THE BEAST OF WAR-MAKING IS BEING BROKEN

GREETINGS,

EVERYWHERE I LOOK I SEE THE SIGNS OF GOD IN PERSON BRINGING AMERICA TO HER KNEES.HOW IS IT BEING DONE?TO REMOVE A THING NATURALLY ONE MUST REMOVE THE FOUNDATION AND PILLARS SO THE STRUCTURE IS WEAKENED.
WELL IF WE LOOK CLOSELY YOU CAN SEE THIS;”Five More U.S. Banks Are Seized, Pushing Total for Year to 89
Share | Email | Print | A A A

By Dakin Campbell

Sept. 5 (Bloomberg) — Lenders in Illinois, Iowa, Missouri and Arizona collapsed, pushing the number of bank failures to 89 this year amid continuing fallout from the worst economic slump since the Great Depression.

Illinois lenders InBank of Oak Forest and Platinum Community Bank of Rolling Meadows; Vantus Bank of Sioux City, Iowa; First Bank of Kansas City, Missouri; and First State Bank of Flagstaff, Arizona were shut by regulators, and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. was named receiver, the agency said in statements yesterday. Closing the lenders, with combined assets of $1.1 billion and deposits of $982 million, will cost the deposit insurance fund about $401 million.

Regulators have closed banks at the fastest pace in 17 years and more are likely as losses mount from soured real- estate debt. A total of 416 banks with combined assets of $299.8 billion failed the FDIC’s grading system for asset quality, liquidity and earnings in the second quarter, the most since June 1994, the regulator said in a report last month.

Great Southern Bank of Springfield, Missouri, bought Vantus in the lender’s second FDIC-assisted acquisition this year. Vantus, the biggest of yesterday’s failures with $368 million in deposits and about $458 million in assets, had 15 branches that will open today as Great Southern offices, according to the FDIC. Great Southern is purchasing $387 million of Vantus’ assets with the FDIC sharing losses on $338 million.

The Office of Thrift Supervision closed Platinum Community Bank, with the FDIC approving a payout on insured deposits. Platinum had deposits of $305 million and assets of $345.6 million. MB Financial Bank of Chicago will accept Platinum’s federal government direct deposits.

MB Financial, InBank

In a separate transaction, MB Financial bought about $150 million of InBank’s deposits and $212 million in assets. MB Financial didn’t buy $50 million in brokered deposits, the lender said in a statement. InBank’s three branches will open today as offices of MB Financial, the FDIC said.

Sunwest Bank of Tustin, California, acquired First State Bank’s $95 million in deposits and $105 million in assets, the FDIC said. The six branches of First State Bank are set to open Sept. 8 as offices of Sunwest.

Great American Bank bought First Bank of Kansas City’s $15 million in deposits and $16 million in assets. The sole branch of First Bank opens today under Great American’s banner, the FDIC said.

The FDIC insures deposits at 8,195 institutions with roughly $13.5 trillion in assets and reimburses customers for deposits of up to $250,000 per account when a bank fails. The surge in failures has depleted the Washington-based regulator’s deposit insurance fund, which fell to $10.4 billion at the end of June from $13 billion in the previous quarter, the agency said. The total was the lowest since 1993.

The agency has brokered the 6th and 11th largest bank failures in history this year in Birmingham, Alabama-based Colonial BancGroup Inc. and Austin, Texas-based Guaranty Financial Group Inc.

