Why invade if we are not annexing territory? We should have just claimed Afghanistan and Iraq as territory and moved everyone out and made a factory out of both countries. Problems solved.
I'd do more to like and support, but I got those amazing dub's for 1 comment over 15 years
This is my logic : Smedley D. Butler wrote a book, a quick one, that explains how the US military build up (before and after ww1) published in 1935. He was a retired major general that literally admitted the US was better than the mafia at running the "racket". I read those words, and it's not hard to see how the US went in and took countries for what they were worth, no need to annex or occupy, and told them -- now you trade with this piece of paper. Their goods, services, exportable products -- all exchanged for the USD. You trade for this or we can fuck with you more.
The NIXON shock in the 70's leads to the stone faced lie -- that we could back gold and silver -- at an agreed upon INTERNATIONAL level after ww2. I think it was France that wanted some gold back for their fucking vault full of ink and notes, and were DENIED. (That's a lot of cheese and wine exports traded for paper) We couldn't give them that back because we fucking LIED.
This is called private central banking.... which APPARENTLY isn't a ponzi scheme. The US got rid of the 1st bank of the US, the 2nd bank (Jackson and no bank) -- then they just renamed the damn thing the "federal reserve". Same scheme, same assholes.... same reason we threw the brits out.... but they (the banksters) are a fucking overwhelming whore.
Sounds kooky right? No, it's called a small dominant group of men that seek control of everything. Dunno how many are she/zher/zhen/zhat these days, but they are literally money junkies that only aim for the wish to feed off you.