Adrian Salbuchi: Final Conflict 2012? Engineering World War III

Final Conflict 2012? Engineering World War III

By ADRIAN SALBUCHI, September 28, 2012
In today’s increasingly interdependent and interactive world, every action
has a myriad of causes, meanings, objectives and reactions; many visible,
many invisible. Some, openly admitted and declared; others no one would dare
When trying to come to grips with the many complex conflicts going on in the
world and the dizzying pace at which they transpire, it would be a mistake
to approach them in isolation. Only a “holistic” bird’s eye view gives us
the picture of where we are and, more importantly, whereto we are being
21st century geopolitics cannot be understood applying a silo mentality.
Syria’s civil war, Egypt’s “Arab Spring,” the destruction of Libya and Iraq,
growing China, crippled Japan, the Eurozone crisis, America’s “missile
shield” in Poland, Iran’s nuclear program, the coming Latin American
“Spring…” Approached haphazardly, the picture we get is one of utter
chaos. Approached applying the right model of interpretation, we begin to
see how things interrelate, react and move in obedience to extremely
powerful and dynamic – albeit, mostly invisible – forces silently driving
today’s world.
Don’t (just) Read the Newspapers…
It’s good to be informed; it’s useless, however, if you cannot format that
information into proper intelligible models. Too much unprocessed
information will send your brain into overdrive. Thus, it’s good judgment to
step away from all the noisy headlines, breaking news, terror alarms and
show-biz news anchors. It’s like when you look at a Claude Monet
impressionist painting: if you stand too close, you only see a maze of
little coloured dots, but when you take a dozen steps back then the beauty
of the work unfolds before your eyes.
In today’s information overdrive, we must join the dots correctly in spite
of the global media’s insistence that we connect them all wrong.
By now, most of us have realised that ours is “a planet at war”; not at war
with some alien world (that would make things easier to understand!).
Rather, we are a civilisation waging civil war with itself and against
Reading the global press, you might think this is a war between sovereign
nations, but it’s more complicated than that. This world war is waged by a
hugely powerful, illegitimate, authoritarian but numerically tiny Global
Elite, embedded deep inside the public and private power structures of just
about every nation on Earth; notably, the United States of America.
Like a cancerous malignant tumour, we can’t remove it outright; we can only
hope to weaken it and arrest its growth before it metastasizes, killing
mankind’s whole body politic. What the world needs now is some subtle sort
of “virtual political chemotherapy” to remove and destroy this malignant
tumour governing the world.
A key manifestation of this social and political illness lies in the extreme
inequalities that exist in the USA, where the richest 1% of the population
owns 35% of the country’s wealth, whilst the bottom 90% must do what they
can with just 25% of national wealth. Worse still, the overwhelming majority
of Congressmen, Senators, and top Executive Branch officers fall under the
“top richest 1%” category.1
Understanding hidden intentions, long-term plans, hegemonic ambitions and
the unconfessable plots necessary to achieve them is particularly important
for US, UK, European and Australian citizens. After all, it’s their leaders
who formally order their countries’ armed forces to ransack and destroy
target countries.
When voters in Argentina, Colombia, Nigeria or Malaysia choose the wrong
leaders, they themselves are the sole victims of their bad electoral
judgment. But when US, British or French voters in their folly put the wrong
people in power in their countries, then hundreds of millions around the
world suffer from their bombs, drones, invasions, interference and regime
Report From Iron Mountain
An old book from the late sixties called Report from Iron Mountain on the
Possibility and Desirability of Peace2 was allegedly authored by the Hudson
Institute future-prying think-tank at the request of then US Secretary of
Defense Robert S McNamara. Many say the book is a hoax. But it uncannily
reflects the realities of the past half century.
The book includes the claim it was authored by a Special Study Group of
fifteen men whose identities were to remain secret and that it was not
intended to be made public. It concludes that war, or a credible substitute
for war, is necessary if governments are to maintain power.
Report from Iron Mountain states that, “wars are not ’caused’ by
international conflicts of interest. Proper logical sequence would make it
more often accurate to say that war-making societies require – and thus
bring about – such conflicts. The capacity of a nation to make war expresses
the greatest social power it can exercise; war-making, active or
contemplated, is a matter of life and death on the greatest scale subject to
social control.”
The report goes on to explain that, “the production of weapons of mass
destruction has always been associated with economic ‘waste’.” Iron Mountain
stresses that war is an important tool, because it creates artificial
economic demand, a demand that does not have any political issues: “war, and
only war, solves the problem of inventory.”
Not surprisingly, Iron Mountain concludes that “world peace” is neither
desirable nor in the best interests of society, because war not only serves
important economic functions but also plays key social and cultural roles.