To contact the reporters on this story: Dakin Campbell in San Francisco at dcampbell27@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: September 5, 2009 00:00 EDT” AND IF WE PAY ATTENTION WE CAN SEE THE DOLLAR,THE POWER OF AMERICA’S MILITARY AND ECONOMIC HEGEMONY IS BEING DESTROYED .THIS,THE MEDIUM OF EXCHANGE OF ANY NATION LOSING ITS VALUE WILL CAUSE THE GREATEST OF NATIONS TO FALL.
THERE IS NO HIDING THIS FALL ANYMORE.THERE IS NOTHING THAT IS BEING DONE AT THIS MOMENT OR CAN BE DONE IN THIS LATE DAY THAT WILL STOP THE FALL OF AMERICA.SHE HAS REFUSED TO DO THE RIGHT THING EVEN NOW.SHE HAS REFUSED TO GIVE JUSTICE TO HER EX-SLAVES AND GIVE THEM A TERRITORY TO THEMSELVES(FREEDOM IN DEEDS,NOT WORDS).SHE HAS REFUSED TO GIVE JUSTICE TO THE RED INDIAN AND SHE CONTINUES TO MAKE WAR WITH ALL THE PEOPLES AROUND THE GLOBE .SHE IS TRULY THE MODERN DAY PHAROAH.
HER REFUSAL TO HEAR THE TRUTH OF GOD COMING OUT OF THE MOUTH OF AN EX-SLAVE(T.H.E.M.) AND HER CONTINUAL WAR MAKING WITH EVERY NATION (” Threat to Peace: “Foreign military bases in our region”: Bariloche — Good Strike!
The imperial strategy has always been

by Hugo Chávez Frías

.
Global Research, September 2, 2009
Latin American Herald Tribune

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

CARACAS — The imperial strategy has always been notable for the weakening and dissolution of any attempt the peoples have made to determine their own destiny.

The ancient and recent history confirms it. There is no possible domination if the processes of sovereignty and independence are not undermined. This is the reason why the empire fears the South American progress towards unity. In this sense, more than a project of simple circumstantial alliances, Unasur is a supreme urgency imposed to the peoples that share a history, a memory and a hope.

Aware of this situation, Venezuela attended the Extraordinary Summit of Bariloche, held last Friday August 28.

We have to highlight the fact that the discussion was publicly broadcasted for our peoples. The times of hidden agendas and agreements signed behind the scenes is over. I also want to point out that this is the first time that any summit or meeting of presidents and heads of state discussed the presence of foreign military bases in our region.

The discussion was frank and crude — sometimes tense — since there are obvious ideological core differences. But we have to deal with these differences in order to maintain and reinforce the South American unity. And it was the South American unity what was safeguarded in Bariloche. Any exogenous attempt to divide Unasur will fail.

Uribe’s rhetoric and pettifogging language worries. He often uses sophisms and, during one of his interventions in Bariloche, he said that those who warn about the settlement of US military bases in Colombia are based on pre-conceptions. Everything can become a pre-concept.

It was only rhetoric, without any content, aimed at avoiding the real important discussion. The problem is that, once the seven bases are established, Colombia cannot offer any guarantee to anyone.

Once they (the bases) are settled in Colombia, who knows how long they will stay there. Thus, the peace in the South American region is and will be always threatened. And what we want — most of Unasur members agreed in Bariloche – is to transform South America into a peace region. What we want is to eliminate the possibility of a war.

Venezuela is not responsible for the internal conflict in Colombia. Our enthusiasm goes towards the achievement of peace in the fraternal homeland. Our peace proposal for Colombia – we made in Bariloche – confirms our support on this issue.

The fundamental aspect is that a key position was established in the third point of the final document: to reaffirm that the presence of foreign military forces cannot — with its means and resources linked to particular purposes — threaten the sovereignty and integrity of any South American nation and therefore the region’s peace and security. De jure and de facto, we are establishing a defense doctrine that no one can ignore. And we will be watching over its rigorous and strict accomplishment.

It is necessary that the South American Defense Council starts acting effectively, with a vision of parity, equilibrium and symmetry. (In fact, the seven US military bases in Colombia provoke a very dangerous asymmetry situation). The revision of the military agreement between Colombia and the United States, signed last August 19, represents one first and fundamental step.

On August 28, it has been two months since the coup d’État in Honduras, and the brave Honduran people resistance have also been against the de facto regime for two months.

And it is a worry that the Honduran situation starts to cool off internationally and that the pressure over gorila to lowers. Today, we know that the coup was perpetrated in connivance with the military base of Palmerola. Otherwise, how would it be explained that the plane that took out President Zelaya landed first in that US enclave. What happened in Honduras was the first essay within a military imperial race whose continuity increases and powers with the new US military bases in Colombia.

