1-800-822-8080 Contact Us

I am sure you have seen that Vladimir Putin has stepped in and gotten Syria to agree to giving up their chemical weapons.  This has effectively neutered any strike by the U.S. and taken “war” off of the table.  It will be interesting to see what the president will have to say tonight and I am sure that his teleprompter speech is being rewritten as I write this.  You have to hand it to Putin, he seems to have diffused this situation and put us in a box of our own (the president’s) making.

From what I have seen and read, more evidence points to the “rebels” (Al Qaeda funded by the U.S.) as the ones who did the gassing, not Syria’s Assad.  My opinion aside, there are MANY reasons why the U.S. would like to strike Syria.  As I have mentioned, we must “reflate” the financial system and unless the Treasury starts issuing copious amounts of new debt then this cannot happen.  Yes the Fed “can” keep buying through QE but the problem is now that they are buying “too much” and eating up collateral that the shadow banking system needs as collateral to lend against.

We also have the reason(s) to keep the Middle East stirred up so that Russia and China cannot get deals done and a further foothold in an area that we are rapidly becoming “pais non gratis” (country not welcomed).  Of course this is certainly connected to the fact that demand for dollars to settle oil has been declining for several years as most all new “deals” are being inked WITHOUT the use of dollars for settlement.

Another couple of “financial” reasons that “no war is bad” would be the upcoming Fed taper or no taper meeting and the debt ceiling debate.  First off, big deficit spending for a war (even if it started with an “incredibly small strike” as John Kerry said) would allow the Fed NOT to taper.  They know full well that any taper will spike interest rates higher and bury the derivatives market and real economy even further.  With regards to the debt ceiling, anyone who even rooted for “austerity” and not raising the ceiling (or even a tempered hike) would be shouted down as un patriotic and just plain “un American” for not supporting our troops.

In the words of David Letterman, “The number one reason that no war is bad?”  Because there is nothing else to distract the public from the ugly reality we find ourselves in.  “A war” is necessary.  It is necessary so that fingers can be pointed to it as the reason for all things bad.  “A war” will distract from all of the scandals that have erupted in just the last year.  No one will remember Benghazi (was it connected to the gas in Syria?), the IRS, NSA, Snowden or anything else.  The banks can be closed and your accounts “bailed in” while the public switches between CNN regarding the war and America’s Got Talent.  Not many pay attention anyway but a war, more than anything else will distract attention to the real deal.  The real deal being that the global Ponzi scheme is collapsing.

I must say that Putin’s “move” was incredibly smart.  He knows that we (the U.S.) “need” another war and he effectively has taken it away.  You see, even though Americans have been fooled into war many times before, we are still (my opinion) by majority a “just” population that needs to believe that we are “doing right.”  The backlash for an unprovoked attack, even now as dumbed down as we’ve become would still not be tolerated.  I believe that Mr. Putin understands this concept and made his “move” accordingly.  I also believe that he is/was fully willing to slam it out in the Mediterranean if necessary and fully understands the ramifications.  He understands that “no war is bad” for the U.S. and has basically dealt the administration a heavy blow by being the “nice guy arbiter.”  He has won this battle without even firing a shot by leaving the only reason for the U.S. to attack Syria being “because.”