This information will make you either upset or confused but it will affect you. Do some additional research

Twenty years have passed since the World Trade Center attacks of September 11, 2001, and yet there are still many unanswered questions surrounding that fateful day that changed our nation forever. 9/11 conspiracy theories attribute the planning and execution of the attacks against two parties other than Al-Qaeda and claim there was advance knowledge of the attacks amongst high-level government and military officials. In 2011, experts and scientists from around the world gathered in Toronto, Canada to present new and established evidence that questions the official story of 9/11. This evidence was presented to a distinguished panel of experts over a four day period. Through their analysis and scientific investigations, they hope to spark a new investigation into the attacks of September 11, 2001. This highly speculative DVD features expert witness testimony from: David Ray Griffin, Richard Gage, David Chandler, Kevin Ryan, Niels Harrit, Barbara Honegger, Peter Dale Scott, Graeme MacQueen, Jonathan Cole, Cynthia McKinney and many more. Welcome to V Movies. The fastest growing YouTube Channel for full length movies! We post every day new and exciting movies! Action, Thrillers, Horror, Sci-Fi! And so much more! Just click SUBSCRIBE and hit the Bell Button! We post EVERY DAY! All movies on our channel have been legally licensed to V Movies from distributors, filmmaker and content owners. If you have any copyright concerns please write us at info@vchannelsmedia.com !

The United Nations needs to end the Ukraine War or be held accountable for the chaos which will ensue.

It is readily apparent the United Nations has not fulfilled its charter. If a few countries can control the narrative and force other countries to abide by their Rule Based Mandates this institution should be relocated and revamped to a neutral country.  If diplomacy could have prevented the War in Ukraine last year, who decided not to come to the table or resisted a peaceful resolution? They are the ones that should be held accountable for this fiasco and face the consequences, not the civilian populations.  We are talking about the potential for a Nuclear Holocaust and this institution has not provided any resolutions.  What are they doing?  They have to know the circumstances and what this means for humanity.  If the U.N. doesn't take immediate action, the consequences for the start of WW3 is on their shoulders and the countries that proclaim to be part of this castrated entity should be held accountable.

Here is a start to ending this European/Ukraine War.  End the sanctions now. They have never worked to end Wars but to help facilitate them.  It is the civilian population that suffers, not the leadership of the country the sanctions are trying to punish. Sanctions are the 1st step to a declaration of War in case the U.N. needs to be reminded.

United Nations Charter (full text)

Preamble

WE THE PEOPLES OF THE UNITED NATIONS DETERMINED

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

AND FOR THESE ENDS

to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbors, and

to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and

to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and

to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples,

HAVE RESOLVED TO COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS.

Accordingly, our respective Governments, through representatives assembled in the city of San Francisco, who have exhibited their full powers found to be in good and due form, have agreed to the present Charter of the United Nations and do hereby establish an international organization to be known as the United Nations.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Here are the main culprits if WW3 breaks out. They are the permanent members of the U.N. security council. They should be held accountable since they have the most influence on any decision being made over other nations.  They signed the bloody charter back in 1945 and should adhere to it.

I declare Kim Iversen should be journalist of the year!

                                                    This is what true Journalism sounds like.

Time to re-watch "On the Beach" 1959 and 2000 Movie

If you could research the Cuban Missile Crisis 1962 and the turmoil it caused this movie will make you think about what can occur if two nations with thousands of Nuclear Weapons decide to use them. Check this out if you want a solid no-nonsense depiction of what could happen. Better yet read the book. 

"There is still time Brother"

On the Beach

On the Beach is a 1959 American post-apocalyptic science fiction drama film from United Artists, produced and directed by Stanley Kramer, that stars Gregory Peck, Ava Gardner, Fred Astaire, and Anthony Perkins.^[2] This black-and-white film is based on Nevil Shute's 1957 novel of the same name depicting the aftermath of a nuclear war.^[3] Unlike in the novel, no one is assigned blame for starting the war; the film hints that global annihilation may have arisen from an accident or misjudgment.

