Reportedly, the Obama regime wants:
1. Iran to control the Middle East.
2. India to control South Asia, including Afghanistan.
3. Militant Moslems to be used against China and Russia.
4. the USA to control Baluchistan, which is currently a part of Pakistan.
A map from an American Armed Forces military journal.
On 24 April 2009, Talha Mujaddidi wrote: The Destabilization of Pakistan: Finding Clarity in the Baluchistan Conundrum
Among the points made:
1. Baluchistan has a port at Gwadar that was built by China.
2. Baluchistan has huge quantities of natural gas, and unexplored oil reserves.
3. Baluchistan's population accounts for only 5% of the total population of Pakistan.
4. British intelligence is allegedly providing covert support to Baluchistan separatists.
There are reports of CIA and Mossad support to Baloch rebels in Iran and Southern Afghanistan.
5. The main group responsible for violence in Baluchistan is the Baloch Liberation Army (BLA), operating out of Afghanistan...
The BLA enjoys support from Indian RAW in terms of finances, logistics, and weapons.
6. Iran has huge reserves of gas and it would like India to gain access to these reserves since India is its ally.
7. The US believes that the balkanization of Pakistan and the setting up of an independent Baluchistan will dismantle the hope of a resurgent Pakistan in the near future, paving the way for a dominant Iran taking control of the Middle East while India will be able to take control of South Asia including Afghanistan.
8. Brzezinski believes that Iran not the Arab world is the natural ally of US in the Middle East.
9. The current US government is using the foreign policy ideals of Brzezinski, which calls for using Islamic militants and Iran against the back drop of a covert foreign policy hellbent on fracturing the whole of ASIA, Africa, Latin America and the Middle East into thousands of Tribes with Flags with ever shifting malleable CIA structured temporary alliances to suit the purposes of Hegemonic designs of the Neo-PNAC cultists....
The Criminal Neo-conservatives up the creek without a paddle? Not necessarily.....
The neo-conservatives started out as liberals and socialists in the Democratic Party. They were never really that conservative on economic policy, only belligerent in foreign and defense policies. And in those two latter policy areas, the Democratic Party is still dominated by their close cousins, the liberal Wilsonian interventionists. Although the liberal Wilsonians—such as Hillary Clinton, Richard Holbrooke, and Madeleine Albright—are less unilateralist than the neo-conservatives and are much more in love with international organizations, they share the neo-conservatives’ passion for armed social work and nation-building. Besides, when you’re deep in the wilderness and your horse is dying, you can’t be too concerned with pimples on your new steed. The neo-conservatives will probably eventually realize that the Republican Party is dying, and will seamlessly re-infest the Democratic mother ship to preserve themselves. And again, they will probably severely debilitate their host....