Thursday, April 14, 2016

The Exit Strategy for Iraq

There is no protocol for ending a genocide because the accepted definition of a genocide doesn't address the root cause of a genocide. Ethnic cleansing does not address the idea that genocides occur on every level, including within families and schools and businesses. Without a protocol, the logical response is fighting back with overwhelming force, and the knee-jerk reaction that ends a war makes a genocide worse, and this is why a military response in Iraq is not the solution. It starts a feud because everyone is fighting for their lives. 

What stops a genocide is that someone must stand up to defend the person who is being defamed, and that leads us to the Exit Strategy for Iraq proposal.

The On The Rainbow Peace Store books associated with the Exit Strategy for Iraq start with the principles associated with power, and where true power comes from. Taking a step back to the Pass It On books, the Battles of Armageddon Series explain what happens when one individual stands on the principles, and it triggers the fears of another individual who relies on him or her for security and support. The one that stands on the principles goes up in power and the one who reacts out of fear goes down in power by grabbing for power. A series of battles result, drawing in more people. 

We, as a planet, are looking at the Battles of Armageddon that came from the decision that Saddam Hussein made when he stood in protest that the U.N. sanctions from the Gulf War were killing his children. He considered U.S. foreign policy on Iraq to be oppressive. This threatened the security and support of the United States, and George W. Bush and his administration went down into the games of revenge when given the first opportunity to do so. 

The events associated with September 11, 2001 allowed George W. Bush to justify the preemptive strike on Iraq, which devolved as a genocide. When he brought in the Coalition nations, he brought together five groups of people, all with what appears to be a common goal--revenge on Saddam Hussein-- and all playing their preferred power games, including war, genocide, massacres, slavery and human rights violations, and terrorism. Ripples of effects have gone out to draw in every person on the planet. 

A schism has formed within the organization, just as has formed within the nations, and people are divided over the issue of where power comes from. This is not the classic fairy tale of good and evil, because both sides believe they are standing on the principles. It is the games that are bad, not the people, and so mankind must start to recognize the games when we see them, understand how how they work and why they don't work, and learn how to overcome the games, which are oppressive to the people.  

The Exit Strategy for Iraq offers a protocol for ending genocides, and ensures that disputes between nations will be handled in an international court system so that the people are not dragged into conflict. 

What stops a genocide is that someone stands up to defend the person who is being defamed, and by doing so, he or she assumes responsibility for carrying through the solution to its culmination. The only person who will do that, and has a plan that benefits everyone, is Karen Holmes, who is parallel to Saddam Hussein. 

History is repeating itself. The creation of the international government is parallel to the American Revolution Movement, and standing up to defend Saddam Hussein is parallel to John Adams defending the British soldiers who were tried in court for the part in the Boston Massacre. In his letters, John Adams said it was the hardest thing he had ever done. 

Each of the families that come into the organization framework will come in the same way--by one individual assuming responsibility to undo the damage that has been done. One sets the stage for the next.

People who have been involved in a genocide lack their inalienable rights. The genocide that the United States is perpetrating in Iraq denied the Iraqi people their inalienable rights, and that went against Universal Law. Now, to maintain our rights guaranteed to us by our Constitution, we must guarantee them to every person on the planet. The next person to come in is parallel to the United States, and he or she will assume responsibility to guarantee the rights of the people by accepted responsibility for the Constitutional Amendment project.