The Truth about our Western Capitalist Empire of Evil led by America and my views on the intervention in Iran.

First, I want to point out that I often express my disagreement with Alex and Alexander, but I also want to make it clear that there is actually more I agree with than disagree. If I were to list all the points of agreement, it would take too long. I usually highlight areas of disagreement because I want to present alternative views to their positions — especially on issues where I believe they are mistaken.

In a recent video featuring Professor John Mearsheimer, I again heard something from Alexander with which I disagree:

Alexander Mercouris: The United States should be extremely careful not to get involved in this. If the U.S. commits to this war and joins it, then an Israeli defeat becomes an American defeat in this absolutely critical region. That would be very humiliating and difficult for the United States.

The U.S. cannot afford a long war for all the reasons we’ve just heard. It needs to manage its resources and consider where its truly important region lies. It’s no longer the Middle East, nor even Europe. That’s not where the main challenge to the United States is coming from. So, this is a massive diversion of resources that the United States cannot afford, and that should be the primary understanding of American leaders.

In my opinion, this quote from Alexander reflects a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the Western capitalist empire — what I would call the “Empire of Evil” led by the United States. I really wish Alexander would watch the main video attached to this post, as it might help him better understand the workings of this empire.

The video from The Jimmy Dore Show featuring Catherine Austin Fitts doesn’t cover everything, but in my view, it’s one of the most information-dense presentations about this empire available.

Importance of the Middle East

Let’s start with Alexander’s statement: “It needs to manage its resources and consider where its truly important region lies. It’s no longer the Middle East.”
Do you know where U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) is located? Not in America—it’s located in the Middle East. The American homeland command is called U.S. Northern Command (USNORTHCOM). So why is CENTCOM, or “Central Command,” located in the Middle East? Because the power of our Western capitalist “Empire of Evil,” led by America, is built on a Ponzi scheme centered around the U.S. dollar as reserve currency, which in turn relies on the Petrodollar system.

I’ve heard Alexander say that America is now an energy exporter and is energetically secure, so it no longer needs to be involved in the Middle East. This reflects a misunderstanding of the true foundation of U.S. global power. The Ponzi scheme of the U.S. dollar as a reserve currency depends on American control of global energy markets. It’s not just about America’s own energy needs — it’s about controlling global energy flows to sustain the dominance of the dollar.

Yes, America is self-sufficient when it comes to energy. But that doesn’t mean it can pull out of the Middle East. It must maintain control over global energy resources to keep the dollar-based financial system afloat. This is precisely why the Middle East remains critically important, and why Israel’s existence is essential to U.S. imperial strategy. Israel functions as the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” of the Empire in the region — as well as a Trojan horse within the Middle East.

Similarly, Britain is a kind of Trojan horse in Europe. Unlike Israel, it doesn’t serve as a military base, but rather as a political and ideological extension of U.S. influence in Europe. I often hear people like Alex Krainer talk about the so-called “City of London” as the power center controlling the world. I really wish someone would show him this post of mine.

MUST WATCH!!! How the world really works and who controls it: Sullivan & Cromwell, Allen Dulles, the origin of the world order, and the neocons.

In that post, I explain that it's not the City of London controlling things — it’s New York City, and firms like Sullivan & Cromwell, that sit at the heart of the Empire. The British Empire effectively ended with the Suez Crisis in 1956, when the U.S. sided with the Soviets to block British intervention. After that, the U.S. took over the “Israel project” from the British. It was the last time Britain tried to act independently of U.S. imperial goals.

Since then, Britain has served more as a tool of American power — much like Israel. Interestingly, a friend of mine is reading a book about Charles de Gaulle, and I mentioned both de Gaulle and Angela Merkel as leaders who tried to secure European independence from American control. My friend told me that de Gaulle had opposed British entry into the European Economic Community (EEC), the precursor to the European Union, on the grounds that Britain was merely a tool of the United States — a Trojan horse in Europe. I’ve expressed this view before in my posts, and it’s good to know that it was shared by de Gaulle himself.

