Guest Posting

If you wish to write and/or publish an article on Operation Disclosure all you need to do is send your entry to applying these following rules.

The subject of your email entry should be: "Entry Post | (Title of your post) | Operation Disclosure"

- Must be in text format
- Proper Grammar
- No foul language
- Your signature/name/username at the top

Send your entry and speak out today!

News Alerts


The beginning of the end for the Petrodollar grows near.

China's gold-backed alternative to the Petrodollar launches on the 26th.

Oil will begin trading in Yuan and gold instead of fiat US Dollars and Treasuries.

This will result in the price of gold to increase.

It also marks the end of Cabal control over the global economy.

The trading of oil in gold-backed currency and the major correction in the stock market will force all countries to ditch fiat currency and agree to a global gold-backed monetary system.

The worldwide consensus to a global gold-backed monetary system will result in the announcement of GESARA law.

The new quantum financial system will then officially come online and reset all currencies.

The RV is expected to release before these events occur.




Featured Post

Restored Republic via a GCR as of March 22, 2018

Restored Republic via a GCR Update as of March 22 2018 Compiled 12:01 am EDT 22 March 2018 by Judy Byington, MSW, LCSW, ret. CEO, Child Ab...

Saturday, January 30, 2016

Coalition Partners-Not! Creating a United Democracies

Coalition Partners-Not! Creating a United Democracies (U.D.)

By Christopher B. Kuch, PhD
January 30, 2016

This decade in American History has brought new challenges for the country as a nation. We are faced with a changing world where it appears there are groups (Al-Qaeda, Taliban, ISIS, Boko Haram, Hezbollah, Hamas, Al-Nusrah and many other Radical Muslim Terrorist groups) that only seek the destruction of free societies *1. Some so called “allies” have become less resolved to help us. While at the same time we have forged stronger or new relationships (i.e., Poland, The Baltic States, Croatia, Kosovo, and Kurdistan) and are working with the global community to fight terrorism.

Some countries which have already had bombings and murder within their countries are weak, scared, unwilling, and perhaps incapable of protecting themselves. It was the fear of retaliation from recent murderous terrorist groups that caused them to cower in the prospect of war with them. Yet, these sometimes hypocritical nations will be the first to scream help from the U.N. and later the U.S. when they are attacked again. This means America will have to shoulder the bulk of the burden to help them-a little unfair, illogical, and costly to our tax payers.

Consider this the U.S. pays 22% of the budget to the almost 200 member United Nations. What kind of rip off is this? In addition, about 24 countries pay under $1,000 per year while the U.S. pays almost $570 million and yet these minor dozen countries have the same voting power. What, what, what is that? Because it is based on the capacity of member states to pay. Tell that to the unemployed and underemployed American. Enough is enough. If we paid $1,000 annually like 12% of some countries we could have an annual pork roast and beer weekend starting Friday at noon.

America does not go it alone typically. First, America should never forget our brothers and sisters, and hopefully the great relationship between Britain and America. This country has never let us down and stands beside us during difficult times. Secondly, Australia has proven to be a never wavering friend. In addition, let’s not forget that the majority of Europe is supporting us with troops, weapons, and intelligence information with our fight against terrorism. Many Asian countries, Central and South American countries, and Middle Eastern countries have stepped up to the plate as well. They all should be rewarded and supported in the future. But the other countries that set on the fence and spend no money should stay on the fence and not be supported in the future.

Who Really are Our Friends When we Need Them?

A very partial list of countries providing major combat forces in The Middle East Coalition on Terrorism: Australia, Belgium, Canada, Demark, Egypt, France, Germany, Jordan, Kuwait, The Netherlands, Poland, Saudi Arabia, and The U.K. While other countries (about fifty) contribute by allowing us to use “our” bases, that we pay rent for, but offer little help other than an occasional dog bone with intelligence information.*2.

Americans should not forget each of these countries participation, loss of life, and retaliation from the enemy. This paper proposes building on the relationships forged during the Iraq and Afghanistan wars through economic, tourism, and continued military alliance in future relationships. Those that did not support us, or withdrew when weapons were pointed at them during or after the main battles should be given the same treatment-lip service! We should reply to countries in the future that did not help us recently “we don’t want to get involved or let’s see if sanctions work in 1,2,5 or 10 years…” And return the favor by voting no in the U.N. for sanctions or military actions against their enemies or conflicts in the future.

The present day policy established by NATO and reinforced by the Bush Doctrine is either you are our friends and willing to come to our side as friends when we ask for it, or you are not our friends and we should not come to your side when you ask for it. This philosophy is grounded in the NATO alliance.*3. If you’re not helping us now when you get attacked call Putin’s Union, China, N. Korea, or some of our NATO allies. Good luck with their response! The present NATO alliance is fraught with problems concerning who will really come to each other’s defense.