It could have happened if the Cuban missile crisis in October '62 had escalated. The film's future date of 1964 may have been very feasible at the end of a nuclear war.

On the Beach is a 2000 apocalyptic made-for-television film directed by Russell Mulcahy and starring Armand Assante, Bryan Brown, and Rachel Ward.^[1] It was originally aired on Showtime.^[2]

The film is a remake of a 1959 film, which was also based on the 1957 novel by Nevil Shute, but updates the setting of the story to the film's then-future of 2006, starting with placing the crew on a fictional Los Angeles-class submarine, USS Charleston (SSN-704).^[3]

New UK PM Rishi Sunak and Some history lessons from India's point of view

India is now becoming the history teacher for the West.  It is laying down some hard facts on what is happening in the world of Geopolitics. Based on the selection of  Rishi Sunak this could be very interesting for the U.K.

Two people offering some Sanity to Humanity

 It is good to hear a discussion from two humans that seem to understand the nature of Wars and what it will mean for Humanity. A Nuclear Armageddon. Please do some research and determine if this is what you want our governments and leaders to support.

What is sanity in psychology?

1. in law, the state of not suffering from a mental disorder or neurological defect that impairs one's ability to understand or appreciate one's acts or to conform to the requirements of the law. Thus, it is the opposite of insanity. 2. more generally, soundness of mind or judgment.

This full interview can be found on Rumble.  Please check it out.

Full Interview:

During war - the first casualty is TRUTH !!

 I recently found something I agree on with Zelensky.  It is time to setup a War Tribunal for determining the facts behind the Ukraine War which is what it has become.  If we can get those in power to formalize an impartial hearing we can hear both sides of the narrative.  Did the Ukrainian gov't renege on the Minsk agreements of 2014? Did the Ukraine govt initiate the decimation of Eastern Ukraine? Did Russia have the right for the incursion? etc. What are the true facts and will Zelensky and his controllers commit to establishing this necessary Tribunal.  Be careful what you ask for because it may happen sooner than you think. During war - the first casualty is TRUTH !! Why wait until this goes Nuclear? Will the U.N. setup an emergency security session to stop WW3 before the 1st missile is released? Isn't this what they are chartered to do?

Only Adult Children Still Believe U.S. Propaganda

Civilizations are at stake, is it to late to chart a new course for humanity?

Over the course of many years I have read and listened to various pundits, bloggers, journalists, religious institutions, think tanks etc. to come up with a solid conclusion. No one has a real clue on how to set a new course for humanity without going to the end all of Nuclear Annihilation. We humans have lost our ability to discern truth and reality from our daily lives. If you see a fire coming your way would you take precautions or would you sit and let the fire come to you directly?  This is what is going to happen if the imbeciles that control our governments, corporations, and various institutions continue down the path of endless wars.  This is why I'm going to submit a thesis of sorts and call it the "20 Percent Solution" If Elon Musk can pay Billions of dollars for a software company with minimal social value I think a solution to end this madness would be worth at least a stipend of sorts.  We pay celebrities, sports athletes, influencers, comedians, MSM pundits, etc huge amounts of fake money to keep us entertained but no one is paying anyone for coming up with long-term solutions for what impacts our species. I know once Artificial Intelligence becomes somewhat sentient the device will determine humankind is useless and will take appropriate action.  Human collective intelligence is squandered on coming up with more ways to keep us from thinking and taking the necessary action to change course.

I recall a movie called "Colossus The Forbin Project" and wonder if this is what our future will become or will our governments make us get chipped and turn us into Borg like creatures.  Only the toes know.

Colossus the Forbin Project 1970

Welcome to the "Collective"

This is Kevin Spacey as Mel Profitt telling us back in the day what is happening

He represents the sickos that truly run this world in my opinion

The Campaign to stop WW3 - reinstate the Kellogg-Briand Pact

It is now self-evident and the facts are undeniable.  Our governments, corporations and leaders have lost their minds.  They are toying with the idea that Nuclear War may be inevitable and will be justifiable as those in power will hunker down like moles in their bunkers for 1,000's of years but those not capable of sheltering themselves will be left to pure anarchy and unbridled chaos.  Thinking that humanity can survive these weapons of mass destruction without huge consequences to our future is pure insanity.  I'm not sure who exactly is making these decisions but I can assure you it is not those holding offices in government. The global syndicate whoever they are have concluded that War is the answer for all of humankind to endure endlessly.  Without any policy statement, directive, or global consensus the global sycophants in office are determining our future.  What future is worth living for if you are knee deep in radioactive waste? Wise up people, our lives are at stake! 