This all reinforces my point: the City of London is not the power center of the Empire. It is the American Empire, headquartered in New York and Washington, that uses Britain and Israel as strategic tools. Neoliberalism, for example, was imported into Europe through Britain under Thatcher, at the behest of the U.S. Similarly, Israel is not controlling America — it’s America that uses Israel as both a base of operations and a destabilizing force in the Middle East.

China Is the Main Enemy

Now let’s address another statement made by Alexander: “So, this is a massive diversion of resources that the United States cannot afford, and that should be the primary understanding of American leaders.”
What Alexander means here is that America’s main strategic rival is China — and I agree. However, just like Russia, China is a nuclear power, which means you can’t truly "win" a military conflict against them.

Even if the West were able to defeat Russia in a conventional military conflict — which, in my opinion, it could though I won’t argue that here, since I know many in this community would disagree — it wouldn’t matter in the end. If NATO armies were marching on Moscow and Russia felt its existence was under threat, it would likely begin by nuking Ukraine and calling for negotiations. If the West refused, the result would be nuclear armageddon. That’s why nuclear powers cannot be defeated through conventional war — the same logic applies to China.

On the other hand, China is also not capable of invading Taiwan. Amphibious assaults are extremely difficult to pull off successfully, and anyone who claims that China could easily invade Taiwan simply doesn't understand the military realities involved. The only real option China would have is to completely destroy Taiwan — flatten it — which they won’t do, because they are not sociopaths like our Western Empire.

So, the West doesn’t need to worry about a Chinese invasion or destruction of Taiwan. At the same time, it also can’t attack and defeat China militarily. Both sides are locked in a kind of stalemate due to the nuclear deterrent.

So-Called "Axis of Evil" — In Reality, the Axis of Resistance / Axis of Good

So, what can the Empire do in this situation? There are three most important countries that stand in opposition: China, Russia, and Iran. Of these three, only Iran does not possess nuclear weapons, which makes it the only one that could theoretically be defeated militarily. It is also the weakest among the three powers.

As I explained in my last post, one of the reasons behind the war in Ukraine was not simply to defeat Russia — though of course, defeating and plundering Russia’s vast resources would have been a bonus for the Empire if possible. But they would never risk their entire empire on a coin toss regarding the outcome of such a war. Many of us already suspected this war could fail, so it’s safe to say that those in power, who are not stupid, also knew the risks.

As I mentioned, a direct military defeat of Russia is not possible due to its nuclear arsenal. The only realistic hope the West had was that the war would trigger a color revolution — an internal collapse or regime change in Russia. But that plan failed. And again, the people running the Empire likely knew it might fail. This means the war had other strategic objectives, which I outlined in my recent post.

The first objective was to destroy Germany’s influence over Europe and crush any dreams of European independence from the United States. Germany was moving toward greater cooperation with Russia and China — an effort spearheaded by Angela Merkel — which posed a threat to U.S. hegemony. The war in Ukraine effectively destroyed those ambitions by severing the potential Germany-Russia-China alliance.

The second major objective was to bind Russia’s resources in Ukraine, thereby weakening its ability to project power elsewhere — especially in the Middle East. Before the war in Ukraine, Russia was able to support Syria effectively, keeping it alive in the face of U.S.-led imperial efforts to destroy it. But because of the war and the resulting sanctions, Russia’s resources became overstretched and tied down in Ukraine. This allowed the Empire to finally go after Syria and weaken or destroy one of Russia’s most important allies in the Middle East.

China Sanctions

Recently I believed the sanctions on China were stupid — and that was my mistake. I allowed myself to be manipulated. I often say that if your analysis leads you to conclude that our leaders are simply stupid, you should re-examine your analysis — because they are not stupid.

The purpose of these sanctions and the broader economic war on China is not to destroy China outright. Even if the sanctions fail in the long run, they can still cause short-term economic disruptions in China. And even if China ultimately emerges stronger from this process, what matters is the short-term impact — because that temporary economic weakness reduces China’s ability to support Iran.

The people running the Empire understand that these sanctions likely won't break China permanently. They know that China may, in fact, come out stronger in the long term. But their strategy is about timing. If they can weaken China just enough in the short term to limit its support for Iran, then that opens the door to successfully attacking and possibly destroying Iran — currently the weakest link in the so-called “Axis of Resistance.”

