement, endless elite corruption, growing authoritarianism, etc. Eventually, as in the Depression, it may include sickness, starvation and general uprootedness. One could argue that even the Afghans, in all their supposed cultural debasement, have it better than this.

How many Afghans lost their houses to foreclosure in the past millennia? How many will likely lose them in a "civilized," Western society? The Western banking system that Western powers-that-be implemented in Kabul has just collapsed entirely. The Afghan head of central banking has fled to the West, citing assassination plots. Hundreds of millions or billions are missing.

Literacy no doubt makes such evolutions possible. But can some within the Pashtun community be blamed for asking whether literacy Western-style comes with an extraordinarily high price tag? Is the literacy now being inculcated in Kabul truly a selfless act or are there other motives?

It is said that literacy is important to create a successful Afghan army and civil police force. But in fact, literacy in this case will only provide the building blocks for civil war as recruits are drawn primarily from Northern, non-Pashtun tribes. Those who join are of course encouraged to think of themselves as Afghan rather than Northern. The idea is to pretend that Afghanistan is a nation like European ones. Again, how helpful is literacy in this case?

Of course European nations are tribal too, and in fact elite depredations are regularly being launched on European (and American) culture as well. All cultures surely need a kind of metaphorical tenderizing in order to create a truly globalist one. In Europe and America thus far the weapons are economic and social; immigrants not bullets are the weapons of choice, but the effect is the same.

Finally, there is the issue (in these current wars) of Al Qaeda itself. We continue to have a good deal of difficulty believing there is a formal al Qaeda. Al Qaeda in Arabic means fundament or base and the CIA apparently came up with the name after cataloguing Arab fighters that poured into Afghanistan to fight the Russians long ago. But whether what was a book-keeping exercise morphed into a fighting force divorced of the CIA remains to us an open question, at least.

What if one of the objectives of maintaining and building a myth of a terrorist "al Qaeda" was to generate a justification for the current wave of tribal attacks? Wherever there is a tribe that needs to be confronted in order to ease the way for world governance, NATO can simply discover "al Qaeda." Is it a coincidence that al Qaeda has suddenly been found in places like Yemen and Somalia?

Regardless of the underlying mechanism, the larger question is whether or not this expanding military effort will have the desired effect of consolidating Western control. (If indeed that's what is going on.) We're not sure. Afghanistan hasn't worked out so well. And other wars need to grow in intensity, some of them anyway, to have the appropriate reengineering effect. Such an expansion can be fomented, unfortunately, via a false flag attack in America or Europe.

Edited on date of publication.

After Thoughts

We would tend to believe – if the above speculation is correct – that the ultimate prize is Iran. Engaging with Iran and the former Persian Empire would likely bring a kind of regional World War III to fruition.

Posted in STAFF NEWS & ANALYSIS
loading