The Military Industrial Complex is the Deep State

[trenton]

I have been doing more research into the decline of empires like the US. I thought it was bad because of the corporate capture and the deficit crisis. However, the situation appears to be even worse than I thought. I believe that the US government has been captured by its own military which now holds permanent undue influence over the entire political process. The current governmental, military, and corporate apparatus that runs our politics appears to be irreversible and irreformable. I see no way for America to escape this deeply corrupted system without complete collapse caused by our imperial overreach and deficit crisis.

I have done research into the origins of the Military Industrial Complex, how it came to be, and how it came to capture the government of the America for its own agenda regardless of public dissent. As I have been doing this research, I understand that most of the time conspiracy theories are ungrounded in reality and completely baseless. However, there have been various conspiracy theories about our government that proved correct about deep corruption. These theories include COINTELPRO, MK-Ultra, NSA mass surveillance, Operation Northwoods, Iran-Contra Affair, and others. I would like to be cautious in the certainty placed in the conclusions presented here because of the incomplete information that is being worked with. However, the evidence seems compelling and I would like to discuss what I have discovered and its implications. It is possible that I am about to highlight one of the rare times a conspiracy theory holds legitimate weight. Even if the theory is not true, there are still other aspects of it which explain the current state of American politics.

Throughout human history governments have formed militaries designed for their protection. However, on some occasions their military goes rogue and accumulates so much power that they cannot be controlled by their own government. This can lead to military leaders hijacking the government though capturing the democratic processes and institutions while occasionally carrying out assassinations of their own political leaders. The Late Roman Empire had cases in which the Praetorian Guard were supposed to protect the emperor, but repeatedly assassinated leaders who did not serve their interests. In the Ottoman Empire Janissaries controlled sultans and blocked various reforms that went against their interests. In Imperial Japan their own military factions controlled civilian government, contributing to overexpansion.

The list goes on and it is possible that the US military industrial complex is no exception. This system has amassed great power and control over the government regardless of which party is in power. Our military has demonstrated a willingness to carry out terrorist attacks against US civilians as false flag operations designed to provoke wars with other nations like Cuba. Our military seems to have no legal boundary it is not willing to cross to serve its own interests. Therefore, the system claiming to serve our national security appears to be the greatest threat to our national security. What would America do if its own military decided it wanted to turn against us and install whatever government it wanted? It has already done this to many other countries throughout history, and the US itself may not be an exception.

President Eisenhower and later Kennedy showed great resistance to the expansion of military power. Eisenhower appeared to be somewhat successful. Meanwhile Kennedy was successful at first until his assassination after which Johnson was put in power. Johnson immediately reversed Kennedy's decisions even though his peaceful policies were showing promise. Kennedy had resisted escalating the war in Vietnam as he also sought peaceful resolutions with Cuba. Furthermore, as soon as Kennedy was assassinated, the previous government workers which he had fired for their terrorist plots were immediately put back in power under Johnson.

The government proceeded to butcher every step of the investigation into the Presidential assassination so systematically, that it is hard to attribute all of these failures to mere incompetence. In fact sometimes governments use the cover of incompetence as a cover for calculated decisions as they did during WWII by "appeasing the bully." The cover pattern of the investigation included repairing the car, thus tampering with evidence, allowing the murder of Lee Harvey Oswald, a key witness, and the CIA practice of destroying sensitive documents to ensure they are never leaked, including Kennedy files. The initial cover story was that Cuba was behind the assassination. However, the official narrative does not hold under scrutiny because if Kennedy was seeking peace with Cuba and was largely successful, then it does not make sense for Cuba to assassinate him. Once again, the military industrial complex has a more clear motive for assassinating the President because he was preventing the expansion of perpetual military spending while preventing the military from carrying out terrorist attacks on Americans by firing key government officials. Furthermore, the later investigation of the assassination yielded limited findings, claiming it was a conspiracy rather than Oswald being a lone actor as initially reported. You would think that if a Presidential assassination were so serious, then it would warrant a thorough investigation, but this never came. The behavior I am describing suggests an institutional cover-up by the CIA. There have also been recent revelations that the CIA had been lying for decades about officer George Joannides who worked with anti-Castro groups that publicized Oswald's pro-Castro activities after his assassination, suggesting a coordinated attempt to start war with Cuba similar to the other terrorist plots like Operation Northwoods which Kennedy prevented.

