Old-Thinker News | August 24, 2008
By Daniel Taylor
After the recent Georgian incursion into South Ossetia, discussion has been rampant regarding America’s influence and dominance on the world scene. Some are proclaiming that Russia has laid to rest aspirations for a so called New World Order. From one angle this may appear to be the case, but there is a bigger picture needs to be examined.
The United States is going to – and to a degree already is – be held up as an example of why “global mechanisms” and a “world structure” need to be in place to prevent such actions as the invasion of Iraq and U.S. support of Georgian forces in the invasion of South Ossetia. We’ve been presented with a problem, now globalist think tanks and organizations like the Council on Foreign Relations will provide us with a solution. National sovereignty has no place in this era, so we’re told. We must “share power”.
Former President of the Soviet Union, Mikhail Gorbachev, has stated that he sees the U.S. led Iraq war as an example of the need for a “new world order” to manage the globe.
“Look at the US in Iraq, everybody was opposed, even their allies, but they did not listen and what happened? They do not know how to get out of it now. Now we understand that… we are all linked to the US and if it falls apart it would be a real collapse. We have to help them to get out of there. That means that cooperation is needed, a new world order is necessary and global mechanisms to manage it.”
Turkish President Abdullah Gul has made similar statements recently in response to the Georgia-Russia conflict. As the AFP reports,
“Turkish President Abdullah Gul predicted “a new world order” of joint international action, in an interview published in the U.K. on Saturday.
He added that the conflict in Georgia shows the U.S. can no longer shape global politics on its own, and that it should start sharing power with other nations.”
The 2008 election gives us an idea of the current trends underway and provides a window into the establishment’s long term game-plan. Both Barack Obama and John McCain have openly indicated that globalist policy will be pursued if either of them are elected president.
John McCain discussed his proposed “League of Democracies” at the Hoover institution in May of 2007. McCain stated in part,
“This League of Democracies would not supplant the United Nations or other international organizations. It would complement them. But it would be the one organization where the world’s democracies could come together to discuss problems and solutions on the basis of shared principles and a common vision of the future. If I am elected president, I will call a summit of the world’s democracies in my first year to seek the views of my democratic counterparts and begin exploring the practical steps necessary to realize this vision.”
Barack Obama made his globalist stance known during his highly publicized speech in Berlin on July 24th. He said,
“Yes, there have been differences between America and Europe. No doubt, there will be differences in the future. But the burdens of global citizenship continue to bind us together. A change of leadership in Washington will not lift this burden. In this new century, Americans and Europeans alike will be required to do more — not less. Partnership and cooperation among nations is not a choice; it is the one way, the only way, to protect our common security and advance our common humanity.”
“In this new world, such dangerous currents have swept along faster than our efforts to contain them. That is why we cannot afford to be divided. No one nation, no matter how large or powerful, can defeat such challenges alone.”
The more sophisticated branch of globalist elites who see the route to power through slower, deliberate and incremental steps are now making their move. The aggressive Neocons have served their purpose and are making the establishment nervous with further provocative actions. The corruption and wars that have tarnished the American people’s name will now be used to further the aims of the global elite. America’s demonization, and in turn its use as an example of the necessity of global governance, may very well be the next stage of the establishment’s plan for world government.