This strategy is played out countless times in countless arenas. This of course has changed over the course of history, where initially, many centuries ago, it was just plain “attack” We want your territory, we have a bigger army, so we just attack. Then when this proved to be ‘unethical’ a change of plan was
introduced. Abuse the potential enemy with threats, false(invariably) accusations, and provocation and when they respond/retaliate (or not), attack. The justification being their response. And our final one is to play the diplomacy card first to show the ‘humanitarian’ side. ‘We want to persuade you to agree with us
because we want an amicable solution. When this fails, fall back to plans B(abuse) and C(attack).
Examples of this range from Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, to Kennedy’s’ failed ‘Bay of Pigs’ invasion, But it seems that in most cases of invasion the plans of attack were hatched and agreed upon long before the mediation begins. Talks , it would seem are merely a smokescreen to show the outside world “we tried to solve this amicably but they did not want to”. Unfortunately, our ‘Good Old Boys’ the US of A, are at the forefront again.
The best examples of these:
Libya (..there are countless others..)
Currently North Korea are at the ‘abuse them’ stage.
As written on the front page of my blog, I am not an expert, and do not want to ‘bore’you with mountains of statistics, but it seems to me that the 3 stages of attack seem to be increasing, but the major, in fact only, as far as I can tell, instigators are America with China discreetly trailing in 2nd. There are of course domestic, and historic conflicts, such as Russia’s invasion of Crimea, and The Ukraine, and Britain’s forays
into many countries in the name of expansion There will always be changes to the landscape, but for most nations the reasons to invade another sovereign territory are becoming flimsier with each incident.
Take the current situation with Venezuela, and the political situation there. (For those of you unfamiliar with it, the current president, Maduro, who runs a socialist government. He won a recent election, but an opposition leader (who has the backing of many countries including the UK (I bow my head in shame at this point), wants to usurp control, accusing Maduro of rigging the election. By the way, did I mention that the country has some of the largest oil deposits on the planet? Strange that isn’t it?
So the countries backing this takeover (let’s give it its correct term of ‘foreign assisted coup’) are under the leadership of …… you guessed it!!!! So in this case there does not need to be the 3 steps. They just go in and say that the country cannot exist on the ‘international stage’ without a fairly elected government. “We are moving in so as to help the people of Venezuela” (You mean ‘help yourselves to their minerals?”)
My hope is that all countries will eventually be able to regain control over their own lands, and not have foreign forces/nations as their puppet masters.