Cold War

CIA Experiments On Best Psychics & Remote Viewers, Exposed Online

Published on
a group of CIA psychics at a round table

Despite being allies during the Second World War, the United States and the Soviet Union was anything but friendly with each other after the war ended. There was a sense of competitiveness between the two powers, and they certainly didn’t trust each other.

This animosity sparked several fierce competitions between them. First of all, the ‘Arms Race’ resulted in the development of both atomic and hydrogen bombs. The exploration of space was also a point of contention. The Soviets famously launched Sputnik in 1957 and the US sent the first man to the moon in 1969.

Source:nasa.gov

But a lesser-known ‘race’ between the countries involved mind-reading, extrasensory perception (ESP) and psychokinesis. Both countries explored the use of psychic powers in war.

Now that the Cold War has ended, the U.S. government does not officially continue to work with the online psychics or other mediums. However, if they did, it is likely to be highly classified. If you want to check some of the online psychics, make sure you visit backpackerverse.com.

Born During the Cold War: The U.S. Government’s ‘Star Gate’ Project

In 1972, a top-secret intelligence report started circling among U.S. government agencies. This classified report asserted that the Soviet Union was heavily investing in psychic research. Specifically, they were researching psychokinesis and ESP.

After the CIA and military heard about this report, it became clear that the United States needed a similar program. This is how the ‘Star Gate’ project was born.

The Star Gate project was a highly classified government program of scientists, physicists, and psychics. The goal of the program was to determine if there were any practical uses for psychic techniques within the government. This could include any applications like spying on foreign officials, searching for missing persons, and exploring inaccessible territories.

One notable project from the Star Gate program was an experiment involving psychic Joe McMoneagle. He claimed to see what the surface of Mars looked millions of years ago.

Does the CIA use any of the best online psychics or remote viewers still today?

Source:newspunch.com

Many of the best online psychics still practice remote viewing in their private lives, but what about in the public sphere? Some swear that the CIA and other government agencies still use psychics to gather intelligence, even today in 2019. According to one source, several remote viewers claim that they were asked to help in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

However, the U.S. government does not publicly admit to this.

The CIA and Military spent 20+ million dollars on the ‘Star Gate’ program and devoted over 20 years to its study. Surely, that project was not all for nothing. It is not likely though that civilians are privy to this information.

America and the Geopolitics of Upheaval

Published on
/

In 1969, Henry Kissinger wrote: “The essence of a revolution is that it appears to contemporaries as a series of more or less unrelated upheavals. But the crises which form the headlines of the day are symptoms of deep-seated structural problems.” At that time, the world was facing the distribution of power, which influenced the US foreign policy, but this quote can be applied today as well.

In today’s world, the United States of America need to deal with numerous challenges. First of all, there is Russia, and on and off relationship they have, but another country which is assuming a world-leader role is China, which keeps developing perhaps too quickly. Furthermore, North Korea is making threats, and their nuclear program is a concern to the America leaders, whereas constant wars in the Middle East are also putting the strain on the US budget. The world is pushed further down into instability and as every day passes we are falling into the abyss.

Source:thenation.com

These geopolitical changes need to be taken seriously. One of the things which are discussed is polarity. Many argue that the United States isn’t as strong as it used to be a few decades back and that their “unipolar moment” has passed. However, this debate can be misleading. Indeed, Washington isn’t as influential as it used to be, but there isn’t any sole challenger who can be a threat to the country. The US still sits at the top of the throne, but the fact is that things are stirring and we might see the US foreign policy during and after Trump administration wrecked by crises.

In order to understand the world we are living in today, we need to compare it to the post-Cold War era and the Western primacy which was unrivaled at the time. There was no doubt who the world leader was after the Cold War. With almost 25 percent of the global GDP in 1994, USA showed everyone its power. Moreover, the country had a major edge in global power-projection capabilities with almost 40 percent of world defense outlays that were in America’s hands. In addition to this, America had highly capable allies both in Western Europe and the Asia-Pacific, and they accounted for 47 percent of global GDP and 35 percent of global military spending. Put two and two together, and you will realize that the US had 70 percent of global economic power and military spending. These numbers clearly showed that the USA was the force to be reckoned with. With USSR divided, there was no other country on the horizon to contest the American power. Backed by its allies, the US managed to keep this state of affairs winning the Gulf War and the Afghanistan War.

