AntiNWO’s Plan B2
AntiNWO's Plan B2
In NWO's highly defective plan from the Dark Ages there are four Unions, European, African, Asian, American. There are big differences in the populations of the four Unions. Asian Union has more than seven times larger population than European. Also there is considerable heterogeneity that increases as the Unions' population increases. Asian Union has the most heterogeneity.
In AntiNWO's Plan A, there are 10+2 Groups; 1) North America 2) South & Central America 3) Western Europe 4) Eastern Europe & ACA 5) Arab Group 6) Northern Subsaharan Africa 7) Southern Subsaharan Africa 8) Southwestern Asia 9) Northeastern Asia 10) Southeastern Asia & Oceania 11) India 12) China. ACA is Azerbaijan and Central Asian countries. Instead of North-South, there can be East-West division in Eastern Asia and Subsaharan Africa.
The ten (10) Groups have roughly equal population, around half a billion. They are a lot more homogeneous than NWO's Unions. There can be four Coalitions of Groups; 1) China + 1 Group 2) India + 1 Group 3) 4 Groups 4) 4 Groups. These are optional and resemble the four Unions of NWO's ridiculous plan. Unlike in NWO's plan, the four Coalitions will have roughly equal populations, around two billion people each.
This is the grouping (plan) AntiNWO recommends and currently SUPPORTS. Nevertheless, Plan B is also acceptable. In that case, Groups can be SMALLER and even more HOMOGENEOUS but COALITIONS are NOT OPTIONAL anymore. The Groups should be within a population range. When the range is smaller, there is more equality in terms of population. As the range gets bigger, eveness decreases but flexibility increases.
The Groups that make up one Coalition do not need to have geographical proximity. So in AntiNWO's Plan B, there are four Coalitions with two billion people each. Coalitions consist of Groups that do not have equal size or geographic proximity. AntiNWO's Plan B2 is an even more flexible variation of Plan B. There is only one requirement, four Coalitions with roughly equal populations.
Since the world's population is eight billion (8 B), each Coalition will have roughly two billion (2B). Each Coalition will consist of GROUPS and COUNTRIES ANYWHERE in the WORLD. No geographic proximity is needed and there is no range in the Groups' populations, only an upper limit. Groups can have as low population as they want but an upper limit must be set.
Eventhough Groups and countries in a Coalition do not need to have geographic proximity, countries of a Group must. It makes sense. Existing relations between countries can be taken into consideration when forming Coalitions. Plan B2 offers ENORMOUS FLEXIBILITY. Like Plan B, Plan B2 is not a specific plan but a process that could be followed. The result of this process will be a specific plan (grouping).
In AntiNWO's Plan A, there are only two countries that are not in Groups, China and India. This is because their population is enormous. In Plan B2, any country, even a small one, can participate in a Coalition without being in a Group. It is OPTIONAL for countries to BE in GROUPS. It is recommended, especially for smaller ones but not necessary. A country can be a member of a Coalition without being a member of a Group.
We will give some examples to make it better understood. In Plan A, Eastern European Group is divided into two Subgroups, A and B. In each Subgroup there are two Regions, A1 and A2 in A, B1 and B2 in B. This is shown in Table B of Appendix 11. In Plan B2, the two Subgroups or the four Regions can be Groups. These Groups can be in the same Coalition or in different Coalitions.
Also Western European Group is divided into two Subgroups. Table A of Appendix 15 presents the North - South division while Table B presents the West - East division. These two Subgroups can be Groups and participate in the same or in different Coalitions. Currently, UK, Norway, Switzerland, Iceland are not in EU. They could participate in a Coalition without being in a Group.
In South America, there are two Groups; Mercosur, Andean Community. Parlacen is the Group of Central America. It could include Mexico as well. These existing Groups can be in the same or in different Coalitions. In Africa, there are four Groups, CEMAC, ECOWAS, IGAD, SADC. Again, these four Groups can be in the same or in different Coalitions. Likewise, African Arab countries can be one Group and Asian Arab countries another.
Plan B2 is similar to what was explained in "Coalitions building blocks". The difference is that countries of any size can also be building blocks of Coalitions. What was explained in "AntiNWO's Groups ready" is very useful to understand how the Coalitions in Plan B2 can be build. In that article, Groups that are ready or almost ready are explained. ASEAN, mentioned in the article, can participate as a building block of a Coalition (as it is).
USA is a big country and Israel a small one. Like China and India, USA does not have to be in a Group. There were a few options explained regarding Israel's placement. As it was clearly demonstrated in the Gaza war, Israel has very close relations with USA. In AntiNWO's Plan B2, Israel can be in the same Coalition with USA, without being in any Group. Of course, if they want to be in a Group, they could but that Group may not be in the same Coalition with USA.
In Eastern Europe's Orthodox countries, many people support an Orthodox Group. This Group could be a building block of a Coalition. The population of Catholics is 1,4 billion. Catholic countries could be in one Coalition. There are around 2 billion Muslims in the world. Muslim countries can form a Coalition that consists of Groups and countries. We must point out that all the population of a country should be counted. Orthodox, Catholics, Muslims etc are not 100% of the population in a country.
Although both Plan B and Plan B2 offer a lot of flexibility, it is questionalbe if AntiNWO's decision makers can agree on an option that has more support than Plan A. People need a specific plan to compare with NWO's ridiculous plan. Although highly defective, the grouping is specific, four Unions. AntiNWO's supporters need a specific plan to use as a compass or a roadmap, so that they know where they are going.
Until AntiNWO's decision makers reach an agreement regarding an option in Plan B or Plan B2, if it ever happens, AntiNWO's PROPOSAL REMAINS PLAN A. An IMPORTANT issue is also the TIME needed. Suppose that AntiNWO's decision makers can reach an agreement on an option of Plan B or Plan B2 but it takes too long. This will not work at all because AntiNWO's plan must proceed as soon as possible.
So decision makers should be able to reach SOON an agreement regarding an option of Plan B or Plan B2, if they can. Otherwise, they should PROCEED with PLAN A which has HUGE SUPPORT. The support for Plan B or Plan B2 can't be measured because currently they are only a process that could lead to a specific grouping. A process can't be compared with NWO's grouping which is specific.
Only those that SUPPORT AntiNWO's PLAN can PARTICIPATE In DECISION MAKING. AntiNWO's Plan is NOT ONLY A but ALSO B and B2. Western Europe is the area that mainly supports NWO's ridiculous plan and will be excluded from decision making. All NWO's SUPPORTERS will be in a QUARANTINE. Probably, they will be placed in a Pseudo-Coalition. Only AntiNWO's SUPPORTERS will DETERMINE the FUTURE STRUCTURE of WORLD AFFAIRS.
Final European Groups Endless alternatives Example of Plan B AntiNWO's Plan B 1 Sets and categories AntiNWO's world structure The tournament will be over A feasible combination A compromising combination Coalitions' supplement Groups' support for AntiNWO Process for Coalitions Coalitions' cases Coalitions' formation