The interesting facts are, it will not be one country or human that will make the decision to use nuclear weapons, it will be all humanity which allowed there respective governments to continue using Wars as the deciding factor to solve issues.  If the Kellogg-Briand pact was adhered to this situation would not be occurring. 

Please start a campaign in your community to educate as many people as possible that a solution was agreed upon years ago but we somehow allowed altercations to continue without any repercussions. This is why we are at the precipice of a self-induced tragedy.  We humans are allowing this to happen by not making those in power accountable.

Remember:

The Only Thing Necessary for the Triumph of Evil is that Good Men Do Nothing!

Warmongering is Insanity 
according to 

                        Dr. David Pyne

To Understand current events we must understand the history of War's in the 20th Century

 The Vietnam war could be a lesson on what happens when ideologies collide.  It is not the people who benefit from war but the corporations, paid politicians, and special interest.  This video is an excellent summation of a war the U.S. loss. Maybe we can understand that although the U.S. and Russia has spent trillions on weaponry no one has the moral high ground or the ability to win a nuclear war.  May wisdom in the depths of humanity arise to keep us from a catastrophic outcome for another WW3.

I have included a post regarding Wars in general.  Humanity will continue to wage wars no matter if there is a treaty or not. Research the Kellogg Briand Pact.  The issue will be on what moral grounds and principles the war was waged on. 

                                                            The Vietnam War 
                       November 1, 1955 – April 30, 1975

Sun Tzu’s Art of War and the First Principles of International Humanitarian Law

August 30, 2020 Sahil Verma

Introduction

Sun Tzu’s Art of War is one of the most influential treatises on the conduct of armed conflicts. Despite having been written around 500 B. C., the Art of War still commands a huge readership throughout the world today. Parallels have been drawn between Sun Tzu’s teachings and a Machiavellian notion of morality and war, and Sun Tzu’s rules are sometimes thought to be amoral and utilitarian. This post suggests that a closer analysis of this seminal treatise shows a balance of humanitarian considerations with the shrewd art of winning wars, casting light on Sun Tzu’s teachings as the forerunners of modern principles of International Humanitarian Law (IHL)

The Art of War must be interpreted in light of the historical context in which it was written. Before Sun Tzu, wars used to be ritualistic, governed by considerations of farming seasons and cultural traditions, thus not causing much humanitarian consequences. Over time, warfare became systematic and institutionalised violent destruction, due to the rise of professionalism in military and technological development. Exposure to such ruinous warfare induced Sun Tzu to devise principles of war that not only guide generals on the use of military strategies, but also principles that are grounded with military ethics and humanitarian ideals. Centuries later, this incipient progression towards humane warfare culminated in Henry Dunant, after his transformative experience at Solferino, laying down the foundation of the International Committee of the Red Cross as well as the genesis of modern IHL, the fulcrum of which is the principle of humanity from which all other principles are derived.

Humanitarian Considerations in Art of War

Sun Tzu recognises war as a political necessity. He advocates the balancing of military conduct with humanitarian considerations, propelled by Confucian virtues, especially ren (benevolence) and yi (righteousness). He thus argues for restraint, both in initiating (jus ad bellum) as well as in conducting war (jus in bello), as his pinnacle of military excellence is to defeat the enemy without any violence [III:2]. This is not merely a utilitarian approach, but it is grounded in moral considerations, which is most evident in his rule on treating prisoners of war (“PoWs”) with dignity [II:17]. Sun Tzu also provides that an army returning home or soldiers fleeing are not an object of attack [VII:35]. Such views were radically against the prevalent military wisdom: PoWs were not considered trustworthy enough to be incorporated into one’s army, and it was considered more prudent to eliminate  them in order to maximize the chances of future military successes. These principles, as advocated by Sun Tzu, despite being technically disadvantageous to the armies, were founded on the superior necessity of preserving human life. More than 2 millennia later, such principles are mirrored today in the 1949 Geneva Conventions and their Additional Protocols.