Even if China becomes stronger after enduring these sanctions, if the short-term economic pressure allows the Empire to defeat Iran, it will have been worth it from their perspective. The long-term damage to China caused by losing Iran as a strategic partner would outweigh any future economic gains China might achieve by adapting to the sanctions.

So, the real idea behind the sanctions is not to win an economic war with China, but to delay and weaken China just enough to eliminate one of its key allies — Iran. And if that succeeds, the Empire will have scored a strategic victory that hurts China far more than the sanctions benefit it in the long run.

The Empire Is Panicking

I often hear on The Duran that the Empire is panicking over Ukraine - something I disagree with, and I’ve explained why in my previous posts.

Ukraine was once a Russian ally, and we’ve effectively forced Russia to destroy its own ally. So even if Russia wins the war militarily, from the Empire’s perspective, it’s still a win: Russia has been dragged into a war against a country that once stood with it.

All the talk about “Ukraine winning” isn't because our leaders believe it — it’s because they need Ukrainians to keep dying for the political goal of keeping Russian resources tied down in Ukraine. They can’t admit the truth: that Ukraine has already lost, that it was always a pawn, and that it has been sacrificed in a war meant to bound Russia's resources. If people knew that Ukraine was never meant to win but only to bound Russia's resources, the Ukrainians would stop fighting. And if Ukrainians stop fighting, the Empire loses its tool.

So they must maintain the illusion. They need Ukrainians to keep dying — not for freedom or victory, but for the strategic benefit of the Empire. If the public were told the truth, there would be no justification left for this war. That’s why the narrative must continue.

However, while the Empire may not be panicking over Ukraine, it is panicking over BRICS and de-dollarization.

Don’t get me wrong — the Empire still holds some cards within BRICS. For example, India acts as a Trojan horse of our Western Empire. Another strategy is to attack the weakest link in the BRICS alliance: Iran.

The Empire knows it can’t afford to wait. It can’t allow Russia to wrap up the war in Ukraine, because that would free up Russian resources — resources that could then be used to support Iran. It also can’t wait for China to recover from the tariff war and other economic sanctions, because once China stabilizes, it too will be more capable of helping Iran.

Right now, while Russia is still bogged down in Ukraine and China is entangled in economic warfare, the Empire sees a unique opportunity to strike. With both major powers distracted, this is the ideal moment to attack Iran — the weakest member of the Axes — before it can be reinforced.

Pakistan

I recently came across an interesting video about Pakistan, which is especially relevant in the context of the current Iran conflict. But first, I want to highlight another video from the same channel:

I've referenced videos from this (propaganda-leaning, pro-Western) channel in previous posts. As I’ve mentioned before, this channel tends to promote Western narratives.

There are many misconceptions surrounding the India–Pakistan conflict. Many believe Pakistan came out ahead, but this video presents a different perspective — one I’ve also heard from John Helmer, whom I greatly respect. Both this video and Helmer’s analysis suggest that Pakistan was, in fact, the loser in the conflict.

There are even rumors that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons facilities were targeted, and in a state of panic, Pakistan allegedly asked the Americans to intervene and stop India. As I’ve noted before, India functions as an American Trojan horse within BRICS and is a tool of the Western Empire.

I’ve also stated in earlier posts that terrorist attacks in India — blamed on Pakistan — were likely false flags orchestrated by the U.S. and its allies to give India a pretext to attack. America essentially used India as an attack dog to intimidate Pakistan.

Interestingly, reports suggest India was prepared to go even further against Pakistan but was held back by the Americans which India didn’t like. I didn’t fully understand why it happened at that time. Sure, Pakistan growing closer to China made it an enemy of the Empire — but the timing wasn’t clear to me.

Now, with the escalation against Iran, it makes more sense. The Empire used India to send a warning to Pakistan as part of its preparation for the broader conflict with Iran.

Ironically, while America is now sending another one of its “attack dogs” — Israel — to go after Iran, Pakistan is proposing Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize:

The Great Geopolitical Cheeseboard

Our Empire created the conflict in Ukraine to ensure that Russian resources would remain tied down there. This allowed us to move against Syria — an ally of Iran — knowing that Russia would be too preoccupied to offer strong support. As a result, we effectively weakened or removed two of Iran’s key allies: Russia (which had once cooperated with Ukraine) and Syria, whose government has been severely destroyed.