The U.N. is a bastion for anti-western and especially anti-American actions. We spend millions of dollars propping up this institution only to have it frequently go against our interests. Although we can control most debates in the Security Council or bottle them up, it really doesn’t function as it was intended. Thus, what is needed is a stronger legal bond between America and her true allies. In essence we would be bypassing the U.N. and NATO. We can then spend less money in those organizations and more on a better organization that is stronger for us and our true friends.

Creating a United Democracies

We have two options. The first is to shore up stronger relations in NATO, which is not going to happen because of the legal structure that most countries don’t follow, or we can form an additional organization and shift resources into it. This article suggests the latter. The American people are sick and tired of bailing out foreign countries in time of conflict. Always the U.S. carries the majority of costs and man power. We should enter into discussions with our true long standing coalition partners about forming a new United Democracies (UD). We should only be in the United Nations as talking figure heads, where nothing gets resolved, pointless anti-American speeches are made, and threats of sanctions are meaningless. The U.N. should strip its pretensious cover and reveal it is nothing but the League of Nations, Russia, China, N. Korea, and Venezuela can debate and vote as the “anti-American axis block” they are. 

The new UD should not prevent any country from taking action against another country independently. It will be a friendly, honest, respectful, and functional body of similar nations. But foremost it should be based on equality with each country carrying an equal amount of military personnel in it and share the operating costs equally. In essence, foundations where friends can seek help from other friends and offer aid to each other. NATO was created to prevent the Soviet Union from attacking Western Europe. That threat no longer existed during the Clinton/Bush administrations but is now reappearing with the weak noninterventionist Obama administration. So why have the old NATO today? Germany or France—flip a coin to see if they are on our side in the next conflict. Today they are, tomorrow they are not depending upon who is in charge.

Our very close military friends are no longer Atlantic bound, but rather global. Perhaps our new additional stronger allies lie in the Pacific and not just Europe. In the vast majority of recent conflicts, disputes, and challenges, we can most always depend on The U.K., Holland, Belgian, Poland, Australia, New Zealand, and Japan. We can always have a token bureaucrat at NATO and whine when another member wants help like they do to us. Let’s put our collective efforts with our “true” friends as just mentioned, in a more reflective name such as UD.

American politicians on the right and some moderates might be persuaded to endorse such a move because constituents are tired of trying to fix unsolvable religious political wars. We should enter into agreements with our new coalition partners with new trade zones. We should erase all tariffs and give tax breaks for import/export goods within the UD. We should agree to come to each others aid in the time of crisis with an equal number of soldiers, planes, and bombs. Educational visas should be easier to obtain within the coalition. Ongoing and more enhanced military training should be just that—ongoing, and not a yearly show for CNN or the newspapers. It should be in-depth, daily, and ongoing. *5.


We should reduce our participation in U.N. diplomatic and military interventions along with NATO operations. It no longer supports democratic nations and is merely a tool of anti-western culture. We should create a United Democracies (U.D.) with liked minded, free, open, and independent nations. Moderate Muslim countries should step up to the plate fully and solve Middle Eastern problems with their own blood, money, and time—The Kurds are doing it now. We are supporting them, but at what future cost *4? The U.S. and her true allies shouldn’t be trying to bring democracy to counties that will not allow or are unable to have it because of religious or social institutions. Middle Eastern countries have been fighting for 1,500 years; therefore it is obvious nothing will change. The problems there are political religious based wars.

No longer should America shoulder the burden in terms of blood and money to solve and resolve Muslim problems. It’s not our fight. If it’s about oil, we should stop buying it there—we have plenty to burn at home. If it’s about Islamic wars—what are we doing there? If it’s about attacks on American businesses there—why are they there? If it’s about attacks on American Embassies there—why do we have them there? Finally, we should drastically increase trade with our friends, decrease business investment with non-friends through the use of tariffs, and drastically reduce non-friends from entering our homeland.


*1. Foreign Terrorist Organization. June, 2015.

*2. Partial List of Coalition Partners. April, 2015.

*3. Article 5, NATO Treaty. Washington, D.C. April 4th, 1949.

*4. Shinkman, Paul D. Who Are the Kurds, and Why should we Help them? November 26, 2014.

*5. Kuch, Christopher B. Military Coalition Partners should be on Each other Ships. 2015, Veterans Today. January 19, 2016

Dr. Kuch holds a PhD, MA, and MS in criminal justice. He lives in Istanbul, Turkey and is on the adjunct faculty at Galatasaray University.

Misafir Profesör Christopher B. Kuch, Benim Telefonum Yok, Lutfen Esim Ayse'yi Arayin Es: Ayse Emily Mae Kuch, Cep: 536 588 63 69 Tel SOK, No 12, KAT-1, Beyoglu (Taksim), Katip Mustafa Celibi MAH, Istanbul, Turkiye 34433 Ev 011 90 (212) 292-5988 , Az Turkce Summer's: 909 E. 30th St. Erie, PA 16504 My Home: 1 (814) 455-5360

Receive News from Operation Disclosure via Email

Shoutbox Disclaimer

Please be advised that the Shoutbox is NOT moderated. Use it at your own will.