Nazi's, Serbs, and Syrians..Part 3

The mish mash of the various conflicts that was the Yugoslavian war, involved the different regions looking for autonomy, with a general desire from Serbia to try and 'keep things together.'

Ethnic minorities living in different regions became the victims to aggressors throughout the country, with various overlapping resentments boiling up, willingly helped along by CIA covert operations (and other actors no doubt).

Split into the different conflicts over a ten year period and across various regional borders, with minority groups supported by US and NATO through arms supply, agitation, and bombings - the country disintegrated.

The individual conflicts themselves are not relevant in this post.
Here's are how the victors categorize them.

Ten-Day War (1991)
Croatian War of Independence (1991–1995)
Bosnian War (1992–1995)
Kosovo War (1998–1999)
Insurgency in the Preševo Valley (1999–2001)
Insurgency in the Republic of Macedonia (2001)

All are similar stories of ethnic conflicts.
Conflicts that were engineered by economic warfare over decades, and later by military action.
None of it was to help any ethnic group, but only for the bankers to secure assets.
Ethnic resentments, and economic disparities were 'the cause' of conflict - foreign agitation and money supplied by the western countries was the gasoline.

The Bankers mantra:
Destroy a country and pick up it's assets for cents on the dollar, as well as long term occupation and control.
(Iraq, Libya...)

So we have Serbia trying to 'keep things together' (with their own agenda), and the other areas trying to break away from the union, with the 'help' of the US and NATO.

So we had Germany trying to 'keep thing together' by looking after the German peoples and defending the abuses from other countries upon their populations (government fueled ethnic resentment) .

German peoples found themselves no longer in their own country because 'the victors' of WW1 who had redrawn lines of countries, across Europe.
It's almost like the lines of these countries and territories were drawn up knowing full well that the potential of unrest in the future was nearly a guarantee . ...It just required the right pressures to be brought to bear..

We have the German government of the time - a defender of the sovereign peoples- trying to protect their civilians while at the same time, political agitation continually stirring things up against them...

Media propaganda can do - and did do - the rest.

Hitler was the 'Evil' German for coming to the aid of 3 million people in the Sudetenland, just as Serbia was the tyrant for helping ethnic Serbians in various regions..
War was declared on Germany for invading Poland in 1939 by France and Great Britain, but war was NOT declared on Russia for doing exactly the same thing at the same time.
Poland was carved in half.

One was an invasion, the other was to protect the people.
Germany invaded for the protection of it's abused people, Russia invaded for land acquisition.

The media reported it as exactly the opposite.

Was there another agenda altogether ? An agenda set by the banks and one not shared with the populations of Europe....

And so with Yugoslavia. And Syria .
Bankers agenda's are never peoples- or countries- agenda's.

Syria today is almost a carbon copy of Yugoslavia.
External forces interfering, disruption and demonization of the sovereign power by the media. NGO's and foundations (George Soros funded) like the Human right watch (helsinki watch), were adding to agitation.
Nothing has changed.
Germany, Yugoslavia, Syria.

Media spin makes it so that whatever action is taken by the sovereign power, it is always seen in a negative light.
The medias, and NGO' are just the propaganda arms of the bankers.
Sovereign nations that are nudged to one action or another - either by 'attacking' or 'standing by and doing nothing' and they are both victories for the bankers.!
It now legitimizes whatever their future action may be..

Yugoslavia was destroyed.
Syria is enduring it now, and Germany suffered it in WW2.

Breaking up countries is always about asset acquisition and consolidation.
Own all the assets of every country, and you own the world....(well that's their theory).
The people are starting to disagree...
Political ideologies are only entertainment for the masses, and the bankers don't care what _any political system is .
Just so long as they control it .

The EU and the USSR was the pinnacle of the social engineering project so far to create this 'one world government'.

The breakdown of them shows that the people are starting to disagree....

OK, WHY....

Germany.

Destroying Germany gave the banks the opportunity to finish ww1.
The entire aim of ww1 was to set up a 'one Europe.'

The destruction of Germany would usher in the European Union and the Eastern bloc.

One Europe was always the ambition.

With the EU absorbing all the countries in the west, and the Eastern bloc doing the same thing in the east, the banks now have 2 superstates.
Two big superstates that would ripe for amalgamation at a later date.

Yugoslavia

The reasons for Yugoslavia happening as it did are not so obvious at first.

It was a country on its knees that would appear, on it's surface at least to have offered no threat to the European project.
But remember - this was back in the early 90's when the USSR project was in the process of failing - dramatically.
The USSR falling to pieces cannot be overlooked.

Here was a seventy years project of the banks, starting way back in 1917, that was unraveling at a lighting speed, and not one the bankers had envisaged.

It was a major setback in the dream of a unified European block, and a one world government.

Yugoslavia was right on the borders of this all this eastern bloc turmoil.
Given their historical connections, there may well have been a danger of them following the lead of their allies in the east.

The banks could not allow that to a happen.
Money and control would be in danger of being lost.
As an economically occupied region, split down politically into smaller fragments, it made the absorption into Western European project much more likely.
Divide and conquer.

Yugoslavia - as an entity - was much more problematic for the west, and definitely posed far more uncertainty.

The bankers abhor uncertainty.

So better to smash it up now (the early 90's) into it's components parts - for much easier control later, and with the added advantage of it much less likely to lean to the east.

The dissolution of the Eastern bloc set the bankers back decades.
The EU project was the only one still looking positive at that time.

The rapid acceptance of former eastern European countries into the EU after the eastern bloc collapse, illustrates this perfectly.

Treaties were then broken concerning military proximity to the east - and the west did not care.
One half of the project was disappearing, and they needed to try and absorb whatever they could into the 'succeeding element'.

That is the WHY for Yugoslavia, how I see it..