We must keep on doing the utmost so the Honduran people recover their democratic path. In spite of the fact that the popular fight in the streets and the farms has continued, Honduras has been sinking in the darkness of gorillism for two months.

These have been two months of lessons. One, the shamelessly meddling power of important US sectors insisting on distorting the destiny of a people. Two, the incapacity of international organizations to accomplish their own decisions. This is a terrible sign for the rest of the continent, which can start assuming the disgrace and injustice as our daily bread.

In a recent article titled “Honduras and the Military Occupation of theContinent” (2009), the famous Mexican intellectual Ana Esther Ceceña says:

“Although Honduras clearly shows the limits of democracy inside capitalism,with the project of settling new bases in Colombia and the immunity of theUS troops in Colombian territory, Honduras as a whole would become alocation for the US army; and this endangers the sovereign capacity of auto-determination of the peoples and the countries of the region.

“The actions of this military base in South America will go to the enemy states or the failed states that, according to the new norms boosted by the United States, can be historically failed or become almost instantly intofailed states “because of the collapse.

”Any circumstance can transform a country into a failed state and therefore it is prone to be audited.”

These words are really worthy. There is not any exaggeration regarding the imminent risky situation for all the countries of the region, especially,Colombia’s neighbors. We all might be a target of a military intervention if we do not dance to the strains of the empire.

We took the illuminated verb of Bolívar to Bariloche. There we remembered what the Liberator says in a letter to Mariano Montilla, dated August 4th,1829: “If America does not come back to its steps; if it does not become convinced of its nullity and impotence; if it does to order and reason; verylittle can be expected of the consolidation of its governments;and a newform of colonialism is the patrimony we will bequeath to posterity.

“We are not willing to bequeath the evil patrimony of a new colonial period, but the luminous patrimony of the definite independence.

*Homeland, Socialism or Death! We will achieve victory!”*/////////AND….”The Honduran Coup And US Involvement

by Roger D. Harris

.
Global Research, August 31, 2009
Postal Coast

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

From afar, the June 28 coup in Honduras might appear to be one of those perennial power struggles among corrupt strongmen in a distant “Banana Republic.” After all, democratically elected and now deposed Pres. Zelaya and coup leader Micheletti came from the same political party. But the picture is quite different for those of us with the opportunity to have contacts with the popular civic groups in Honduras.
I am with the Marin Task Force on the Americas, a 25-year-old human rights organization. Two of our members are now in Honduras on delegations, and we have been in contact with other activists reporting back from what is alarmingly becoming an increasingly violent situation.

Zelaya’s “Crime”

Here are the words of our friend Lisa Sullivan, a lay member of the Catholic Maryknoll order working with the poor in Latin America. Lisa had gone to Honduras just a month before the coup at the invitation of a leading human rights group representing families of those disappeared in the previous military dictatorship in the 1980s. They went to a meeting with Honduran President Zelaya.

“It was not just an ordinary meeting, but one in a series of gatherings between the president, some of his ministers, and leaders of most of Honduras’ social movements. It was a six-hour, heart-to-heart, head-to-head real dialogue on deep issues such as whether to continue with the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA), to keep the Palmerola military base open to U.S. soldiers, how to create a sustainable water system, whether to pull Honduran troops from the School of the Americas. I have been in Latin America for 32 years, but this kind of president-to-the-people consultation was a first. And, it made me realize that something very interesting was happening in Honduras.”

A month later Pres. Zelaya was kidnapped out of Honduras and civil liberties suspended. Zelaya’s “crime” was that he threatened the privileged position of the elites in his country. With over 65 percent of the Honduran population below the poverty level (U.S. AID), the Zelaya administration was beginning to listen to the social movements and give their needs consideration.

Zelaya had raised the minimum wage, gave out free school lunches, provided milk for the babies and pensions for the elderly, distributed energy-saving light bulbs, decreased the price of public transportation, made more scholarships available for students, and passed legislation to protect forests from logging.