The protection of civilians and their property is an underlying theme that runs throughout the Art of War. Sun Tzu provides that the main object of war is victory, but without protracted violence [II:6; III:2–3]. This is comparable to the fundamental IHL principle of distinction, first codified in the St. Petersburg Declaration, according to which the only legitimate objective of war is to weaken the military forces of the enemy. Sun Tzu advocates that the highest realisation of warfare is attacking the enemy’s plans, next is to disrupt alliances, then to attack their army, and last is to attack cities, which must be pursued as a last resort [III:3]. The prohibition on attacking cities is also apparent in the Art of War’s chapter on attack by stratagem. It needs to be noted here that Sun Tzu is not discussing mere military strategy, but the fundamental objectives of war. He thus emphasises that killing civilians is not the objective, [II:19] and that the best policy is to take a State intact [III:1], which is in consonance with the principle of distinction. The devastating humanitarian consequences of urban warfare and sieges in modern warfare show the contemporary relevance of Sun Tzu’s teachings.

Sun Tzu advocates preserving an enemy’s country, army, regiment, detachment, or company over destroying them [III:1]. This is more than just a strategic consideration, and is grounded in morality. Sun Tzu’s progression of objectives in war, are attacking the enemy’s plans, alliances, army; and lastly fortified cities [III:3]. Thus, preservation and destruction must be understood, not as a dichotomy, but as a matter of degree. Therefore, even when there is a recourse to armed force, it must be used to gain victory in the shortest possible time; least possible cost in lives; and with infliction of the least casualties on the enemy. It corresponds with the fundamental idea of IHL, as was first provided in the Lieber Code; necessity only of measures indispensable for securing the ends of the war. This is tied with the prohibition of superfluous injury or unnecessary suffering, as it cannot be considered “indispensable” for securing the ends of the war. This can further be traced to the principle of proportionality requiring any incidental injury to civilian to be proportional to the military advantage expected.

Conclusion

It is unfortunate that the Art of War is revered only for its military strategies, while its humanitarian admonitions are sidelined. Such an interpretation is not only reductive, but may also lead (or has indeed led) to disastrous consequences. The Chinese State of Qin for example, followed Sun Tzu’s strategies, while ignoring his overarching principle of preservation over destruction. It conquered six other States, but at the cost of leaving a trail of destruction because of its ruthlessness in war.

In modern times, China’s interpretation of the Art of War as a tool to guide and illuminate its present military conduct is limited to jus ad bellum – to the exclusion of jus in bello -. This unfortunately incentivises the predominantly utilitarian interpretation as the prevailing narrative. This can be problematic as the Art of War, even today, has found application in various military operations around the world, such as in Afghanistan and Iraq. However, one must look beyond mere utilitarianism and recognise the latent underpinnings of humanitarian considerations in the Art of War, which later gained prominence through the work of luminaries like Henry Dunant and Jean Pictet. In the words of Jean-Pictet, “when different customs, ethics and philosophies are gathered for comparison, and when they are melted down, their particularities eliminated and only what is general extracted, one is left with a pure substance which is the heritage of all mankind”. In conclusion, due credit must be given to Sun Tzu for thousands of years ago, he foreshadowed the origins of the first principles of IHL.

Posted in: International Humanitarian Law

                                Sun Tzu - The Art of War Explained In 5 Minutes

Some additional information on the Ukraine crisis by Scott Ritter

 Another valuable piece of information from someone that knows how things work.  Scott Ritter has been a strong voice for educating people on current issues.  Take this to heart since he has no agenda but to help bring sense to this madness.  Americans can be a bit ignorant about global issues and this is why we need to listen to other views beside the MSM.

