A good arrangement

In the previous article and in Appendix 44, an arrangement of countries / areas in four Coalitions was presented. This is a VERY GOOD ARRANGEMENT, ONE of the BEST if not the BEST of all. Each Coalition has an advanced area as the pole. A has Western Europe, B has China, C has North America and D Eastern Europe. China does not have high per capita income but is technologically very advanced and has economic strength. Eastern Pacific can also be added as a pole in D.

It is important to have an advanced area as a pole because it can assist less advanced areas in their development. A Coalition is not like NWO's Unions or AntiNWO's Groups. Relations in Coalitions are loose. Countries already have economic relations with other countries in many parts of the world. With Coalitions, they will focus more on the countries / areas that are in their Coalition.

Placing in Coalitions separate countries that are not in continuous areas in not prohibited. However it should be avoided and have it only when there is no other way. With the arrangement that was presented, we have continuous areas. Not only that but the countries in two Coalitions, B and D, are in a single continuous area. The other two, A and C, have two continuous areas. There may be only one exception.

Israel has not been placed in any Coalition yet. Obviously it can't be placed in Coalition B with Turkey and Iran. But it could be placed in Coalition D, either with Eastern Europe or with the countries of Arab Peninsula. Another alternative is to place Israel in North America's Coalition C. Since the population is small, it will not change much the Coalitions' percentage. In that case, Israel will be the only country not in a continuous area.

There are no Groups in Coalitions of Countries. But divisions and subdivisions are highly recommended. This is a matter of internal organization in each Coalition that does not concern the other three. Obviously, in a division, relations will be closer. So it is important how these divisions will be. It is also a matter or internal organization, how close relations between divisions will be.

Coalition D can have seven divisions. We present them clockwise. The first, Division D1 can be all Eastern Europe, except Russia and Belarus. These two countries will be in the second Division D2 with ACA, Azerbaijan - Central Asia (Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Turkmenistan). They are in Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS). Georgia and Armenia can be in that division or in D1 with most Eastern European countries.

Eastern Pacific (Japan, S. Korea, Australia, New Zealand, Papua) can be a third Division D3. ASEAN can be one division. It is better if there are two divisions, D4 and D5, so that their populations are more equal with the other five. Subsaharan countries can be Division D6 and Arab countries D7. There are not big differences in the populations of the seven divisions.

There could also be subdivisions. For instance, Ukraine, Poland, Czechia and Baltic countries can be northern Subdivision D1a. The rest of the Eastern European countries in Division D1 will be southern Subdivision D1b. Also Russia and Belarus can be Subdivision D2a and ACA Subdivision D2b. Armenia and Georgia can be in D2a or in southern Subdivision D1b.

In Coalition C, the first Divsion C1 can be North America. This will include USA, Canada, Greenland, Iceland. Also British Isles (UK, Ireland) will be in that division, if they are in Coalition C. Division C2 will be the central Group in AntiNWO's Grouping B and Division C3 the southern, Mercosur+. In Subsaharan Africa, there can be two or three divisions. Also there can be divisions in Coalitions A and B.

With this arrangement, all or most of Western European countries are in A. British Isles may be in C. All American countries are together in C. There is also the largest part of Subsaharan Africa. All Eastern European countries are together in D. Most of Arab countries are also in D. Most BRICS and most Asian countries are placed in Coalitions B and D.

It is a good arrangement for USA and Canada. According to NWO's very stupid plan, they will be in American Union, with the rest of the countries in American continent. That would be around one billion people. With this arrangment, they get additionally most of Subsaharan Africa, on the western side. Western Africa is the area that is closest to the American continent. Most likely they will get British Isles as well, if Subsaharan Africa is in Coalition C.

Instead of a Union with one billion, they get a Coalition with two billion. Most importantly, a Coalition is nothing like NWO's Union. American Union would be exactly like EU, with free movement of people, products, services and capital. In Coalition C, they can have closer relations in their North American Division C1 and determine how close the relations with the other divisions will be.

It is a good arrangement for Western Europe as well. Western European countries can be Division A1 and have closer relations. In NWO's very stupid plan, EU would have roughly six hundred million people. In adddition to Western Europe, only Division D1 would be included. In AntiNWO's plan, they get almost ten times D1. Only the five Asian countries (Bangladesh, Nepal, Bhutan, Sri Lanka, Maldives) have more population than D1. In addition, they get India.

Coalition A, as any Coalition is more than three times larger than what EU would be according to NWO's very stupid plan. Instead of having many smaller countries, they get one with very large population, India. As a matter of fact, it may be easier to deal with one big country than with many smaller ones. It is also possible that USA may choose India for Coalition C. In that case, Western Europe will get in Coalition A, Mercosur+, most of Subsaharan Africa and British Isles.

This is a good arrangement for BRICS too. All eleven countries barely fit into two Coaltions because they have almost half (48,93%) of the world's population. Only 1 - 2% more could be added. That would be only a few relatively small countries. It would not be a good arrangement because BRICS countries are not in continuous areas, they are scattered.

Obviously, there could be modifications in the arrangement recommended. Countries or areas with roughly equal population can be exchanged between two Coaltions. For instance, Division C3 (Mercosur+) has roughly the same population with Division D6 (Subsaharan). If D6 is swaped for C3, Coalition C will have all Subsaharan Africa (except Sudan, Somalia, Djibouti, Comoros). Not only areas but countries can be exchanged. However modifications do not seem necessary.

It seems that the arrangement is as good as it can get. Decision makers should agree on that arrangement, with or without modifications. Uncertainty is not good and NWO's very stupid plan has to end. After the decision is made, countries can focus more on their Coalition. Obviously Coaltions will not be isolated from the rest and there will be relations between countries in different Coaltions.