The death of Henry Kissinger has brought obituaries that stepped across the usual plaudits to describe him as a “notorious war criminal” and “state murderer” according to Rolling Stone, responsible for every death in the final seven years of the Vietnam War. Elsewhere he was described as a “colossus on the world stage”, a “dominating and polarising force in US foreign policy”. Fox News said he was “revered and controversial, praised by supporters as a brilliant strategist and condemned by critics as a master manipulator”. In France, Le Monde said Mr Kissinger was “scathing, even contemptuous, but he knew how to charm those he needed”, and used a diplomatic technique “between cynicism and seduction, brutality and skill”.
He was born 27 May 1923 5.30am Furth, Germany, with German-Jewish parents who fled Nazi persecution with the family in 1938. He studied political science at Harvard after doing military service and stayed in academia before becoming Secretary of State under Richard Nixon and Gerald Ford.
He had a 12th house Sun Mercury in Gemini, making him adept at backroom dealing. But what marked his chart were two other placings. One was a sparsely aspected Mars in Gemini just below his Ascendant, making him adept at communication, uncompromising and a tendency to go non stop. The other even more significant was a Water Grand Trine of an unconventional 10th house Uranus trine Pluto trine Jupiter in his 5th, formed into a Kite by Jupiter opposition Venus. Water Grand Trines can be creative or healing or wrap the individual in their own bubble of reality. The Jupiter opposition Venus would give him superficial charm even if his underlying motives were not so amiable. Neptune in the 3rd would definitely be slippery and evasive.
He had a reputation as a playboy which his Venus in Taurus Jupiter aspect would feed into. But he was emotionally edgy with his Moon widely conjunct a 5th house Saturn and trine Mars – so not entirely at ease with women.
He was an odd mix with Nixon, 9 January 193 9.35pm Whittier Junction, CA. Admittedly Nixon’s Aquarius Moon was conjunct Kissinger’s Midheaven which makes sense of a political partnership. But Nixon’s ruthless Mars in Sagittarius opposition Pluto collided with Kissinger’s Mars which was mirrored in their relationship chart with a composite Sun Mars square Pluto – as long as the energy was turned outwards into ruthless/brutal/bullying actions their togetherness would be cemented. But if that energy ever turned into their relationship they would have killed each other. Nixon’s Midheaven fell in his 12th and Nixon’s Capricorn Sun in his 8th – so much going on in secret to suit Nixon’s Machiavellian tendencies.
Kissinger was undoubtedly a force to be reckoned with with a strong and fairly brutal global superstar 22nd harmonic; and a war-mongering 9th harmonic – power was what he enjoyed wielding. His astrocartography points to Vietnam and China as being his key areas.
I think he was a really hard man and I will leave it there. Well worth listening to politically.
@ Unmystic Mom: Excellent observations and questions. I, too, would like to know more about how this connection to anti-Jewish persecution has affected U.S. foreign policy.
It would also be interesting to include in the analysis Henry Morgenthau Jr., Franklin Roosevelt’s treasury secretary and friend, and the only member of his Cabinet who was Jewish. Morgenthau’s father had been a U.S. ambassador during the Wilson administration and had started a private foundation to aid the victims of the Armenian Genocide in Turkey in the early 1900s.
The son, who was reluctant to make an issue of his Jewishness in light of widespread antisemitism in the 1930s and 1940s, eventually overcame his reluctance and confronted Roosevelt after learning that his Treasury Department’s payments intended to aid European Jews during World War II were being withheld or diverted by the U.S. State Department, and that the State Department was blocking reports back to Washington about the murder of Jews by the Nazis.
As a result of Morgenthau’s efforts, Roosevelt took aid to European Jewry out of the hands of the State Department in 1944, creating the War Refugee Board to administer funds and spearhead efforts to rescue survivors.
Way back when I came across a paper about when USA policy became more pro-Israel – it was after one of the early skirmishes – the Yom Kippur War or one of the others when the USA woke up to the fact that Israel could hold its own as a democracy in the Arab world. And what’s more could be useful in testing US weapons. If I ever find time I might dig it out.
The argument being not that the USA was necessarily pro-Jewish more that Israel was a bulwark against Arab nations whom the US saw as a threat.
Found it
USA – groups with a vested interest in supporting Israel. There is an unholy alliance of the arms industry, the Christian Right, the Jewish lobby and no effective protesting voice.
There’s a decent 2002 paper on why the US supports Israel which makes as much sense today.
[https://fpif.org/why_the_us_supports_israel/
WHY THE U.S. SUPPORTS ISRAEL
In the United States and around the world, many are questioning why, despite some mild rebukes, Washington has maintained its large-scale military, financial, and diplomatic support for the Israeli occupation in the face of unprecedented violations of international law and human rights standards by Israeli occupation forces.
By Stephen Zunes | May 1, 2002
Foreign Policy in Focus]
** The sentimental attachment many liberals–particularly among the post-war generation in leadership positions in government and the media–have for Israel.
** The Christian Right, with tens of millions of followers and a major base of support for the Republican Party, has thrown its immense media and political clout in support for Ariel Sharon and other right-wing Israeli leaders. Based in part on a messianic theology that sees the ingathering of Jews to the Holy Land as a precursor for the second coming of Christ, the battle between Israelis and Palestinians is, in their eyes, simply a continuation of the battle between the Israelites and the Philistines, with God in the role of a cosmic real estate agent who has deemed that the land belongs to Israel alone.
** Mainstream and conservative Jewish organizations have mobilized considerable lobbying resources.
** The arms industry, which contributes five times more money to congressional campaigns and lobbying efforts than AIPAC and other pro-Israel groups, has considerable stake in supporting massive arms shipments to Israel and other Middle Eastern allies of the United States.
