Beware the leader who bangs the drums of war in order to whip the citizenry into a patriotic fervor, for patriotism is indeed a double-edged sword. It both emboldens the blood, just as it narrows the mind - and when the drums of war have reached a fever pitch and the blood boils with hate and the mind has closed, the leader will have no need in seizing the liberties of the citizenry. Rather, the citizenry, infused with fear and blinded by patriotism, will offer up all of their liberties unto the leader, and gladly so. How do we know? It's what recorded history, ancient and modern alike, tells us, time and time again...
Imperialism is easy.
All you need to do is take over a nation's resources and/or assets through military and/or political and/or economic and/or cultural and/or demographic means.
War, Warfare and its Directives
It is well known -or should be (by now)- that a third party usually gains from the conflict of two others. If we enlarge this way of thinking from persons to countries, to continents, to the whole planet even, then we still find it valid.
Banking systems loaning monies to a warring nation have a vested interest in seeing that war drag on. A banking system loaning monies to all warring parties has an even greater interest. Those warring parties have to loan again to restructure their countries after the war. Warfare thus, is its own valuable commodity, in effect furnishing another, more important, commodity: debt.
Warfare and unrest also convince people to accept the setting up of rules and regulations including institutions to implement and enforce them - and even welcome them - that under warless circumstances they never would have accepted. Those devices are set up to prevent further warfare it is said. Warfare then, is an effective tool to establish, maintain and expand social and political control over a large population - in one foul swoop.
The control of monies and arms controls the conflict, but that's just half the story. The objective isn't so much to control the conflict, it's to control the debt that the conflict produces. The real value of a conflict, the true value, lies in the debt that it creates. When you control the debt, you control everything. The reality is that this is the very essence of the banking industry, to make us all, whether it be nations or individuals, slaves to debt.
Wars are started because parties want, without any form of reasonable exchange, what others parties have; be it resources, assets or both. Control over resources and assets equals power over i.e. dominion over other parties; dominion over all. Warfare therefore, is an excuse to take what is not yours - to take.
Wars are 'fought' over resources and assets, and a nation that wishes to initiate a war of conquest must create the illusion of an attack; a threat, to start that war because no citizen of a modern, industrialised nation will send their children off to die in a war to grab another nation's resources and assets - and must thus be coaxed into it.
Wars do not begin, do not drag on, because of truth' being told. On the contrary. Wars are started, and perpetuated, by deception. No wonder then that the beneficiary of warfare turns out to be the initiator, meant to establish (more centralised) control which equals (more) power (over).
Once we realise it is possible to cite many wars started by and because of deception and that it turns out impossible to cite a war started by and because of truth, we might also realise we already know everything we need to know concerning war, warfare and its directives.
Think about it, when war(fare) is meant to establish, extend, maintain peace - shouldn't we have had peace by now?
Since war(fare) is a racket, the initiators do not care which jockey wins the race. They lay down the track. They pay the jockeys. They own the horses. They thus control the race. They therefore win, one way or the other.
It doesn't have to be that way though.
What if war is said to break out and nobody shows up?