The Role of War and Politics in the United States: A Globalist Perspective

Recently, Sibel Edmonds, a well-known whistleblower, shed light on the deeper reasons behind the United States' recurrent inclination towards war. She argued that the U.S. does not always think that war is the only option, but it has become a means of exercising political power and weakening competitors through non-military methods. This article delves into the historical and modern implications of this viewpoint, drawing parallels with significant world events and analyzing the motivations and impacts of U.S. policies.

Carl von Clausewitz: War as Continuous Politics

One of the earliest and most prominent advocates of the idea that war is a form of politics is Carl von Clausewitz, a Prussian military leader and theorist. In his seminal work, Von Krieg, Clausewitz famously stated, 'War is the continuation of politics by other means.' This perspective underscores the often blurred line between political and military actions.

Current U.S. Foreign Policy and War Versus Politics

Today, the U.S. foreign policy often involves more than just military intervention. It frequently entails strategic diplomacy, economic sanctions, and political interference to achieve geopolitical objectives. The U.S. has a long history of using non-military tactics to maintain and expand its influence worldwide. These methods include economic power, media influence, and covert operations.

The Globalists and the U.S. Economy

A significant portion of these policies can be attributed to the influence of globalist elites who hold sway over financial institutions and economic systems. According to Sibel Edmonds, these globalists have concentrated vast resources, and their actions have rendered both capitalism and the majority of the world's population unnecessary and dangerous. This situation creates a tension where the majority may feel exploited, leading to dissatisfaction and unrest.

The Pearl Harbor Argument: A Provocation?

The attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941 is often seen as the catalyst for the U.S. entering World War II. However, some argue that it was a purposely created provocation. Edmonds suggests that the U.S. was forced into war due to Japan's attack, but the underlying reasons for entering the conflict are more complex. The motivations may have been strategic economic gain rather than purely defensive.

Europe and the Great War

During World War I, the U.S. initially stayed out of the conflict. However, the economic opportunities presented by the war eventually drew the U.S. in. The American government profited from supplying food and supplies to Europe. It was only when Germany started sinking American merchant ships that the U.S. decided to intervene. The Jewish bankers and financiers, who were powerful in U.S. society, may have played a role in pushing the U.S. into the war.

The Aftermath and Long-Term Impacts

The U.S. experienced significant gains from entering World War II. It gained new territories, strategic positions, and technological advancements. However, these gains came at a cost. The U.S. received no significant reciprocation, and this lopsided arrangement might have set the stage for current geopolitical tensions and domestic issues.

Lessons from History and Prospects for the Future

Edmonds' perspective offers a critical view of U.S. foreign policy and its historical context. While the U.S. has historically gained from involvement in major conflicts, the costs and long-term impacts should not be ignored. Modern challenges such as economic inequality, political polarization, and societal division require solutions that focus on sustainable economic growth, social justice, and transparent governance.

It is essential for citizens to remain vigilant and educated. The U.S. is indeed heading towards a path that poses significant risks to its future. Understanding the root causes behind political and military decisions can empower individuals to participate more effectively in the democratic process and work towards a better future.

As the saying goes, 'Before the civil war comes, the signs are clear.' It is up to each individual to open their eyes and recognize the signs. Only then can there be a chance to prevent a catastrophic scenario.

Keywords: War vs Politics, Globalism, United States Military Policy