** The widespread racism toward Arabs and Muslims so prevalent in American society, often perpetuated in the media.
** The failure of progressive movements in the United States to challenge U.S. policy toward Israel and Palestine in an effective manner.
Strategic Reasons for Continuing U.S. Support
There is a broad bipartisan consensus among policymakers that Israel has advanced U.S. interest in the Middle East and beyond.
� Israel has successfully prevented victories by radical nationalist movements in Lebanon and Jordan, as well as in Palestine.
� Israel has kept Syria, for many years an ally of the Soviet Union, in check.
� Israel’s air force is predominant throughout the region.
� Israel’s frequent wars have provided battlefield testing for American arms, often against Soviet weapons.
� It has served as a conduit for U.S. arms to regimes and movements too unpopular in the United States for openly granting direct military assistance, such as apartheid South Africa, the Islamic Republic in Iran, the military junta in Guatemala, and the Nicaraguan Contras. Israeli military advisers have assisted the Contras, the Salvadoran junta, and foreign occupation forces in Namibia and Western Sahara.
� Israel’s intelligence service has assisted the U.S. in intelligence gathering and covert operations.
� Israel has missiles capable of reaching as far as the former Soviet Union, it possesses a nuclear arsenal of hundreds of weapons, and it has cooperated with the U.S. military-industrial complex with research and development for new jet fighters and anti-missile defense systems.
hello Marjorie,
I’m still numb from reading this long list.
I’d like to read the article you have a link too, but it takes me to the website…. however, it says, “no results found”.
would you have the title of that article? maybe I can search for that.
thanks!
Hi Have amended above. They had obviously shifted it on their website since it was quite an old study.
excellent!.. thank-you.
There is also a scathing article on Kissinger in The Intercept.
My American husband just read most of that out loud tonight.
A lot about his personality.
How interesting… Jimmy Carter and Henry Kissinger.. .same era.
https://fpif.org/why_the_us_supports_israel/
Pluto in Capricorn last month begins as it exists seems it’s taking away all satrun blessed long living 100yr olds…Charlie munger n now Kissinger…would b interesting to list n watch how December last month of plutos Capricorn bids goodbye since by one reaches 100, there comes a sense of being immortal ..both to outsiders n self..observed in many i knew
Non-astrological comment: Both Kissinger and Madeleine Albright, two of the more influential Secretaries of State in recent times, were Jewish child refugees from Eastern Europe, who were impacted directly or indirectly (Madeleine Albright was raised Catholic because her parents had converted from Judaism to Roman Catholicism) by the antisemitism of the Nazi era and its immediate aftermath.
To what extent is US foreign policy still impacted and shaped by the life-stories of these two recent behemoths of US foreign policy?
The current US Secretary of State is also descended from Eastern European Jews, though their migration was before WWII and likely caused by programs against Jews in the Russian Empire. As his paternal family hails from Kyiv, the war there must impact him personally.
@ Unmystic Mom,
I agree that Henry Kissinger was atrocious when it came to U.S. foreign policy. I never liked him…nor did I ever agree with him. However, I disagree with framing Madeliene Albright as a behemoth. I agreed with her position on Serbia and Kosovo 100%. far-right Ethnic Serbian nationalism was at its worst in the 1990s and it lead to the Republika Srpska separatists living in Northern Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as the 1995 Srebrenica Massacre where over 8,000 ethnic Bosniaks (Slavic Muslims) were murdered by Serb nationalists simply because they were Sunni Muslims and seen as relics of the Ottoman past.
And in 1998, Serb nationalists began their ethnic cleansing campaign against the Indigenous ethnic Albanians, Goranis (another Slavic Muslim ethnic group), & Romani Gypsies in occupied Kosovo. They targeted historic mosques and other landmarks built during the Ottoman Period. Most ethnic Albanians and Romani Gypsies in Kosovo are Sunni Muslims like the ethnic Bosniaks….so, I don’t think it was a coincidence the Serbs targeted all of these ethnic groups.
I was a teenager in the 1990s, but I was just as passionate about world events and International Relations back then as I am now (and I’m in my early 40s now). I supported Madeleine Albright’s position on Kosovo…and I also supported NATO’s intervention in the region. Serbia had to be stopped.
I think do the trauma of having her own family experience the Holocaust and fascism in Central Europe in the 1930s and 1940s probably was a catalyst for Madeleine Albright to take such a firm stance against leaders like Slobodan Milošević – who she likely saw as having the potential of becoming another Adolf Hitler (at least in a regional capacity).
It is disgusting to call these people behemoths . They were smart people with weaknesses . Trying to connect what ever you see as weakness to Judaism is called antisemitism and is not related to Astrology.
She may have meant colossus….
I am lost as to why calling somebody a behemoth is an insult. It is a compliment with regards to their stature in a particular field.
Indeed, as Anna has mentioned above, it is synonymous with colossus.
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/behemoth
The current US Secretary of State is the grandson of Maurice Blinken.
His NYTimes obituary says the following:
“In 1946, under Mr. Blinken’s direction, the institute initiated and financed a report by several economists, ”Palestine: Problem and Promise,” which argued that an independent Jewish state was economically viable.
“This rebutted a British white paper that contended Palestine could not economically support a large immigrant population.
“The institute’s report is said to have helped persuade the United States Government to support the establishment of the State of Israel.”
So Anthony Blinken is not an honest broker in this.
The only honest broker is David Cameron, who is unconnected to either side and gave a very fair speech about the need to curb the settlers in the West Bank. He made the point that unless Palestinians are secure from theft and harassment, Israel won’t be either.
No-one else has made this point. Good on Dave!