When a soldier dies during the war he is considered a hero, that is if the war was imposed on his country and he needs to defend it, however, when that soldier dies during a war to "defend his country's interests" he needs to be more vigilant before joining the military on what do those 'interests' mean exactly?
Soldiers fighting for their G.O.D (Gold, Oil, and Drugs)
The most active army during the past 7 decades and all over the world is the US army, the irony is that nobody invaded the USA, nobody even thought of doing so, and the so-called 'terrorist attacks' against the USA, like the 9/11, are more controversial than the wars itself with many pointing the fingers of false flags and at best, the US intelligence agencies already knew of the attacks beforehand or they are the ones who created, funded, armed, and trained the terrorists!
The above picture explains one of the main reasons the US went to war during the past 7 decades, there are other reasons, this one stands out as there's no justification at all for them, like the wars on Iraq, Libya, et al, and the only reason cited is 'defending the US interests', whose interests exactly? Obviously, the large oil cartels in the USA and their international partners.
Those soldiers dying in such wars are no heroes, they are not defending their country, they are invading and destroying other countries to steal its resources, and the ironic part is the families of these 'fallen soldiers' are not benefiting at all from the resources stolen.
Image source: New Syria FB page.
US soldiers fighting for their G.O.D. and going to hell for their war crimes.
I agree a 100%.
Understanding that there is a financial elite that manipulated the news media, and as such the people of the USA is a great first step in understanding how the world works.
Congratulation.
Next step would be to understand that they manipulate all countries. They either control the leaders, presidents of countries or find ways to undermined them.
They even spy on their so called allies, such as on Merkel of Germany and the phone tapping scandal not so long ago.
If they can't the leader must go. Examples in the middle east would be Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein. Current still living examples are Assad of Syria, and Erdoğan of Turkey. Both these leaders are not great to begin with, adding falls narratives and lies by the news media turned them in to a liability for the people. However bad each of these leaders are, people understand that the alternative will be far worst.
One thing you don't seam to understand fully yet:
These financial elites, are not one single group, but many groups that most of the time are at odds with each other.
But currently they seam to be in consensus about Assad and Erdogan.
In other words Erdogan and Assad need to put their differences aside, and collaborate or sooner or later they will be replaced by puppets.
The people of Turkey do understand that Erdogan has become a liability, and they will replace him in 2023, next general elections. Assad is running out of time, Assads best bet is Erdogan. And who knows what 2023 will bring to Turkey.
But we know what will happen if Assad does not collaborate with Erdogan. Syria will become a Russian puppet state.
Syria has never been a puppet to any country, unlike what Erdogan did when he submitted to George W. Bush in exchange for a 'leading role in the Greater Middle East project' as he himself admitted, Greater Middle East means Greater Israel.
Watch him: https://syrianews.cc/erdogan-tool-hands-zionists/
The only bet Erdogan has is to apologize to Syria and Assad specifically and work out how he will compensate Syria for the damages of his failed policies, if he doesn't do so he will lose, then who will come after him will have to apologize and find a way to compensate Syria. It's a genocide and we won't forget or forgive.