“The permanent possibility of war is the foundation for stable government;
it supplies the basis for general acceptance of political authority… War
is virtually synonymous with nationhood. The elimination of war implies the
inevitable elimination of national sovereignty and the traditional
nation-state.” Thus, “war has been the principal evolutionary device for
maintaining a satisfactory balance between gross human population and
supplies available for its survival. It is unique to the human species.”
So, in order to guarantee its own survival through its entrenchment inside
the US, UK, European and other power structures, the Global Power Masters
need war, the threat and rumours of war, just as fish need water, tigers
need weak prey, and dogs need trees… and all for similar reasons!
But the United States, Britain and their allies cannot have just any enemy.
They need a credible, dangerous, “scary” enemy: first it was Germany, then
Japan, the Soviet Union, the global “Red Menace”; today it’s “Islamic
Fundamentalist Terrorism” and, increasingly, China and Russia are going
centre-stage on the Global Power Master’s geopolitical radar screen.
The Case of Russia
In recent times, Russia has variously played the role of Buffer, Brake and
(now, hopefully) Wall against Western power aggression.
When Russia acts like a Buffer, the world feels frustrated as the cases of
Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya and Palestine show. In all these
cases, Russia sounded adversarial, “confronting” the US/UK/EU/Israel in word
but certainly not in deed. The Western powers always got their way, even at
the UN.
In recent times, however, Russia is increasingly acting as a Brake on
Western hegemonic ambitions, notably in Syria and Iran. In November 2011 and
February 2012, Russia vetoed two US/UK/French sponsored UN Resolutions
against Syria which, if passed, would have had the same devastating effect
on Syria as UN Resolution 1973 had last year on Libya. Also, Russia has
refused to support IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) pseudo-reports
and sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. In addition, Russia has
dispatched credible dissuasive military forces to counteract NATO’s
militarisation of the Persian Gulf and Mediterranean.
Here we begin to wonder whether a gunfight might actually break out. This
has had the sobering effect of forcing the US, UK, France and Israel to drag
their feet in carrying out their threats of unilateral attacks on Iran and
Syria. The downside is that this is cornering the US and its allies to
resort to covert and criminal tactics involving engineered insurrection and
civil war – aka “Arab Spring” (see below).
The key question is what needs to happen – what outrage must the Western
powers commit – for Russia to start acting as a solid Wall, telling the
Western powers in no uncertain terms, “This is as far as we’ll let you go;
this is as much as we will tolerate!”
If and when Russia finally does that, will the Western powers stand down or
will they bulldoze their way through the Russian Wall? This is the key
question because it holds the answer of whether or not the near future will
see the unleashing of World War III.
More importantly regarding the West’s decision-making process, all we say
about Russia also holds for China which the Global Power Masters see as
their real long-term enemy, because of its huge economic, political,
demographic and military growth, and China’s increasing geopolitical control
over the Pacific Basin and Indian Ocean.
The Case of China
As great air and naval powers, the US and UK well understand that China has
many more options to control major oceans than does Russia, which is
basically land and ice-locked. Add to this the fact that China holds over
two trillion dollars in US-Dollar denominated government bonds, plus another
trillion in Euros and then we begin to understand that China holds the
financial valve that can trigger sudden collapse of US Dollar hegemony.
We must move away from just thinking in economic/financial terms as most in
the West do, concluding that China would never swamp international markets
with one or two trillion in US Treasuries because that would destroy their
worth and, in a boomerang process, have a negative economic impact on China
itself whose reserves would thus evaporate.
But China – the Empire of Ten Thousand Years – has a different thought
process. China bides its time when it plays chess with the American
Adolescent Empire. China might even decide to play a geopolitical – not
financial-economic – card, sacrificing all its Dollar reserves just to
cripple the US behemoth’s monetary free-ride with which it pays for its
gigantic military machine. Will China fire the first geopolitical shots on
the global financial stage?
In 2010, Wikileaks reported that in 2009 then Australian prime minister
Kevin Rudd discussed with US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton how to deal
with China, both voicing their fears over its rapid rise and multi-billion
dollar store of US debt, prompting Hillary to ask, “How do you deal toughly
with your banker?” Both agreed that the Western powers should try to
“integrate China into the international community, while also preparing to
deploy force if everything goes wrong.”
The Pentagon knows full well that its long-term enemy after 2020 is China.
US News & World Report quotes Aaron L. Friedberg – a former close Dick
Cheney advisor, PNAC3 and Council on Foreign Relations member, and Princeton
University professor – as saying that the US should spare no effort to “keep
the Chinese dragon in its lair” because “strength deters aggression,” and
warning “this will cost money.”
Keeping China in mind helps to better understand US moves in other far-away
places as direct or indirect stepping stones on the road to China.