                                            Scott Ritter with George Galloway interview.

To understand the true reality of Geopolitics we need to understand who controls the narrative.

 

How is it that this individual Russell Brand who is a celebrity, comedian, and past drug user can present the facts so concisely that it makes most MSM pundits sound like kindergarten students compared to this oratory of current events?   He has no agenda but to educate those that want the truth and are not beholden to corporate interest.  I wish him well and hope he can continue educating us with his humor and profound thoughts. His personal growth and desire to bring humans out of their comfort zone is amazing.  Take a look at some of his prolific work in various mediums books, podcast, interviews, etc. He has been consistent in his views for some time and only ask that people think for themselves if they want to learn more about how to develop as a human race. 

A solution for this fiasco in Ukraine is to get the masses to educate themselves and bring back the Kellogg Briand Pact. A simple treaty that could have prevented WW2 and other military ventures. But instead of Governments we need to have the people sign on to it and refuse to support policies that cause wars and those that promote them. If we started boycotting wars this may change the dynamics on how they are waged. If this is amplified across the globe we can hopefully stop some of this madness. One can dream it without repercussions can't they? The Kellogg-Briand Pact, 1928 Introduction The Kellogg-Briand Pact was an agreement to outlaw war signed on August 27, 1928. Sometimes called the Pact of Paris for the city in which it was signed, the pact was one of many international efforts to prevent another World War, but it had little effect in stopping the rising militarism of the 1930s or preventing World War II. In the final version of the pact, they agreed upon two clauses: the first outlawed war as an instrument of national policy and the second called upon signatories to settle their disputes by peaceful means. On August 27, 1928, fifteen nations signed the pact at Paris. Signatories included France, the United States, the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Belgium, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Germany, Italy and Japan. Later, an additional forty-seven nations followed suit, so the pact was eventually signed by most of the established nations in the world. The U.S. Senate ratified the agreement by a vote of 85–1, though it did so only after making reservations to note that U.S. participation did not limit its right to self-defense or require it to act against signatories breaking the agreement. At would also behoove the reader of this blog to read this book.

WAR IS A RACKET BY SMEDLEY D. BUTLER This short anti-war pamphlet was written by a Major General in the Marines who was an American military hero, but became disillusioned with the profiteering, propaganda, and injustice of the military-industrial and intelligence-foreign policy establishments , and came to oppose American involvement in foreign wars designed to benefit financial and industrial interests.

http://kether.com/words/butler-smedley--war-is-a-racket-1.pdf

Russell Brand

You’ve Been LIED To About Why Ukraine War Began

Here are some quotes from the comment section of this video I thought added to his insights:

Dean Thurman

My Grandfather died in WW2, he left his three kids and wife. My dad grew up without the blueprint of fatherhood (don’t worry he did a fantastic job without the blueprint, other people did not have that happen. Wars cause problems for generations not just during a year long war! It’s generations people always forget this , hey the war is over but the problems have just begun! In 2022 we should be able to use words and not bombs to solve problems

Nicolaj 62

I was in military service part of the NATO-troops at the steel curtain between the Germanys. Years later I find myself married in Ukraine, we have a lot of family and friends both in Ukraine and Russia. All people there were and are aware that this was coming. Last summer we had this feeling coming as we parted all after our summer-meeting, which was very beautiful and relaxed, where we discussed these matters of course. We all weeped at parting.......... And now this........ It hurts a lot, though thankfully we are still able to keep up contact and look after each other as far as this is possible. We don´t think the other side to be the real enemy, but we know that the people with the money are the real enemy for they worked towards this point in history. It is sad that Big Money is able to bring this misery to normal people.

Here is a great bit of history of how we got to this situation in Ukraine from someone that was very involved in the early days of this from the start. Dr. Jeffrey Sachs

Who makes the decision to make war in the U.S.?

Some Views of how true Americans think. Nuclear War is not an option we can win.