At this point, we need to refer to Francis Fukuyama’s “end of history.” He noted that this was the period in which democracy and open market spread more widely than ever before. This meant that the liberal-capitalist model was widely accepted and even the countries which you wouldn’t expect it to integrate into the liberal order made efforts to do so. These countries are Russia and China, but the latter saw this model as a grave threat. It leads us to the third phenomenon which managed to strengthen America after the Cold War. When the crisis ended, everybody anticipated seeing the American centered alliance to fragment. However, all of the allies continued to support Washington, and the war between the great powers of the world was unimaginable at the time.

The overall picture of the world was the following. The United States became superior with the allies supporting it in Europe and Asia-Pacific. Since there was no great-power conflict at the time, it was a lot easier for the United States to organize their forces and deal with some “minor” issues. For instance, they confronted Saddam Hussein and his regime in Iraq at the beginning of the 21st century, plus they had to deal with Al Qaeda when they attacked on 9/11. NATO’s role changed completely with the Soviet Union gone, and the alliance could focus on some “outer” problems and help the United States clean things up.

The changes that we have witnessed over the next two decades were severe, and the Western primacy has diminished. The United States itself is weaker than in 1994. While they had to be the ones to put out occasional fires in different parts of the world, they were starting to get weaker as the other countries had a chance to focus on their economy and develop as much as possible. For instance, in 2004, the US accounted for 25 percent of the GDP and 42 percent of military spending, but that has dropped by 3 and 9 percent respectively 11 years later. While this is a significant decline, the allies did even worse. For instance, they accounted for 47 percent of global GDP and 35 percent of global military spending in 1994, but in 20 years, these numbers plummeted to 39 and 25 percent respectively. The UK used to be a renowned naval force, but they are struggling to rule the waters around the island today.

And while this is happening with the US and its allies, the main competitors are getting stronger every year. Russia is still having major issues with the economy, but they modernized their military and increased the defense spending significantly over the years. Today, they have capabilities to compete with the West and once again, they have become a relevant country that has a major influence on the world. On the other hand, China has become even more powerful than its Russian neighbors. Between 1994 and 2015, China’s global wealth saw a jump from 3.3 percent to 11.8 percent, while the military spending increased from 2.2 to 12.2 percent. The rise of these countries couldn’t have been stopped, and today, they are challenging the primacy of the West.

Source:static1.uk.businessinsider.com

China had a different look at the USA after the Cold War. They knew it was just a transitory condition which had to be endured. They didn’t saw that victory the way the Americans did, and during the post-war time, they have been patient, investing a lot of money to improve their country. Also, resurgent Russia has managed to undermine NATO and the European Union, and they have waged wars in Ukraine and Georgia that they have won. Slowly but surely, Russia, just like China, has built up its military, and both countries are challenging the USA and its weakened allies. The USA will have a difficult time facing the challenges, but some things need to be considered before we reach the best solution possible.

First of all, the USA must not abandon its posts around the world and return to “Fortress America.” Over the years, they have worked hard to gain such dominance and even though it is receding, the USA must not withdraw. This would only wreak havoc on the world scene, and disruptive trends would be on the rise. Let’s not forget that America is still the most powerful country in the world and they still have a say when it comes to shaping the International system. Shaping and influencing the international order is one major reason why the U.S. is so successful, but American public needs to be satisfied with such role. Last but not least, the USA needs to recognize what they are up against. Once they do that, they could start looking for solutions.

Defending Defense: Setting the Record Straight on us Military Spending Requirements

Published on
/

After the Cold War, both the Republicans and Democrats have reduced the funding of the military, and instead of replacing worn out equipment and fixing what needed to be fixed, they did little. Today’s wars which happen on and off require a nation to be prepared, but they also call to cut the Defense Department’s budget. Read on to see what are the myths and what are truths about the military spending?

Myth

The US spends more on defense than half the world combines, which means that no more should be invested.

Truth

The United States is the most powerful country in the world, and the military is here not only to protect the citizens of its country but to keep the world peace and be the world policeman. What is important is that overall cost is compatible with the size of the country’s economy. Mackenzie Eaglen of the Heritage Foundation wrote: “Defense spending is near historic lows… Between 2010 and 2015, total defense spending is set to fall from 4.9 percent to 3.6 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), even though the nation has assigned more missions to the military over the past two decades.”

Source:huffingtonpost.com

Myth

During Bush Administration, Pentagon spent heaps of money.

Truth

This was not entirely true. America was waging wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and more money was being spent at the time. But AEI’s Gary Schmitt and Tom Donnelly summed up the situation: “The budget increases that have occurred…are largely tied to fighting the wars. When Bill Clinton left the White House, and Dick Cheney told the military that “help [was] on the way,” the defense burden stood at 3 percent of GDP—a post-World War II low. When George W. Bush headed out the door, the figure for the core defense budget was about 3.5 percent. This is an increase, to be sure, but not one to make the military flush after a decade of declining budgets and deferred procurement.”

