Newsweek admits: U.S. Gov Planned False Flags to Start War With Soviet Union, JFK Documents Show

It is well known that the U.S. government will resort to any tactic in order to achieve their national and global objectives.
Which is why I am terrified by people who take the word of government officials (dems or repubs) as gospel and think America is the "good guys" in all aspects.

Id rather have an asshole in office telling us he's planning on dicking Americans and foreigners rather than find out in my 60s that x is invading our country because of something my government lied about in 2020
 
Which is why I am terrified by people who take the word of government officials (dems or repubs) as gospel and think America is the "good guys" in all aspects.

Id rather have an asshole in office telling us he's planning on dicking Americans and foreigners rather than find out in my 60s that x is invading our country because of something my government lied about in 2020

Lol I agree with you 100%. Liberalism isn't what its cracked out to be and we need radical politics. Radical right won with Trump, but the pendulum will swing to the left and its gonna swing dramatically. For the sake of the human species, the U.S. needs to have less power and a supranational organization needs to have more influence. Hopefully it will be the U.N.
 
I'm thinking about running in 2024

Sniper Mohammed from the Democratic People United Sherdog Party
 
Lol I agree with you 100%. Liberalism isn't what its cracked out to be and we need radical politics. Radical right won with Trump, but the pendulum will swing to the left and its gonna swing dramatically. For the sake of the human species, the U.S. needs to have less power and a supranational organization needs to have more influence. Hopefully it will be the U.N.

The US political system is full of War Hawks. We will not get an isolationist in our lifetime. Just look what the MSM and Agencies have done to Trump for merely running on an isolationist platform.

Thee ONLY time the Media got behind Trump at all was when he bombed Syria
 
It is well known that the U.S. government will resort to any tactic in order to achieve their national and global objectives.

Jet fuel doesn't melt steel beams.

Wait, what were we talking about?
 
That's the way to politicize it, truth is it's a human problem not a government problem.
I call it the one in ten rule: For every ten humans one is fucked up.

That said, as the country grows so must government. To believe that corruption and misbehavior could be eliminated is irrational.
The better approach is to put forth the best ideas to limit and manage it. Have any good ideas? My first thought is to vote against people like Trump, Christie, Moore, Conyers, Clinton and anyone else who demonstrates corruption, lies, and this type of behavior.

That's good. I point to lobbying and campaign finance as the root of the problem.

Really though, to rally people you need hope or fear. I don't think people properly fear becoming a banana republic, which means we have to find a way to sell hope in reform.
 
Is this surprising to anyone?
Considering the damage the states manages to cause already, just imagine the shit they'd stir up if they had a competent "intelligence" community.
 
We haven't come very far.

Half of the people who were ready to self-immolate in protest of the Iraq war a few years ago want to carpet bomb Syria now, because the CIA & Israel cherrypicked some disfigured baby photos and ordered their shills in the media to carry out a coordinated bombardment. For a while if you didn't want boots on the ground in Syria, you masturbated to dead babies (most of those kids turned out to be from pro-Assad families).

Then all the irredeemable buffoons who want to sanction Russia into a bloodied corner as revenge for "hacking our election" (Reality: Fishy evidence that a Russia-based group exposed our corrupt primaries and instead of thanking them, public reaction was scientifically conditioned by the usual suspects).
 
@mods: If you feel like this is a conspiracy theory and become triggered, at least read what Newsweek admitted in the link below before deleting.

And let this thread serve, at least, to help people distinguish between conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts.

U.S. Government Planned False Flag Attacks to Start War With Soviet Union, JFK Documents Show

The U.S. government once wanted to plan false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify war with the USSR or its allies, newly declassified documents surrounding the assassination of President John F. Kennedy show....

The memo also conceded that the plan would require employing a “maximum-security area.” Otherwise, it would be “most difficult to conceal the existence of such aircraft from the prying eyes of the American press and public.”


The U.S. government planned false flag attacks with Soviet aircraft to justify intervention
The conspiracy facts are that this never went beyond planning. It didn't even pass the incubation phase, and it never happened.

You've proven that the US is willing to entertain all tactics if shit really hits the fan. Mindblowing.
 
The conspiracy facts are that this never went beyond planning. It didn't even pass the incubation phase, and it never happened.

You've proven that the US is willing to entertain all tactics if shit really hits the fan. Mindblowing.

Wouldn't a false flag attack be illegal?

If not, it should be.
 
Wow, Newsweek finally admitted it . . . wait, Newsweek was in on it?
 