U.S. Involvement

The U.S. State Department freely admitted it had consulted with the perpetrators prior to the coup (Wall Street Journal, 6/29/09). With the U.S. as Honduras’ largest trading partner, its army heavily subsidized by the U.S., and some of the coup leaders including the head of the military trained in the U.S. School of the Americas, at least some tacit involvement in the coup by U.S. is evident. The popular saying among Latin Americans is “The Honduran army breathes through the noses of its U.S. advisers.”

But the world is a different place than it was in 1954 with the CIA-backed coup in Guatemala or even the Nixon-Kissinger coup in Chile in 1973, which brought the reign of terror under Pinochet to Chile. Attempted coups with U.S. backing against democratically elected and popular leaders failed in Venezuela in 2002 and in Bolivia in 2008 (but succeeded in Haiti in 2004).

Internationally the coup in Honduras has received universal approbation. The United Nations and the Organization of American States have both unanimously condemned the illegal coup and called for the immediate restoration of the constitutional government.

Specter of Repression

If this coup is not overturned, we fear Honduras will return to a period when disappearances and arbitrary arrests of those willing to speak out against injustice were common place. Such fears are not unwarranted as repression by the coup government escalates against the popular movement.

The Huffington Post (7/23/09) reported the coup government has been responsible for the targeted killing of at least four individuals, including two political opposition leaders. The death toll, all of them Zelaya supporters, has since more than doubled. Over a hundred people have been assaulted by the armed forces, and over a thousand of those associated with the social movements have been illegally detained. Press and media outlets have been shut down, while journalists have been arrested and detained.

The U.S. has partially gone along with the international community in opposition to the coup. Pres. Obama has publicly denounced the action, calling it a “coup,” and withdrew some U.S. military and economic aid to Honduras. Now is the time for the U.S. to take leadership and suspend all military, diplomatic, and economic relations with the coup government in Honduras, as is mandated by U.S. law when a coup has occurred, until the entire constitutional government in reinstated in Honduras.”…//////AND////” Confronting Russia? U.S. Marines In The Caucasus

by Rick Rozoff

.
Global Research, September 4, 2009

Email this article to a friend
Print this article

On August 21 the chief of the U.S. Marine Corps, General James Conway, arrived in the Georgian capital of Tbilisi to begin the training of his host country’s military for deployment to the Afghan war theater under the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF).

“During the meeting the sides discussed a broad spectrum of Georgian-U.S bilateral relations and the situation in Georgia’s occupied territory.” [1] Occupied territory(ies) meant Abkhazia and South Ossetia, now independent nations with Russian troops stationed in both.

Conway met with Georgian Defense Minister Davit (Vasil) Sikharulidze, who on the same day gave an interview to the Associated Press in which he said that the training provided by the U.S. Marine Corps could be employed, in addition to counterinsurgency operations in South Asia, in his country’s “very difficult security environment.”

Associated Press reported that “Asked if he was referring to the possibility of another war with Russia, he said, ‘In general, yes.'”

The Georgian defense chief added, “This experience will be important for the Georgian armed forces itself — for the level of training.” [2]

Sikharulidze was forced to retract his comments within hours of their utterance, and not because they weren’t true but because they were all too accurate. The Pentagon was not eager to have this cat be let out of the bag.

Three days later American military instructors arrived in Georgia on the heels of the visit of Marine Commandant Conway, whose previous campaigns included the 2003 invasion of Iraq and the first assault on Fallujah in that nation in 2004.

Three days after that Georgian Defense Minister Sikharulidze – former ambassador to the United States, head of the NATO division at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Georgia and deputy head of the Georgian Mission of NATO in Brussels – who was appointed to the post last year by the country’s mercurial leader Mikheil Saakashvili after the disastrous war with Russia last August, was sacked by the same. “Saakashvili criticized [Sikharulidze] for not doing enough to prepare the military ‘to stop an aggressive and dangerous enemy’ in possible future conflicts.” [3]

Whatever led to the defense minister’s dismissal and replacement by 28-year-old Bachana (Bacho) Akhalaia it wasn’t due to his bellicose intentions towards Russia. In announcing the transition Saakahshvili said, “We need a tougher approach. Bacho Akhalaia is the right man for the job” [4]

Immediately after being named new defense chief Akhalaia identified “three priorities of the defense Ministry: ensuring peace, modernization of the army, and NATO integration.”