Although we may never know who was truly behind this conspiracy, the impact of this assassination is clear. The military industrial complex immediately captured the US government and installed a system that would forever serve their interests. It created a system of perpetual military spending and endless wars. Every President following Kennedy's assassination has been far more hawkish. Even those that were initially peaceful eventually had to flip. It appears that the military industrial complex has captured the democratic apparatus and made peaceful foreign policy practically impossible because the system in place perpetually funds new weapons systems as the military constantly looks for and creates new threats to justify intervention. This kind of dynamic has created a policy lock in system that has made it impossible for the US to stop its imperial overreach even when it is clearly destructive like in Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Moving forward, this historical analysis explains why it is impossible to change American foreign policy. The democratic apparatus is being run by the military industrial complex who benefit from perpetual war and endless deficit spending. I see no means to challenge this kind of system. I believe the only way out of this broken government is to leave the US and let the economy implode due to endless US imperial overreach, leading to the decline of empires throughout history as demonstrated in Dalio's model. I see no movement within this system that could overcome this level of corruption, not to mention to financial capture of other massive corporations which also block any reform that does not benefit them. Our government is inflexible and irreformable, and there is no politician we can elect that can overcome this kind of corruption. The system is completely entrenched and the entire government itself has become a tool for this corruption.

Of course there is more evidence we could discuss regarding the assassination. To this day the military industrial complex continues to run rogue. There are various covert operations being carried out without the oversight of Congress. This exposed operations include assassination plots, government coups, mind control, and many other covert operations that have gone rogue from the government. It is clear that the military has become too powerful for our own government to control as it now takes in more money than the next ten countries combined. This is unsustainable and clearly destructive, but there is likely nothing we can do to change our course from inevitable destruction.

[Raze]

 

 

 

[trenton]

@Charli Are you talking about Operation Mongoose? Or are you talking about some other operation? What happened in this one and what is the proof?

[trenton]

I did some further research on this matter. It seems to have led to even more uncertainty and questions rather than clear answers.

What I found was that the only other nation that did its own investigation into the assassination was the Soviet Union. The Soviet Union concluded that there was likely a right wing conspiracy to assassinate the President and put Johnson in power. Although the Soviet conclusions seem to align with my analysis of the evidence, they still have credibility problems.

First of all, the Soviet Union spread disinformation campaigns all the time. They were constantly looking for ways to sabotage the US and become the sole superpower. Concluding that Johnson was behind the assassination of the previous President would delegitimize him, break the unity of the American people, and set the seeds for a revolution, destabilizing the US further. Furthermore, they have not released the specific evidence for their conclusions or their methods of investigating the matter. The implications are that the Soviet Union may have been the original source of the conspiracy theory that the deep state was responsible for killing Kennedy. I can't take the Soviet Union's word for it without seeing the specific proof. They might be right that there was foul play by a rogue faction in the CIA, but they have strategic interests served by their conclusions.

Secondly, all other nations did not weigh in on the matter. They did not release any evidence at all. It would make sense that allies would not release information that would contradict the US narrative as it might destabilize the relationship. The official narrative has serious credibility problems because of the repeated lies and systematic destruction of evidence. However, from this point of view it looks like neither source can really be trusted. I require specific evidence and methods, but nobody is willing to provide it.

[Rafael Thundercat]

Weird, inl got this on my IG today as a recommedation

Is about the growing Drone Military market.

https://www.postfactum.co.uk/drones-geopolitics-explained-drone-armed-military-fighter-jet-comapare-superiority-air-power-strike-warfare-war-strategy-uav-bayraktar-ukraine-syria-fpv-shahed-exports-imports-production-cost-asymmetry-politics-weapon-us-china?utm_medium=paid&utm_source=ig&utm_id=120219638939390504&utm_content=120227395486950504&utm_term=120219638939380504&utm_campaign=120219638939390504&fbclid=PAZXh0bgNhZW0BMABhZGlkAasi1wiVEqgBpwJRTrUoSBY-tfmSZUnuNRd08-WF88-PyBbmji7DpbF0tfru-FcTve8VQefo_aem_SCvqRRXKrV1bgvOlkNUAWg

 

[Rafael Thundercat]

I guess no deep analysis of this topic can be made without an understanding of NATO and OTAN

[Leo Gura]

3 minutes ago, Charli said:

@Leo Gura 9/11 Truth is not "a conspiracy theory". It's literally just true.

No.

Do not infect this forum with your wild speculations.

We have epistemic standards here.