The CIA and NSC proposed all kinds of ridiculous scenarios during the Cold War. Operation Northwoods. Obviously, the Bay of Pigs. Kennedy was being implored by his security advisors during the Missile Crisis to either carpet bomb Cuba or launch a full scale invasion.

Luckily, cooler and saner minds prevailed.
On the other hand, that was a time when the USA could defeat the Soviet Union in a nuclear war. The soviet arsenal was crap in the early 60s, their bombers sucked, their ICBMs were powerful but very slow and not numerous, they relied mostly on short range missiles.
These short/intermediate range missiles would have wrecked Europe and caused many military casualties but most of the continental USA would be spared.
After that the Soviet capabilities increased to the point it would be insane to go against them.

I see it going that way:
Kennedy launches total war against the Soviets during the Cuban missile crisis. Cuba is invaded, however the Soviets had tactical nukes there that annihilate the invading american forces and Florida. America retaliates and nukes Cuba.
The USSR nukes and invades western Europe. The USSR is nuked to oblivion but controls most of western europe. USA forces fight the soviets in an apocalyptic battle in western europe and win due to logistics(soviet logistics get destroyed).
North Korea and China attack South Korea and Taiwan and take them because the USA will not waste resources there.
Well, writing that it doesn't seem that good anymore, changed my mind.
 
It is well known that the U.S. government will resort to any tactic in order to achieve their national and global objectives.

"the govt" eh? so its one monolithic entity with unified goals?

why didnt these false flag attacks happen do you suppose?
 
Virtually every US war has utilized a False Flag or some sort of misleading to build up support

The Lusitania had arms on it, it wasn't merely carrying innocent passengers
The USS Maine Incident
The Gulf of Tonkin
WMDs in Iraq
We were 'attacked' by Seminoles and used that as pretense to invade Florida
Same thing w/ the Mexican American War, and how Lincoln rose to fame initially w/ his Spot speech 'Show me the SPOT on US Soil that our troops were engaged....' which they couldn't do as the US troops went into disputed territory to start shit
We had some knowledge/intel about Pearl harbor prior, how seriously they took it is a different story. Same w/ 9/11

We fought the last battle of the War of 1812, battle of New Orleans, after the WAR WAS ALREADY OVER FFS haha

Damn did not know this. USA is very good at war. So since you have a corrupt businessman as president. Is it not possible that pro war generals he appoint and military complex get him to go along with such a scenario. False flag? He may also profit from it


Nope, for calling reductive and antagonistic morons "morons."



Look at my username. I'm not defending fucking neocons.

I am extremely critical of US foreign policy. We should be spitting on the Graves of the generals who proposed Operation Northwoods.

That doesn't mean we should confuse good government with bad government and create private economic domestic tyranny in the place of international political tyranny, especially when the former can be leveraged into the latter.

So since you have a corrupt businessman as president. Is it not possible that pro war generals he appoint and military complex get him to go along with such a scenario. False flag? He may also profit from it
 
That's good. I point to lobbying and campaign finance as the root of the problem.

Really though, to rally people you need hope or fear. I don't think people properly fear becoming a banana republic, which means we have to find a way to sell hope in reform.
I agree, imagine if free speech from lobby groups was just that. Free speech! Meaning absolutely $0 and only a speech could be given. I would like to see lobby groups become groups that put together information and all they can do is present it to campaigns in a formal document or presentation that was available for anyone interested to see, that way people and groups could present their ideas "free speech" with only the promise of honest policy. No bribery money. Another positive in my opinion would be to reverse/ repeal Citizens United at the same time making it illegal for unions to give any money at all to campaigns. The only money campaigns could receive would be limited donations from private individuals that were posted on a permanent website. That way every single penny a campaign receives could be tracked by anyone with the internet. That's
what transparency means to me . Yes I know this would never happen but I honestly believe it should.
 
Last edited:
Damn did not know this. USA is very good at war. So since you have a corrupt businessman as president. Is it not possible that pro war generals he appoint and military complex get him to go along with such a scenario. False flag? He may also profit from it



So since you have a corrupt businessman as president. Is it not possible that pro war generals he appoint and military complex get him to go along with such a scenario. False flag? He may also profit from it
If the process of appointment were more bi partisan we would be safer from the scenario you've outlined. When the House Senate and administration are all one party there is a disproportionately dangerous advantage and either side has too much power in these appointments being confirmed.
 
"the govt" eh? so its one monolithic entity with unified goals?

why didnt these false flag attacks happen do you suppose?

Different institutions have different goals, but under the power of a single administration, supreme court and congress in their favor, and with a bureaucracy so strong, you bet your ass government is monolithic here. There is always room for changes in plans according to contingency.
 
Back
Top