 How is it that very few journalist can showcase some real issues facing American's and the World like whether to support Nuclear Armageddon or not. While the majority of our MSM pulpits act like this would be a viable outcome for ending a conflict.  Things have definitely gone awry here in the U.S. and I'm not sure if we are capable of returning to some form of normalcy and use what's left of human intelligence to say "NO" to our true master's whoever they may be.  They lack the courage  to really say who they are but I'm sure we have surely figured out it is not our current politicians.  They can't even submit a letter stating the U.S. population is against the current support of Ukraine without being chastised about it and having to retract the their letter. 

May the Almighty forgive us for being so ignorant and nonchalant about this issue.  We will regret this in the months to come. Karma awaits us all at the gates of justice.

Letter from Congress on 10-24-2022

Dear Mr. President: We write with appreciation for your commitment to Ukraine’s legitimate struggle against Russia’s war of aggression. Your support for the self-defense of an independent, sovereign, and democratic state has been supported by Congress, including through various appropriations of military, economic and humanitarian aid in furtherance of this cause. Your administration’s policy was critical to enable the Ukrainian people, through their courageous fighting and heroic sacrifices, to deal a historic military defeat to Russia, forcing Russia to dramatically scale back the stated goals of the invasion. Crucially, you achieved this while also maintaining that it is imperative to avoid direct military conflict with Russia, which would lead to “World War III, something we must strive to prevent.” The risk of nuclear weapons being used has been estimated to be higher now than at any time since the height of the Cold War. Given the catastrophic possibilities of nuclear escalation and miscalculation, which only increase the longer this war continues, we agree with your goal of avoiding direct military conflict as an overriding national-security priority. Given the destruction created by this war for Ukraine and the world, as well as the risk of catastrophic escalation, we also believe it is in the interests of Ukraine, the United States, and the world to avoid a prolonged conflict. For this reason, we urge you to pair the military and economic support the United States has provided to Ukraine with a proactive diplomatic push, redoubling efforts to seek a realistic framework for a ceasefire. This is consistent with your recognition that “there’s going to have to be a negotiated settlement here,” and your concern that Vladimir Putin “doesn't have a way out right now, and I'm trying to figure out what we do about that.” We are under no illusions regarding the difficulties involved in engaging Russia given its outrageous and illegal invasion of Ukraine and its decision to make additional illegal annexations of Ukrainian territory. However, if there is a way to end the war while preserving a free and independent Ukraine, it is America’s responsibility to pursue every diplomatic avenue to support such a solution that is acceptable to the people of Ukraine. Such a framework would presumably include incentives to end hostilities, including some form of sanctions relief, and bring together the international community to establish security guarantees for a free and independent Ukraine that are acceptable for all parties, particularly Ukrainians. The alternative to diplomacy is protracted war, with both its attendant certainties and catastrophic and unknowable risks. Russia’s invasion has caused incalculable harm for the people of Ukraine, leading to the deaths of countless thousands of civilians, Ukrainian soldiers, and displacement of 13 million people, while Russia’s recent seizure of cities in Ukraine’s east have led to the most pivotal moment in the conflict and the consolidation of Russian control over roughly 20 percent of Ukraine’s territory. The conflict threatens an additional tens of millions more worldwide, as skyrocketing prices in wheat, fertilizer and fuel spark acute crises in global hunger and poverty. A war that is allowed to grind on for years—potentially escalating in intensity and geographic scope— threatens to displace, kill, and immiserate far more Ukrainians while causing hunger, poverty, and death around the world. The conflict has also contributed to elevated gas and food prices at home, fueling inflation and high oil prices for Americans in recent months. Economists believe that if the situation in Ukraine is stabilized, some of the speculative concerns driving higher fuel costs will subside and likely lead to a drop in world oil prices. We agree with the Administration’s perspective that it is not America’s place to pressure Ukraine’s government regarding sovereign decisions, and with the principle you have enunciated that there should be “nothing about Ukraine without Ukraine.” But as legislators responsible for the expenditure of tens of billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars in military assistance in the conflict, we believe such involvement in this war also creates a responsibility for the United States to seriously explore all possible avenues, including direct engagement with Russia, to reduce harm and support Ukraine in achieving a peaceful settlement. In May, President Zelensky, despite deadlocked negotiations, reiterated that the war “will only definitively end through diplomacy,” and had previously explained that “any mentally healthy person always chooses the diplomatic path, because he or she knows: even if it is difficult, it can prevent the loss of thousands, tens of thousands...and maybe even millions of lives.” In conclusion, we urge you to make vigorous diplomatic efforts in support of a negotiated settlement and ceasefire, engage in direct talks with Russia, explore prospects for a new European security arrangement acceptable to all parties that will allow for a sovereign and independent Ukraine, and, in coordination with our Ukrainian partners, seek a rapid end to the conflict and reiterate this goal as America’s chief priority.