Take the Middle East, for instance, where geopolitical positioning and
control over oil reserves by the US also acts as a beachhead into Russia’s
Heartland and is geared at closing off oil sources to China – notably from
Wikileaks also exposed Kevin Rudd telling Hillary Clinton that China was
“paranoid about Taiwan and Tibet,” adding that, “the West should promote an
Asia-Pacific community intended to blunt Chinese influence.” Yet another
example of Western double standards and misrepresentation because contrary
to the US and Europeans, China has no global hegemonic ambitions.
Rather, China seeks to continue being the dominant power in the Asia-Pacific
basin steering traditional Western intrusion, colonialism and interference
The West’s worst nightmare-scenario – as noted by Samuel Huntington in his
“Clash of Civilisations” theory in the 1990’s – is if China achieves two key
geopolitical goals on which it is progressing slowly but surely:
Bonding closer ties, cooperation and agreement with Russia and India on the
Asian continent, and
Negotiating closer cooperation and overcoming the distrust of the past with
Japan. If Japan and China agree a common geopolitical strategy as France and
Germany did after World War II (leading to the EU), then the whole
Asia-Pacific region powerhouse with two-thirds of the world’s population
would be hands-off for the West. Just imagine marrying Japanese cutting-edge
technology with Chinese resources and manpower!
The Five Types of War…
When Report From Iron Mountain was written back in the sixties, its authors
went so far as to study whether substitutes could be developed for war but –
alas – they surmised that war had to be maintained, even improved in its
effectiveness. War could, however, take on unexpected and more subtle
characteristics. The Report’s recommendations included:
*    A giant space-research program whose goal was largely impossible to
achieve (a black hole, budget-wise and hence able to feed the economy);
*    Invent a new, non-human enemy: the potential threat of an
extra-terrestrial civilisation
*    Create a new threat to mankind: for example, pollution
*    Implement new ways of limiting births: via adding drugs to food or
water supply
*    Create fictitious alternate enemies
Almost a half century later, some of these recommendations have been
achieved (e.g., 1: a military and civilian space program), others are
on-going or in the making (3, 4, and, if Hollywood’s PsyOps machine is any
indication, number 2 is no doubt on the books), but 5 is the real keystone:
“creating fictitious alternative enemies,” of which we’ve seen so many
recently: Iraq, Afghanistan, Serbia, Libya, Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea,
Islamic Terrorism, and now: Iran and Syria.
The huge challenge mankind faces is that the US is increasingly resorting to
covert, clandestine and technology-driven warfare over outright invasions,
as Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan looked really bad on the Evening News…
Thus, there are basically five types of war used by the Global Power Masters
through their US/UK/NATO proxies, each characterised by increasing PsyWar
and strategic/logistic complexity:
Military Invasion – Clearly visible, very territorial and using overwhelming
military force and economic strength. As the Colin Powell Doctrine from the
90’s recommends, “the US should only wage war against foreign enemies where
American military power is so overwhelming that victory is guaranteed.” Can
a more ruthless doctrine by a major power be imagined? Cowards bombing
people half-way around the world using a joystick and screen inside some
safe facility.
Military Coup – Identifies dissident and treacherous elements inside the
target country’s armed forces, egging them on to removing the local legal
authorities and backing them with arms, money, “positive” global and local
media coverage and diplomatic support. A favourite method used against Latin
America in the 50’s, 60’s and 70’s, it’s still being used here and there, as
Egypt shows.
Financial Coup – Consists of first cornering a country into an unpayable
“sovereign debt” morass with the powerful global mega-banks. Then, when the
target country cannot service that debt, the banksters send in the IMF/World
Bank leeches supported by global media and rating agencies. They trigger
economic and social hardship, financial and monetary collapse leading to
widespread social upheaval, thus “justifying regime change.” Throughout
Latin America they perfected the “Sovereign Debt Model” that is now being
wielded against Greece, Spain, Italy, Ireland and – soon to come – the UK
and US.
Social Coup – Consists of financing political activists to bring about
controlled regime change in the target country. Here the local US/UK/Israeli
embassies support all sorts of dissident groups rendering them ample
financing and media coverage, plus the logistics to generate constant street
turmoil, which ends up grouping around some US-friendly political party or
movement. In the 80’s, they used the so-called “human rights” movements in
Latin America of which Argentina’s “Mothers of Plaza de Mayo” were a leading
Engineered Civil War – Consists of financing, arming and supporting
militarised “opposition” groups against the target country’s on-going
government. Normally, a key “national liberation” or some such “council” is
set up, as in Libya, Egypt, Syria and elsewhere, around which other militant
groups, thugs and mafias can revolve. Here, CIA, MI6 and Mossad fronts play
a key role and, in the cases of Libya and Syria, CIA offshoots like Al-Qaeda
also play a fundamental “freedom-fighter” role. In the Middle East, they
dubbed this the “Arab Spring,” presenting it to global public opinion as a
spontaneous, genuine and legitimate fight for freedom by the local
population against allegedly repressive and authoritarian regimes.