In his own words he said: “Modernization envisages the improvement of the Georgian army’s weapons and equipment, as well as the training of soldiers and officers. And NATO integration remains our only way. Georgia should have an army that will not be a burden on NATO, but will strengthen it.” [5]

The Civil Georgia web site reported on September 1 that the U.S. Marines in the nation had launched “intensive training” which would “focus on skill sets necessary for Georgian forces to operate in a counterinsurgency environment….”

The same report divulged that “A similar training program was conducted by U.S. military instructors for the Georgian military ahead of their deployment in Iraq. Georgia withdrew about 2,000 of its troops from Iraq during last year’s war with Russia.” [6]

The 2,000 U.S.-trained Georgia troops in question constituted the third largest foreign deployment in Iraq last year with only America and Britain providing more occupation forces. They were also stationed near the Iranian border. When Georgia’s invasion of South Ossetia last August 7-8 triggered a five-day war with Russia, the Pentagon transported the Georgian soldiers in Iraq back home for combat in the South Caucasus had the conflict not ended on August 12.

The U.S. Defense Department’s training and arming of the Georgian military started long before the deployment to Iraq and that underway for Afghanistan.

In April of 2002 the Pentagon instituted the Georgia Train and Equip Program (GTEP) under the broader Operation Enduring Freedom “Global War on Terror” campaign whose main target was Afghanistan. For the first nine months the GTEP was run by U.S. Army Special Forces – Green Berets – assigned to Special Operations Command Europe. In December of 2002 the program was passed on from the Green Berets to the U.S. Marine Corps.

Later the Pentagon created a Georgian Sustainment & Stability Operations Program (GSSOP) under the aegis of the Defense Department’s European Command, whose top military commander is also NATO Supreme Allied Commander. This program concentrated on training Georgia’s officer staff as well as soldiers for eventual deployment to Iraq, NATO integration and armed assaults against Abkhazia and South Ossetia. The GSSOP succeeded in all three of its objectives, though not to the degree intended in the third category.

The redeployment of U.S. Marines to Georgia, then, is indicative of a continuous effort by the Pentagon ranging over more than seven years to prepare the Georgian armed forces – an American and NATO proxy army – for wars abroad and in the South Caucasus alike.

On August 31 the latest mission began: “The ISAF program to train the Georgian military for implementing international missions in Afghanistan started at the National Training Center of the Armed Forces of Georgia in Krtsanisi on August 31. The 31st infantry battalion of the Georgian Armed Forces will pass a six-month intensive training to participate in NATO operations within ISAF, led by an expeditionary brigade of U.S. Marines….” [7]

On September 2 the newly appointed Georgian Defense Minister Bacho Akhalaia summoned (or was summoned by) the ambassadors of NATO countries in Georgia and he reiterated his triad of priorities. “The minister presented during the meeting the key challenges of the Ministry and discussed the priorities, such as peace, modernization and NATO integration.” [8]

The same day a delegation of the German Bundeswehr arrived in the country and, visiting the Defense Ministry, discussed information technology. “The purpose of the visit is to integrate an informational codification system of the Georgian MoD with the NATO general system,” an initiative “implemented within the framework of the Bilateral Cooperation Plan [of] 2009 between Georgia and the Federal Republic of Germany.” [9]

During the same time it was announced that the American Marine Corps was sending a delegation to Georgia’s neighbor in the South Caucasus, Azerbaijan, which has also recently been levied for more troops for the U.S.’s and NATO’s war in Afghanistan.

From September 14-18 U.S. Marines will “examine the training of the Azerbaijan Marine Corps” and “according to the bilateral military cooperation program signed between Azerbaijan and the United States, U.S. navy experts will assess the skills of the Azerbaijani naval special forces….” [10]

Another Azerbaijani news source added, “After getting familiar with the combat activities of the marine battalions of the Azerbaijani Naval Forces, they will make their own recommendations.” [11]

Azerbaijan’s navy is deployed in the Caspian Sea which is also bordered by Iran and Russia.