Next, we launched an economic war against China, binding its resources to internal economic challenges caused by tariffs and sanctions. At the same time, we deployed another of our attack dogs — India — to strike at Pakistan, yet another Iranian ally. This show of force scared Pakistan, pushing it closer to alignment with the West out of fear, and discouraging it from supporting Iran.

One by one, the Empire has systematically weakened or neutralized Iran’s allies, reducing the chances that Iran would receive meaningful support in the event of an attack. When viewed in this broader context, all the recent moves suddenly make strategic sense.

It’s now or never. The Empire can’t wait for Russia to finish the Ukraine conflict, because that would free up Russian resources to support Iran. It can’t wait for China to stabilize its economy, because that would allow China to increase its assistance to Iran. And now, with Pakistan effectively neutralized, the timing is ideal.

I’m not saying the attack on Iran will succeed — but when we understand the strategy behind these moves, and that a more favorable moment may not come again, we can see why the Empire has chosen to act now.

Final Words

Regarding our Western Capitalist Empire of Evil led by America, I’ve only briefly touched on the U.S. dollar as a Ponzi scheme, with the petrodollar system at its core. In the main video attached to this post with Catherine Austin Fitts, she also highlights other critical aspects of this empire — such as the narco-economy, the global warming (now called “climate change”) narrative, the technocratic future planned for us, and many more sinister elements.

These issues show that America — and our Western Empire — doesn’t operate like a normal nation-state. It functions more like a global mafia, or as Michael Parenti aptly called it, a “Gangster State”: a global extortion racket.

There are many more evil dimensions to our Empire that I’ve discussed in previous posts, including a deeper explanation of the narco-economy. I won’t repeat all of that here, as it would make this post too long. I’ve written this in my posts many times in the hope that Alexander (and others) might come to understand the true nature of this Empire and the reality of American power — so that he stops believing the U.S. can simply "mind its own business" like a normal country.

As Catherine Austin Fitts explains in the main video attached to this post:

11:57
It's basically designed as a case study for the equivalent of a business school class, to help you understand the intersection between narcotics trafficking and illegal money in Wall Street and Washington.
The reality, Jimmy, is our economy is deeply dependent on narcotics trafficking and money laundering. We're the global leader in money laundering.
We've been very insistent that our business model is something other than organized crime and war, but it's not. We're deeply financially dependent on organized crime and war.
So, it's designed to show you how that machinery works and how they proceed to use government credit and money to kind of engineer the system. They make lots of things look economic, turn lots of people into billionaires with government money, and make it look like they're making money in the private market, when it's really rigged from either the central bank or the government.

This Western Capitalist Empire of Evil led by America is built on Ponzi schemes, narcotics trafficking, money laundering, fraud, war, terrorism, and more. Once you understand that, you realize it cannot operate like a normal state. The belief that America can simply act like a regular country and mind its own business, as Alexander seems to think, is simply naive.

Thanks to everyone who stuck with me until the end of my post. And, as always…

“Knowledge will make you be free.”

― Socrates

+

“Knowledge isn’t free. You have to pay attention.”

― Richard P. Feynman

=

“Freedom is not free, you need to pay attention.”

― Grzegorz Ochman

Please pay enough attention, or we will all be screwed. God bless you all.

“Each generation doubtless feels called upon to reform the world. Mine knows that it will not reform it, but its task is perhaps even greater. It consists in preventing the world from destroying itself.”

― Albert Camus

“No healthy society will endure, without putting up active resistance, an economy run by thugs propped up by the authorities, and authorities propped up by thugs. And if that's the kind of society we are, then we ought to get rid of such rulers.”

― Józef Piłsudski

“Sometimes I dream of saving the world. Saving everyone from the invisible hand, the one that brands us with an employee badge, the one the forces us to work for them, the one that controls us every day without us knowing it. But I can't stop it. I'm not that special. I'm just anonymous. I'm just alone.”

― Elliot (Mr. Robot)