This comes directly from NSC / 68 that was declassified in 1975. It shows how advance the NWO was already in april 1950.

http://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/nsc-68/nsc68-1.htm


In a shrinking world, which now faces the threat of atomic warfare, it is not an adequate objective merely to seek to check the Kremlin design, for the absence of order among nations is becoming less and less tolerable. This fact imposes on us, in our own interests, the responsibility of world leadership. It demands that we make the attempt, and accept the risks inherent in it, to bring about order and justice by means consistent with the principles of freedom and democracy. We should limit our requirement of the Soviet Union to its participation with other nations on the basis of equality and respect for the rights of others. Subject to this requirement, we must with our allies and the former subject peoples seek to create a world society based on the principle of consent. Its framework cannot be inflexible. It will consist of many national communities of great and varying abilities and resources, and hence of war potential. The seeds of conflicts will inevitably exist or will come into being. To acknowledge this is only to acknowledge the impossibility of a final solution. Not to acknowledge it can be fatally dangerous in a world in which there are no final solutions.

All these objectives of a free society are equally valid and necessary in peace and war. But every consideration of devotion to our fundamental values and to our national security demands that we seek to achieve them by the strategy of the cold war. It is only by developing the moral and material strength of the free world that the Soviet regime will become convinced of the falsity of its assumptions and that the pre-conditions for workable agreements can be created. By practically demonstrating the integrity and vitality of our system the free world widens the area of possible agreement and thus can hope gradually to bring about a Soviet acknowledgement of realities which in sum will eventually constitute a frustration of the Soviet design. Short of this, however, it might be possible to create a situation which will induce the Soviet Union to accommodate itself, with or without the conscious abandonment of its design, to coexistence on tolerable terms with the non-Soviet world. Such a development would be a triumph for the idea of freedom and democracy. It must be an immediate objective of United States policy.

There is no reason, in the event of war, for us to alter our overall objectives. They do not include unconditional surrender, the subjugation of the Russian peoples or a Russia shorn of its economic potential. Such a course would irrevocably unite the Russian people behind the regime which enslaves them. Rather these objectives contemplate Soviet acceptance of the specific and limited conditions requisite to an international environment in which free institutions can flourish, and in which the Russian peoples will have a new chance to work out their own destiny. If we can make the Russian people our allies in the enterprise we will obviously have made our task easier and victory more certain.



To think it all started with the Council on Foreign Relations funded by Mandell House and that traitor of Woodrow Wilson. They were responsible for the unjust taxation system we have and the federal Reserve.

Anyone care to share their views?

"cold war" stuff......what nation would you care to insert into the dialog, considering the condition of the world today?...don`t you think it is still the policy of big brother right now, only with necessary modification to fit the times?.............[smoke]

They never intended to win the cold war, but rather to befriend the russians.

Henry Kissinger was as RED as they come. He was behind all the China and Cuba stuff. I am not antisemitic but Kissinger should have perish before he was able to do so much damage to our National Interests, just to be in David Rockefeller's good side.

                                        Who were the initiators?......didn`t rockefeller "mysteriously" disappear?....was`nt it a "clique" of eccentric higher-ups with nothing better to do?....why were they not more sucessful?..was`nt kissinger simply a "pawn" in a two way game?...and the "official" attitude was that this was not a harmful "approach" (ie..covered a multitude of sins)?.........

You are right, but let's not forget about Carter and the Trilateral Comission.

                                        Trilateral......hmmmmm...isn`t it interesting?..................(did i say big brother?).......[smoke]

Ariel......i want to say this about kissinger.....and without being more "read" than red.....i believe, possibly with a nieve sense, that kissinger was a very misunderstood man.......that he, himself really did envision a world of greater peace (which would certainly be a honorable persuit today) but his own ideals were stifled by the very same powers that he may have thought would give him leverage to attain success. in that these efforts cuold have easily been percieved to be a effort to nwo, or not, is at least arguementative....i had observed henry on numerous occasion and studied to a lesser degree, during and after his time in the spotlight, and ended with the opinion that he, though not others, was genuine. keep in mind that this was a  world still enjoying the " better times" of the 60`s and 70`s and to most of us "westerners", a lot of the foriegn policy of the time was just that...foriegn!....anyhow, as i said...open to opinion, but i`m not too sure that the NWO, was not simply a cover story, and actually helped in what eventually DID happen in ussr eventually.....this is my opinion only, and end of discussion on this subject, since i do not know that much more... but....who does know what goes on behind closed doors?.........k.k..........[grenade]............p.s.  david was most likely eaten by cannibals...simple as that.[beer]