The goal during this time is to return the military to pre-war readiness level, and this was difficult to achieve. Part of the money was used to increase the number of the US ground forces. Also, the moral obligation needed to be considered as well. The families of those who fought in the Middle East had to be tended. However, they had to receive an amount of money which would motivate them to answer the call to service.

Source:sputniknews.com

Myth

Additional earnings can be made in Pentagon by cutting waste and excess. This would make up for shortfalls.

Truth

According to former Defense Secretary Robert Gates, it was necessary to reform defense acquisition and reduce overhead costs, which is why he started an initiative. Even if this was put into practice, it wouldn’t do much to close the gap. The requirements would still be great and resources scarce. The bipartisan Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel stated:

“[T]hose savings will be insufficient for comprehensive [military] modernization. We cannot reverse the decline of shipbuilding, buy enough naval aircraft, recapitalize Army equipment, modernize tactical aircraft, purchase a new aerial tanker, increase our deep-strike capability and recapitalize the bomber fleet just by saving the $10 billion-$15 billion the Department hopes to achieve through acquisition reform….Meeting the crucial requirements of modernization will require a substantial additional investment that is sustained through the long term….Although there is a cost to recapitalizing the military, there is also a potential price associated with not recapitalizing – and in the long run, that cost is much greater.”

Myth

We are spending too much on defense.

Truth

Source:sbaranes.com

The defense budget is relatively small compared to the federal budget. Pentagon keeps spending less and less in real dollars, but you cannot eliminate the spending entirely. Even if Pentagon had done that at some point, the deficit of the country would still be in trillions. The US national debt has exceeded $20 trillion recently, and the budget used for defense is just one drop in the ocean. Once again, Mackenzie Eaglen noted:

“The substantial decline in the defense share of the budget largely reflects the dramatic growth of entitlement spending. Entitlements now account for around 65 percent of all federal spending and a record 18 percent of GDP. The three largest entitlements—Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid—eclipsed defense spending in 1976 and have been growing ever since. If future taxes are held at the historical average, these three entitlements will consume all tax revenues by 2052, leaving no money for the government’s primary constitutional obligation: providing for the common defense.”

Myth

The USA has a role of the “world’s policeman,” and that needs to stop.

Truth

After the Cold War, Europe has entered the durable peace which lasts today. Countries in East Asia have grown stronger economically and millions of people have exited poverty. However, this peace couldn’t have been achieved by itself. It was partly due to America’s involvement and the fact is that no-one would be able or would want to assume the role of the USA. According to the Quadrennial Defense Review Independent Panel, the future is:

” …likely to place an increased demand on American “hard power” to preserve regional balances. While diplomacy and development have important roles to play, the world’s first-order problems will continue to be our security concerns….As the last 20 years have shown, America does not have the option of abandoning a leadership role in support of its national interests….Failure to anticipate and manage the conflicts that threaten those interests…will not make those conflicts go away….It will simply lead to an increasingly unstable and unfriendly global climate and, eventually, to conflicts America cannot ignore.”

In other words, the USA cannot afford to recover all that it has achieved or lose it altogether. Repairing such damage would be too expensive even for the US and preserving the “world-policeman” role is cost-effective.

Myth

Winning the current wars should be the country’s primary concern. The defense spending must be focused on that primarily.

Truth

America’s role is too big to focus on just one or two wars the country is in. They need to defend the homeland, plus there is the newly-created cyberspace which is a hotbed of conflicts and the US nation needs to be dominant here as well. Furthermore, its military must assure access to the seas, in the air and space. The US has been fighting for the common good for years, and that means fighting on numerous fronts. Europe is stable and peace is preserved, while currently, America is building peace across the Middle East. They also need to be ready for the rise of the countries in the Asia-Pacific, such as China. To quote former Secretary of Defense, Robert Gates once again:

Source:charlierose.com

“As I look around the world and see a more unstable world, more failed and failing states, countries that are investing heavily in their militaries—as I look at places like Iran and North Korea and elsewhere around the world—as I look at the new kinds of threats emerging from cyber to precision ballistic and cruise missiles and so on—my greatest worry is that we will do to the defense budget what we have done four times before. And that is, slash it in an effort to find some kind of a dividend to put the money someplace else. I think that would be disastrous in the world environment we see today and what we’re likely to see in the years to come.”