Anonymous ID: 8202ae Nov. 8, 2023, 7:22 p.m. No.19885226   🗄️.is 🔗kun   >>5242 >>5245 >>5269 >>5820 >>5831

An anon alluded to this a couple breads ago and it's been nagging me. He (because there are no women on the internet) said maybe we need a new word for war.

When one entity/power/agency controls both warring factions, creates the conditions to force two nations into war (media/politics/economics/false flags/aggression) in order to control and profit from that war, is it war?

Or is it a gladiator contest in a larger coliseum, where one entity (banksters) control all the gladiators contracts, the betting, the concessions, the venue and the publicity?

Can a case be made that the term war no longer applies to organized and promoted bloodletting and destruction when it's planned to enhance the power and profits of the promoters of the contest?

Seems the banksters have turned the world into their personal Thunderdome, more for their own entertainment (as they already have 90+% of the planets wealth and control all but a few recalcitrant nations) like a global Truman show.

 

What name would be more appropriate than "War" to describe their preferred entertainment?

 

What can we call the crime of the wasting of lives and resources and all the potential for good they held for the last two hundred years? We would be among the stars, in peace, if it wasn't for them. No want, no disease, no strife, no need to plunder resources to feed the machine. What do we call them and their works?

Anonymous ID: 8202ae Nov. 8, 2023, 7:36 p.m. No.19885290   🗄️.is 🔗kun

>>19885245

>When I describe war to people I describe the kings sitting in a smokey room playing cards and start gambling.

Not my creation, nabbed from here, but you described it well.