 Sincerely, Pramila Jayapal Chair Earl Blumenauer Member of Congress Cori Bush Member of Congress Page 2 Jesús G. "Chuy" García Member of Congress Raúl M. Grijalva Member of Congress Sara Jacobs Member of Congress Ro Khanna Member of Congress Barbara Lee Member of Congress Ilhan Omar Member of Congress Ayanna Pressley Member of Congress Sheila Jackson Lee Member of Congress Mark Pocan Member of Congress Nydia M. Velázquez Member of Congress

These congress members may need to look up the Minsk Accords to set the record straight on why this event may have happened.

WARs are a cancer to humanity and a civilized world. Time to Restore the Kellogg - Briand Treaty

It is evident that WAR's are nothing more than a cancer to humanities desire for a better world.

Many men and women have spoken on the nature of WAR and its impact on society.  If we humans desire a more sustainable future a need to create enemies and destroy civilizations must end.  It is self evident that WAR's are really and acronym for Wrongfully Acquiring Resources when diplomacy and peaceful dialogue are not providing the results of control for the ruling elite

References:

Kellogg–Briand Pact
Video: 

When the World Outlawed War

Here is another video in case one of these gets deleted. France and the U.S. should reinstate this Treaty before its to late.

Smedley Butler: War is a Racquet

All wars are bankers wars: Michael Rivero

https://youtu.be/_JFkf9Be9Bo

https://youtu.be/eRiXv8Vt0EQ



Cost of an Aircraft Carrier:

Oh, its very expensive, the Nimitz class carriers the US operates cost about 4.5 billion each with amortized engineering and design costs. The new classes of carriers coming out cost about 6.2 billion each because of new features designed in.

That does not include the air wing (65-75 aircraft and related support equipment and parts), which would add another few billion.

So far we have only paid for the hardware. Fortunately the fuel is not a recurring cost. but we have 3200 men (5500 with the aircrew) to feed and house. An aircraft carrier is a complex machine with a lot of wear and tear, generally in peacetime use the ships spend half their time on patrol and half their time in port. So for the money we really get only fifty percent availability.

Ah and here's another major cost - to support and protect the carrier we have an entire carrier group that travels with the carrier literally everywhere it goes. A carrier strike group[1] (CSG) is an operational formation of the United States Navy. It is composed of roughly 7,500 personnel, an aircraft carrier, at least one cruiser, a destroyer squadron of at least two destroyers and/or frigates,[2] and a carrier air wing of 65 to 70 aircraft. A carrier strike group also, on occasion, includes submarines, attached logistics ships and a supply ship. The carrier strike group commander operationally reports to the commander of the numbered fleet who is operationally responsible for the area of waters in which the carrier strike group is operating. So that's another 4000 men and 6-7 warships and a few support ships (fuel for the aircraft, fuel for the CSG ships, and food and parts and expendable armaments).

Finally you have the overhead of the Navy - all the land-based operations and supply groups and people all the way up to admirals.

So considering everything my guess is an initial cost of 10 billion (and I didn't count the cost of the CSG ships) and an annual operating cost of 2-4 billion (entire CSG).

And ultimately there will be nuclear refueling at several hundred million every 15 years and nuclear decommissioning at about a billion at the end of life (40 years?)

It may be to late to stop WW3, the U.S. has just dispatched a forward operating contingent of the 101'st Airborne.  This is not looking good for Europe and any nation that feels this is going to go well.