A week before, September 7-9, the nation’s Defense Ministry will conduct a meeting of the Coordination Group on Azerbaijan’s Strategic Defense Outline and it announced that on the same precise dates as the visit of the U.S. Marine delegation “A working meeting on creating the Strategic Defense Outline and supporting the preparation of the final document will be held in Baku on September 14-18 with the participation of experts from the US and other countries.” [12]

On August 1 the nation’s press revealed that “NATO and Azerbaijan are discussing the possibility of using the country’s air space by the alliance’s contingents to reach Afghanistan.

“‘We are holding talks [about using the air space] with several countries including Azerbaijan,’ said a NATO official, who asked to remain anonymous.” [13]

The third nation in the South Caucasus, Armenia, is also part of plans by NATO to further integrate the strategically vital region and it too has been recruited for the Alliance’s expanding war in South Asia.

On August 21 the Armenian ambassador to NATO, Samvel Mkrtchyan, met with the bloc’s new Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen and “said that Armenia is inclined to develop partnership ties with NATO” [14] and “Armenian servicemen will join the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) in Afghanistan shortly.” [15]

The expansion of the Afghanistan-Pakistan war by Washington and NATO is pulling in regional states and increasingly vast tracts of Eurasia.

Last month General David Petraeus, Commander of the United States Central Command (CENTCOM), which is prosecuting the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, visited the former Soviet Central Asian republics of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Uzbekistan. While in Kazakhstan, which shares borders with Russia and China, Petraeus met with his counterpart, Kazakh Minister of Defense Adilbek Zhaksybekov, and “discussions centered around building on the already strong strategic partnership that exists between Kazakhstan and the United States.” [16]

He also inspected the U.S. and NATO base at Manas in Kyrgyzstan, which had been closed to the Pentagon and its Alliance allies earlier this year, but the use of which was again secured by Petraeus in August.

On September 5 NATO is to begin a week-long multinational emergency management exercise in Kazakhstan which will include forces from the United States, Germany, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Armenia, Finland, Britain, Spain, Sweden, Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Ukraine. That is, a 20-nation exercise in Central Asia whose participants include six former Soviet republics and two former Yugoslav states.

In late August the Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the British Armed Forces led a delegation to Turkmenistan to discuss bilateral military cooperation.

The Afghan war is the center of a Western military operation that is broadening into wider and wider circles throughout Eurasia and in varying degrees taking in dozens of nations from the Chinese border and the Indian Ocean to the Black Sea and the Adriatic Sea. Nations being absorbed into this military transit, overflight, and troop recruitment and training network include all those in Central Asia (Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) and the South Caucasus (Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia), the Black Sea region (Georgia, Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania and Ukraine) and the Southern Balkans (Albania, Bosnia, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Slovenia) in addition to Afghanistan and Pakistan. With the exception of the Central Asian states (so far), all of those nations mentioned above have sent troops to the war theater or soon will, Serbia alone possibly excepted.

Kuwait and Iraq are also used to transfer troops and equipment to the Afghan war zone.

The above nations include several that border Russia, China, Iran and Syria, four of a small handful of states in the world not subservient to the U.S. and its NATO and Asian NATO allies.

On August 30 it was reported that Bulgarian troops scheduled for deployment to Afghanistan are to train in neighboring Macedonia as part of “Bulgarian-Macedonian-American training in the framework of the Bulgarian-American” joint arrangement for use of the military base in Novo Selo in Bulgaria. [17] At roughly the same time U.S. National Guard troops were in Macedonia training the nation’s special forces is exercises that were described as “enriching and building the battle skills of both armies.” [18]

While U.S. and Bulgarian military personnel were training in Macedonia for NATO deployments to Afghanistan and elsewhere, Macedonian troops were participating in an exercise in Serbia “involving medical units…with the participation of officers and units of NATO forces and Partnership for Peace members states.” [19]

In the second half of last month American servicemen in the Joint Task
Force-East, which is now based in Romania, trained with Bulgarian and Romanian opposite numbers “to build interoperability capabilities and develop relationships with other militaries in regional security cooperation.”

