Nukes, NATO & New World Order

Calling for a complete restructuring of NATO and a trilateral pact combining the US, NATO and the EU together in a “grand force” to tackle the challenges of an increasingly brutal world, the former military heads from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands insist that a “nuclear first-strike” option remains the “indispensable instrument” since there is “simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world”.

Their manifesto, written following discussions with active commanders and policymakers, sounds so much like the New World Order the media and power-elite keep insisting is a conspiracy, that many are unable or unwilling to publicly air their views. It has been presented to the Pentagon in Washington and to NATO’s secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, over the past 10 days. The matter will surely be discussed at a NATO summit in Bucharest in April.

“The risk of further [nuclear] proliferation is imminent and, with it, the danger that nuclear war fighting, albeit limited in scope, might need to become possible,” the authors argued in the 150-page manifesto for the urgent transformation of western military strategy and structures. “The use of nuclear first-strike weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction.” But apparently they forgot about the Depleated-Uranium munitions widely used by coalition forces throughout the middle east leaving 3.5 billion years of radiation poison from the aerosolized ordinances. Just as massively destructive in widespread small doses as a single tactical bomb)

The authors - General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff under Bill Clinton and former NATO Supreme commander in Europe, General Klaus Naumann, Germany’s former top soldier and ex-chairman of NATO’s military committee, General Henk van den Breemen, a former Dutch chief of staff, Admiral Jacques Lanxade, a former French chief of staff, and Lord Inge, field marshal and ex-chief of the general staff and the defence staff in the UK - paint an alarming picture of the threats and challenges confronting the west in the post-9/11 world and naturally, deliver a withering verdict of our ability to cope.

Not surprising, the five commanders argue that the west’s values and way of life are under threat, and the west needs help to summon the will to defend themselves. The key threats being:

· Political fanaticism and religious fundamentalism. Not withstanding the US born-again christian president who admittedly "talks to God"?

· The “dark side” of globalisation, meaning international terrorism, organized crime and the spread of weapons of mass destruction.- As opposed to state-sponsored mercenary death-squads, resource extortion, child slavery and gross human rights violations associated with the "positive" side of corporate greed- oh and the inconvenient fact that most WMD's are made and financed by the west.

· Climate change and energy insecurity, causing a scramble for resources and potential “environmental” migrations on a mass scale. Meaning the west's imperial conquest in the form of "free-market capitalism" consisting of domination of resources and inhabitants by an elite, friendly to powerful corporate interests, who will use such a global military to decrease surplus populations and maintain subjugation of the remainder.

And lastly and most insideously,
· The weakening of the nation-state as well as organizations like the UN, NATO and the EU. Meaning their plans for the ascension of the Corporate Kingdom and a One-World-Government to save the imminent collapse of the west way... but that still might not sit well in the US.

To prevail, the generals call for a complete overhaul of NATO decision-taking methods, a new “directorate” for US, European and NATO leaders to respond rapidly to crises, and an end to EU's obstruction-of and rivalry-with NATO. Among the most radical changes demanded are:

· An end to veto powers by member-nations and a shift to majority rule in NATO: Bully-Rule.

· The end of national "conditions" in NATO operations -meaning the bully rules and all must follow.

· Exclusion of any NATO member in decision-making of NATO operations for alliance members not taking part in the operations. Bully-way or the Highway!

· First-Strike capability without UN security council authorization if “immediate action is deemed necessary (by the bully) to protect large numbers of human beings”.

All this surfaced in the wake of the conspicuous headlines condemning NATO's performance in Afghanistan. Touched-off by Bush administration defense secretary, Robert Gates' comments that some allies could not conduct "proper" counter-insurgencies, the five ex-military goons declared that NATO’s future was "on the line" in Afghanistan's Helmand province. “NATO’s credibility is at stake in Afghanistan,” said Van den Breemen and according to their manifesto, “NATO is at a juncture and runs the risk of failure,”

Coincidentally, this week the Bush Administration named their man in Iraq, Gen Patreas, as a possible head of NATO... So as the latest in a long line of commanders, most of whom left calling for the US to leave Iraq, General Patraes however had no problem ignoring human rights and codes of conduct, to "win at any cost" and bring about a turn in the war. For that barbarism, he will be awarded the command of this New World Order's pretorian guard.

Klaus Naumann, Germany's top military commander who single-handedly revived combat operations and the Luftwaffe, dormant since Nazi rule, delivered a blistering attack on his own country’s performance in Afghanistan. “The time has come for Germany to decide if it wants to be a reliable partner.” By insisting on “special rules” for its forces in Afghanistan, the Merkel government in Berlin was contributing to “the dissolution of NATO”.

Naumann conceded that the plan’s retention of the nuclear first-strike option was “controversial” even among the five authors. Inge argued that “to tie our hands on first use or no first use removes a huge plank of deterrence”. Though again he failed to admit that he feels tactical nukes were not only a reality, but perfectly acceptable to use- which kind of nullifies the word deterrent.

Big words from five fear-mongers who's economic future depends on conflict and strife. Our media seems content to play this one down but its very notion should cause public outcry the likes of which our nation has never heard. For what these mercenaries of terror are proposing is nothing short of the end of democracy and the beginning of a one-world rule.. exactly what the Bilderberg Group has been planning for nearly a century.