There is a kind of co-dependent psychology hard-wired into the US astrology of military actions: that it is the crusading hero out to vanquish the evil foe, whether it be communism (built by US dollars and technology transfers), drugs (which the populace is addicted to and the CIA traffics), poverty (enabled by an over-wrought capitalism and ever-expanding welfare system) or extremist dictator-thugs (created, bought and paid for by US dollars)….

On June 3, 1997, the Project for the New American Century think tank group was established in Washington, DC.  In it’s statement of principles:

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world’s pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

Among its chief points for consideration for th US government were (taken from Wikipedia):

1        A significant increase of U.S. defense spending.

2        Strengthening ties with the U.S.’s allies and to challenge regimes hostile to U.S. interests and values.

3        Promoting the cause of political and economic freedom outside the U.S.

4        Preserving and extending an international order friendly to U.S. security, prosperity, and principles.

After the 2000 election of George W. Bush, many of the PNAC’s members were appointed to key positions within the new President’s administration.  It is these people who are the present architects of the current US international “perpetual war” policy; a list of them can be found at:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC

Call it what you will: imperialistic, globalist, expansionist, or “enlightened Americanism”; it would seem to be the credo of US foreign policy today.  As one British journalist called it, “Get out of our way or we’ll kill you”.  If you take a look at the PNAC website you could say that a lot of defense contractors had some influence in the formulation of their ideas. 

It is not possible to get a “birthchart” of the PNAC, those details are not public knowledge; but you can always use important events in an entity’s life as “sub-charts”, which will reveal a lot of information.  The date of the publication of the PNAC’s statement of principles on June 3, 1997 reveals a wealth of information:

Because the document is so strongly militaristic, bold, and aggressive in its tone; I would guess that the actual publication of this significant document occurred sometime in the morning of June 3.  The reason I say so is that there is a tight conjunction of the Moon and Mercury in the sign of Aries; Aries is a strongly martial sign ruled appropriately enough by the planet Mars. 

[I actually have done some rectification on this chart, and I am tentatively pinning the actual birthtime of this statement as 9:42 am, Washington, DC, June 3, 1997.  The chart works just as well as the Moon ascendant chart below, which I include in both styles.]

The Moon sign becomes an alternative ascendant (in Vedic astrology, chandra lagna).  Mars as the ascendant ruler then would fall in the sixth house which is associated with war in Vedic teachings, and it is with the Moon’s North Node (Rahu).  Therefore we can say that this is a highly militaristic charts since Aries is the ascendant and its ruler Mars is conjunct Rahu, which is a highly activating point. 

{mosimage}

The position of Mars and Rahu in the sign of Virgo indicates a lot of intellectual argumentation and focus in organization and planning.  Mars is not particularly well dignified in Virgo, and that would suggest that the overly-aggressive aspects of Mars are coming into play here; and maybe a very strong influence as I have said above from the military-industrial complex.  I do not imply that the military-industrial complex is necessarily a bad thing; but I am trying to imply that such an entity could be trying to use Virgoan facts and statistics to aggressively improve its bottom line. 

{mosimage}

There is no doubt of war-profiteering going on in Iraq right now, with huge carte blanche contracts being given to such contractors as Haliburton, Bechtel and others.  Why do we have so many wars?  Besides the lesser aspects of human nature, a lot of money is to be made from wars from arms sales to vast rebuilding contracts. 

Mars in this chart is somewhat redeemed, that is, made somewhat more respectable; by its mutual reception with Mercury.  With Mars and Mercury exchanging ruling signs their ill-dignities astrologically are somewhat compensated for, and maybe this COULD be a somewhat workable policy. 

The authorities of this statement of principles by this chart seem to be rather shady or secretive since the tenth house of this chart is inhabited by a very weak and ill-dignified Jupiter.  The ruler of said Jupiter, Saturn is itself weakened and of less-than-good inclination in illusive/delusive Pisces in the equally deluded (and conspiratorial) twelfth house.  Further, Saturn is made worse by being conjunct the South Node (Ketu), which is itself a very secretive and nasty influence. 

Again I can’t all condemn the above configuration since Jupiter and Saturn themselves are in mutual reception as Mercury and Mars above; and the influence of Pisces and the twelfth house has the connotation of “suffering for the common good” and it’s because “Jesus would want us to do this” kind of sentiment.  I would question though the actual spirituality of these PNAC prime movers since they are a very worldly crowd. 

Jupiter in bad dignity in the tenth house would indicate an arrogance and bad judgment of leadership and of visionary principles. 

Project for the New American Century and the US Natal Chart

Now if I take this chart and superimpose onto the chart of the US (7-4-1776) a few interesting things turn up:

{mosimage}

The aggressive Mars-Rahu conjunction of the PNAC chart falls in very close conjunction to the US natal Neptune, which would indicate that the reasons for taking action (in this case very involved military campaigns) are not fully thought through and that the reasons used have a very high probability of being fantastical ego-trips that crash with a very rude thump. 

Since natally the US has a square of Mars and Neptune there is a kind of psychology hard-wired to American aggression or military actions that it is the crusading hero out to vanquish the evil foe, whether it be communism (built by US dollars and technology transfers), drugs (which the populace is addicted to and the CIA traffics), poverty (enabled by an over-wrought capitalism and ever-expanding welfare system) or extremist dictator-thugs (created, bought and paid for by US dollars). 

The US would seem to have a co-dependant relationship with its enemies; it enables them so it can defeat them and look heroic.  This is weird I know; and I’m simplifying things somewhat here. 

Now as far as how the US will “come back to earth with a resounding thud” I leave those points including the NUCLEAR ones for the next parts of this essay to come in short order. 

CB

(Visited 42 times, 1 visits today)