Drills were held in both Eastern European nations and “More than 3,800 Romanian, Bulgarian, U.S. troops and civilians [participated] in
the three-month exercise.” [20]

The Pentagon and NATO have acquired seven new military bases in Bulgaria and Romania in recent years, including air bases for the transit of troops and weapons to Georgia and Afghanistan as well as for potential bombing runs against other nations such as Iran.

Last month a Bulgarian news source reported that the Pentagon “will invest in infrastructure and construction projects with a combined price tag of $45 million for their Bulgarian bases” in addition to budgeting $61.15 million a year ago for “construction works at its training area in Novo Selo.” [21]

Bulgaria and Romania face the western Black Sea across from Georgia and Abkhazia and offer the U.S. naval and air bases for current and future armed conflicts to the east and the south from the Caucasus to South Asia, the Persian Gulf to Northeast Africa.

Regarding Southeastern Europe in general, the new NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen last week identified the Balkans as a “top priority” and “said that his task is to get all of the Balkan countries into the Euro-Atlantic structure in the coming years.” [22]

In late August the U.S.’s European Command held a 40-nation exercise in Bosnia, Combined Endeavour 2009, to further integrate nations from the region and beyond into NATO. The chief military commander of NATO forces in Bosnia, Italian General Sabato Errico, said of the exercise that it was conducted “in the spirit of Partnership for Peace” and that “this exercise offers an excellent opportunity to focus on one of the key elements of the Partnership and the Alliance: interoperability. Allies and partners who participate in NATO-led collective security operations must be able to work together and to communicate effectively – exercises such as Combined Endeavour allow us to practice this.” [23]

Last week NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen visited Turkey and pressured his host to provide more troops for the Alliance’s war in Afghanistan, stating that the bloc’s deployment there would last “as long as it takes.” [24]

On the same day Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu announced that his country would be more than doubling its troops in Afghanistan from 795 to 1,600. At a joint press conference with NATO’s Rasmusssen Davutoglu added, “We are appealing to NATO countries to take measures against the PKK,” alluding to the counterinsurgency war against the Kurdistan Workers Party. [25]

The war in Afghanistan is developing in intensity and in range, in depth and in width. The August 29 edition of the British newspaper The Independent reported that the top military commander of American and NATO troops in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, will demand 20,000 more Western soldiers for the war. That is, after last month’s elections, the excuse for what were presented as temporary U.S. and NATO buildups over the past several months. Other estimates range as high as 40,000 additional forces. [26]

The new Chief of the General Staff of the British Army, General David Richards, last year said “he wanted to see a surge of up to 30,000 troops in Afghanistan, including 5,000 more British soldiers” [27] and is now in a position to deliver on his demand.

Central Command Chief General Petraeus last month announced plans to launch an intelligence training center to be coordinated “with the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, the (NATO) International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan, and Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe” that will “train military officers, covert agents and analysts who agree to focus on Afghanistan and Pakistan for up to a decade.” [28]

Late last month it was announced that the Pentagon was reassigning its 3rd Special Forces Group (U.S. Army Special Forces), which has been deployed to sub-Saharan Africa and the Caribbean, and now the “3rd Special Forces Group will be responsible for Afghanistan and Pakistan under a realignment of where the Army’s Special Forces groups operate.”

Moreover, “The 3rd Group’s new area of orientation will include the eastern and northern Middle East, which includes Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan.” [29]

U.S. Marines and Green Berets have become regular fixtures in the Balkans, Afghanistan, Kyrgyzstan, Iraq, Kuwait and the Horn of Africa over the past decade. With the widening of the Afghan war they are soon to take up permanent residence in the capital of Pakistan, in the Caucasus, in the Black Sea region and the Caspian Sea Basin among other locales.”AND THERE’S SO MUCH MORE PROOF)…..THE BIBLE TELLS US THAT GOD WOULD DESTROY THOSE WHO DELIGHT THEMSELVES IN MAKING WAR…THAT IS AMERICA.AND TODAY WE ARE POINTING OUT GOD’S JUSTIFICATION FOR HER BEING REMOVED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH.

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2009 Hiram's 1555 Blog

Leave a Reply