[Leo Gura]

2 hours ago, Charli said:

I've read around here about the people you consider smart. Chris Langan are 9/11 Truthers.

Are you telling me you're a Falser?

Why don't you go actually read my post?

Zero interest in that.

Chris Langan is politically delusional. As bad as can be.

No matter how good someone is in one area never saves them from self-deception in another. I've made this point many times. Many legit spiritual people hold absolutely idiotic political beliefs, this is nothing new.

You are engaged in speculation without being conscious of it as such, which is a serious epistemic error.

Edited Wednesday at 02:24 AM by Leo Gura

[Leo Gura]

58 minutes ago, Charli said:

it actually works on probabilities.

No, it doesn't.

The truth is you 100% do not know. The rest is conceptual mumbo-jumbo.

If you did consciousness work you would know that.

You have yet to discover not-knowing.

Edited Wednesday at 12:58 AM by Leo Gura

[r0ckyreed]

1 hour ago, Charli said:

I've read around here about the people you consider smart. Daniel Ingram and Chris Langan are 9/11 Truthers. You called Ingram "a serious man" and Langan "a true genius".

Are you telling me you're a Falser?

Why don't you go actually read my post?

What are you doing? You have no evidence to back up your claims. There is no evidence that Daniel Ingram is a 9/11 conspiracy theorist. If you’re gonna make a claim like that about someone, cite the source; otherwise, it is wax in my ears.

[Leo Gura]

1 hour ago, Charli said:

However I was spurred into researching this by a guy that looks and sounds exactly like him.

How dare you call Daniel Ingram a 9/11 conspiracy theorist?

You have zero epistemic standards.

You should be ashamed of yourself bringing that trash on my forum and asking me to entertain it.

Edited Wednesday at 02:28 AM by Leo Gura

[Wilhelm44]

It is a little bit fishy though that them steel structures went down seemingly exactly like a controlled explosion ? Am I allowed to say that ?

[Raze]

I recall seeing an interview with Daniel Ingram where he mentioned something about doubting the official 9/11 story but didn’t want to talk about it publicly. I can’t find it now so it may have been removed. Ironically in the same interview he bashed Covid conspiracy theories. 

Edited Wednesday at 08:18 AM by Raze

[Raze]

I remember seeing an old clip of Chomsky where someone asks him about theories that 9/11 was an inside job and he said it doesn’t matter and he doesn’t care. I was always confused by this until years later when I understood his morality better. Basically if all human life was considered of equal value, it would actually not be a major crime for the government to have done it in comparison to all the things I did before and after with how many it killed in foreign countries. I think he said something similar about not caring if JFK’s assassination was an inside job, because I think he doesn’t think it makes a difference any more then some third world countries leader being killed due to an internal government dispute, when what matters are the proxy wars and policies that effect hundreds of thousands and millions of people.

[Wilhelm44]

30 minutes ago, Raze said:

I remember seeing an old clip of Chomsky where someone asks him about theories that 9/11 was an inside job and he said it doesn’t matter and he doesn’t care. I was always confused by this until years later when I understood his morality better. Basically if all human life was considered of equal value, it would actually not be a major crime for the government to have done it in comparison to all the things I did before and after with how many it killed in foreign countries. I think he said something similar about not caring if JFK’s assassination was an inside job, because I think he doesn’t think it makes a difference any more then some third world countries leader being killed due to an internal government dispute, when what matters are the proxy wars and policies that effect hundreds of thousands and millions of people.

Saying that it doesnt matter is silly. Its more like it would be something truly shocking to accept. 

[Wilhelm44]

44 minutes ago, Raze said:

I recall seeing an interview with Daniel Ingram where he mentioned something about doubting the official 9/11 story but didn’t want to talk about it publicly. I can’t find it now so it may have been removed. Ironically in the same interview he bashed Covid conspiracy theories. 

Yeah, its like if you said a few years ago, that some tech bros want to abolish democracy and take over the world, that would have been Alex Jones type stuff. Just goes to show that everything needs to be investigated on it's own merit.

[trenton]

I have a question about the implications of the Kennedy assassination. Is it fair to say that the military industrial complex gained more control and influence over the government following the assassination, and that this influence continues to this day regardless of which party is in power? If so, then it indicates that there is not much that can be accomplished through the democratic process as this institutional capture is very deep and ingrained in our system. It creates a policy lock in situation which is nearly impossible to change even when American foreign policy is clearly disastrous and self-destructive.