Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,171 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 946,523
Pageviews Today: 1,688,625Threads Today: 723Posts Today: 12,789
07:09 PM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPLY TO THREAD
Subject It does not matter who we elect as President when it comes to Iran
User Name
 
 
Font color:  Font:








In accordance with industry accepted best practices we ask that users limit their copy / paste of copyrighted material to the relevant portions of the article you wish to discuss and no more than 50% of the source material, provide a link back to the original article and provide your original comments / criticism in your post with the article.
Original Message That Geo-Strategy has been in play for some time now, and every President: Bush, Clinton, Bush and Obama -- has done their part in fulfilling part of that Geo-Strategy.

There's a reason why Clinton, Bush and Obama did not take action with Iran.

Our Geo-Strategy is very coherent and logical, and there are things that must be done in preparation for other actions.

It's like a big chess match, but instead of light and dark squares, you have countries.

And, like a chess match, once you start, there's no starting over: you either win, draw or lose.

Also like a chess match, you cannot change strategy in the middle of the match.

Neither your Presidents nor your Congress has any control over our Geo-Strategy. That is solely in the purview of the Bureaucrats. Why? Because changing strategy every 4-8 years with a new President leaves you with no coherent strategy at all, and you end up in a situation worse than you could ever possibly imagine.

More than that, there really isn't any viable alternative strategy that would benefit you, and then the cost to change strategy is in the $TRILLIONs, so it's not like we can afford it.

No, you're going to see this out to the bitter end, whatever that might be.

Those of you who think Iraq and Afghanistan are failures don't have a clue.

The goal was always to create a situation where the US can maintain a military presence indefinitely.

How's that working out for everyone?

Well, so far, it's a smashing success, because that's exactly what's happening.

Those of you who play chess or checkers or strategy games like Risk, don't you put pieces in places to control certain squares on the board or certain areas?

Well, of course you do.

That's exactly the function of Iraq and Afghanistan.

When the opportunity presents itself, and it's anyone's guess as to when that will happen or what it might look like, because the US could coerce a confrontation, or use a false-flag event or use some other seemingly unrelated event as justification, whoever is President is going to give the order.

So, at the end of the day, it doesn't matter if you elect a Republican, or Democrat or Independent, or Green-Party or Libertarian or Communist or Socialist or whatever party, they're going to do it, and they'll do it, because they won't see any other options, or they'll be led to believe (by the Bureaucracy) that's the only option.

I'm not saying I agree with the Strategy, in fact I've never said that, I'm just telling you what it is and why.
Pictures (click to insert)
5ahidingiamwithranttomatowtf
bsflagIdol1hfbumpyodayeahsure
banana2burnitafros226rockonredface
pigchefabductwhateverpeacecool2tounge
 | Next Page >>





GLP