BY WHOM ARE WE BEING DRIVEN TOWARD WORLD WAR THREE?
The question posed above is hardly a mystery. It merely takes a willingness to observe the obvious. Many of us do this... but at least an equal number, and I suspect a great many more do not.
Many are simply caught up in HAVING to believe something rather than seeking to discover what the REALITY truly consists of. Everything depends on the attitude we bring to such matters. An enquiring mind will always gain access to something approaching actuality than a fixed one.
With this in mind what factors are obvious in reference to the question that heads this commentary?
Which nation or group of nations has made the most interventions in sovereign nations over the last hundred years? Which nation or group of nations has involved itself or themselves in deposing the leaders of sovereign nations, assisting coups in sovereign nations or arranging assassinations in sovereign nations?
I will name no names, I will leave the conclusions on this question wholly up to the reader.
For me the answer to all the questions above is clear, especially in regard to two particular nations that repeatedly display a certain disposition to regarding themselves as having a mission that REQUIRES intervention, a mission that derives its power from a sense of superiority over others and which the elites of these nations feel behooves them to have an almost God-demanded duty to intervene. However, others must make up their own mind.
There has been one other nation that at the very least we have been told wished to achieve world domination, that took advantage of the second world war to occupy a number of nations in Europe.
That nation had an ideological belief in the superiority of its own system of social organization and control. It gained its own expansion due to its vital role in defeating what had been to that time the most aggressive and violent attempt to intervene in an almost unlimited manner globally with apparent unending ambition based on its supposed inherent superiority.
I would argue that there are only two primary candidates who mirror the global ambitions demonstrated by the country above. That there are only two that conceive they have the 'manifest destiny' to go out into the world and intervene, removing leaders they disapprove of and replacing systems of governance that they consider less ideal than their own.
And what might be the result of these ambitions? In fact we have seen the results of some already in the Middle East and can reasonably clearly judge what might result from such similar or even larger scale interventions in future.
And the intent behind such interventions beside the obvious ones of removing leaders and replacing systems? In my estimation these are quite obvious and involve the elimination of all opposition to certain powers who see themselves as superior as described above and therefore as the inheritors of the role of world guardians and controllers, maintaining a high degree of surveillance, intervening at every level to ensure their own values are consistently and permanently adhered to.
It is the resistance to these single pole of power geopolitical ambitions that creates the negative effects up to and including a third world war. It is the RESPONSE to these ambitions, not the ambitions of those being intervened against that will clearly cause the enormously negative effects inevitably to follow from the ambition to gain globally hegemony by all means considered necessary.
Yet what are those being targeted to do? Submit to the demands that they concede to the claims of foreign superiority mirroring the colonialist era of the past? National pride I would think would always find such a prospect geopolitical anathema. So, the building sense of crisis continues, with two nations in particular using every means to undermine and subvert those it wishes to bring under control.
The underlying elements that fuel this effort are twofold. One is that inherent sense of superiority spoken of before. The other is a largely unspoken fear. Since it was hit hard after a very long period of invulnerability, one of the two nations in question clearly determined that unless it gained overarching ability to surveil and control such an event or even more serious attacks could occur.
So here we are. On a road with no turning in a juggernaut without a reverse gear. Duty through a sense of overwhelming superiority and duty to export that superiority along with an equally overwhelming fear and determination to eliminate all sources of that fear.
Driving hard on the road toward World War Three.