Thus, local conflicts ready to explode are taken advantage of: regimes that
have been in power for too long (as in Egypt and Libya); religious divides
(Shiites against Sunnis). It comes as no surprise to learn that Bassma
Kodmani, a “member of the executive bureau and head of foreign affairs” at
the Syrian National Council, attended the Bilderberg Conference last June in
Virginia, USA.5
Lately, this author has been warning of the rise of a “Latin American
Spring” that takes advantage of grave social and political grievances
throughout Latin America reflecting the huge divide that exists between the
very rich and the very poor. Normally, the rich are very US-aligned and the
poor have leaders that naïvely point to “Yankee corporate exploitation” as
the sole culprit, missing really fundamental political and social factors.
Signs of this coming “Latin Spring” can be seen in the recent
Monsanto-orchestrated coup in Paraguay, the money-sloshing election fraud in
Mexico, and increasing US militarisation in Colombia and elsewhere in the
Often these types of war start at a lower level – say, a social coup – and
are then escalated into full-fledged civil war insurrection mode if it suits
Global Power Master objectives. Libya, Syria, Egypt are examples of this.
What, Why, When & Where
What then exactly does this all add up to? Basically, we can see that such
chaos engineered by the Global Power Masters, although chaotic locally in
specific countries and regions, really points to a “new world order” on a
global scale.
The “chaos” part is deployed to destroy whole countries, especially those
that have come this far preserving their national sovereignty in one way or
another. That is a key characteristic shared by all attacked “rogue states”
– Libya, Iraq, Serbia – prior to them being invaded. The same goes for
on-going targets like Syria, Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea and Ecuador.
The more sovereign states can be weakened, the better for the one-worlders
who, after all, basically want to drag us all towards a single,
communist-like global state under their total control.
All those Arab (and Latin) “springs,” invasions, no-fly zones, sanctions;
all that “rogue state” rhetoric, are ground-clearing exercises geared at
positioning the Western powers and their allies for the final assault on
Asia which means war with Russia and China.
Of course, such a war would be a gross contradiction of the Powell Doctrine.
China and Russia are very powerful, so messing around with them carries huge
risks. If – God forbid! – it ever comes to war between China/Russia and the
West that dragged in other powers like India, Pakistan and Brazil, hopefully
it won’t happen any time soon. However, that’s what lies beyond the 2020
threshold. Its preliminaries are being played out today in different
Why is all of this being done? Maybe imperial overreach and the grossly
hyper-inflated dollar that saved the Money Power Bankers (don’t say that too
loudly!) has cornered the Western Elites into an irreversible and
unsustainable corner.
It’s like chess: What do you do when all possible moves only lead to
checkmate? Well, basically, you have two “options on the table”: (1) admit
defeat, or (2) kick the chessboard and… go for your gun.
1. See Zbigniew Brzezinski, 14 October 2011 acceptance speech of the Jury du
Prix Tocqueville Prize, bestowed upon him by former French president Valery
Giscard D’Estaing. Not surprisingly, both belong to the
Rockefeller/Rothschild Trilateral Commission, a key “rich and powerful”
decision-making body.
2. Originally published in 1967; re-published 1996 by the Free Press (Simon
& Schuster).
3. PNAC – Project for a New American Century; the Neo-Con think-tank group
from the late nineties that designed and planned the invasions of
Afghanistan and Iraq, promoting Israel’s strategic interests in the Middle
East, that served as a blueprint for US post-9/11 policies to this day.
4. Its leader Hebe Bonafini is known to have embezzled millions of dollars.
5. See official Bilderberg site Characteristically Ms
Kodmani’s nationality is described as “International.” She serves her
international masters very well.
ADRIAN SALBUCHI is a political analyst, author, speaker and radio talk-show
host in Argentina. He has published several books on geopolitics and
economics in Spanish, and recently published his first eBook in English: The
Coming World Government: Tragedy & Hope? which can be ordered through his
web site, or details can be requested by E-mail to
[email protected] Salbuchi is 58 years of age, married, with four adult
children, and works as strategic consultant for domestic and international
companies. He is also founder of the Second Republic Project in Argentina,
which is expanding internationally (visit:
The above article appeared in New Dawn No. 134 (Sept-Oct 2012).
Read this article with its illustrations and much more by downloading
your copy of New Dawn 134 (PDF version) for only US$5.95

By piotrbein