I gave a lecture in Moscow during the spring about western-Soviet relations over the last century. With the partial exception of World War II, it is a narrative of unrelenting hostility. After I had finished, a student asked, «why do they hate us so?» The answer is not complicated. You cannot cross «da man» in the United States, that is, the powerful, wealthy US «deep state», which sets the rules for everyone else and enforces its worldwide hegemony against disobedient states and leaders.
It is a basic tenet of the three Semitic Death Cults that they must have Armageddon to force the return of their Messiah .
I place more emphasis on this fact than I put on making excuses and rationalizations for the underlying thrust of world affairs.
That they all protest that they are all about peace and love is belied by their actions. Handsome is as handsome does.
Do I expect these few words to undermine The very foundation of the three Semitic Death Cults? Not at all. I expect them to double down on their protestations of goodness.
And because Atheism leaves a hole that must be filled, it is not the answer.
Remember that these desert religions have been offered to us on the end of a sward for a mere 1300 years and we have been Asatru for 40 000 years I urge everyone to.
Abandon the three Semitic Death Cults, return to the religion of your ancestors, Asatru.
It has served us well for 2, 222 generations. It will serve us well into the future.
Asatru dose not command, it advises. You are the embodiment of your ancestors. Listen in quite woods for their advice and council. They will not give bad advice. Your future is their future.
Thanks for thinking and for your reply: I don't believe we will achieve much it's too late; with automatic feedback's annihilating ecosystems and out of control madness in the population. But some of the responsible will pay a price for their involvement, and if (in a parallel universe where man still have balls) there were more groups to have this goal: who knows maybe we could’ve throw the pirates to the ocean, take over the shipwreck and steer it back to calmer waters.
Maybe the Russians are preparing for a natural disaster as stated, and maybe others should too.
Google " I emailed SLOOH Astronomer Paul Cox…"
Also: Zeta Talk.com
I too rush to judgment sometimes. Of course I'm concerned about what's happening over Syria, but I agree with Dave here on the nuclear outcome.
What has changed since the Cold War that suddenly we are at risk of nuclear war? Are we really that hungry for Syria's energy resources that we're willing to engage in conflict with Russia? I doubt it. However, both sides need justification for increases or at the very least, maintenance of state spending. It also serves a convenient distraction and scape goat for the elite. Last decade it was the terrorists; now it is the Russians and Chinese. If we don't do this (spy on all Americans, build a new stealth jet, you name it) - they win!
There's been a marked turn around in the DoD CONOPs. A lot of R&D technology (proportion of $$$) went from things like force protection and IED detection/diffusal to supporting a littoral or ground war with Russia/China. It's scary to think about, but at the end of the day, it's probably just an excuse for building more toys than the other guy, much like it was post WW2 with nukes. If we're lucky some of this wasted energy will transition to civilian purposes…
"Some on Congress and the Senate are watching and saying openly what should be obvious; any attack on Assad/Russia could have serious consequences and that an declaration of war would be needed from Congress before such bombing could be undertaken."
Since when has Obama gone through congress for anything? He has 10's of thousand of refugees pouring in to the USA, despite no approval to do so. He knows that Congress will not act against them. Congress thinks that if the go after Obama, that it will the tipping point that starts a race war and mass riots.
What Congress needs to do its make it crystal clear to top brass that no further action can be done in Syria or any action in the ME or with Russia, without Congressional approval, bypass Obama's ability to once again circumnavigate Congress.
It seems to me that, with this analysis, you've surpassed yourself. Congratulations! It seems to me, you've turned a corner and started to realize that the contents of "the next 20 years being entirely different than the past 20 years", might have more to do with the fallout of geopolitical conflicts than the sterile consequences of your EEE-analysis (which remains at the root of all anyway). ....
I've come to believe that the decline of industrial civilization will be accompanied, somehow, by some sort of conflagration (authentic or orchestrated) that will get … out of control.
So it seems that the crises in the 3Es is driving all this change. But the details of the change now involve watching the political and economic dramas, too. The Neocon's, false flags, alliances, wars, population migrations, resource availability, etc.
Perhaps similar to a bunch of intoxicated 4th of July revelers riding inner tubes down a river. Every one is having fun and drinking beer. Then the river is picks up velocity and big rocks have appeared ahead…
Matt Bracken is a former Special Forces soldier and is active in the liberty movement. He has a rich imagination and writes about various scenarios for the future.
A couple of theme come up in Bracken's writing repeatedly:
1. The use of food supply as a social control weapon by "Mr Tyranny." Closing highways to stop the delivery of food will kill people as surely as shooting them. [This increases by desire to build a large green house, both for extending the growing season and protection of the soil from nuclear fallout.]
2. Attacks on the electric grid shut off the "oxygen" of civilization. He imagines quite a few variations on both international and domestic conflict pattern and ALL OF THEM involve somebody cutting electricity. It is such a powerful leverage point to bring down a city or a nation. Analogous to the Saudi's bombing Yemen's water infrastructure.
You mention that there are at least a dozen ways that our electrical grid could be disrupted. What do you see as the most likely causes for grid-down?
Anything from a solar flare to a cyber-war with a national entity could take down the grid. In the event of a civil war, there will be a strong urban vs. rural dynamic, and one way that rural participants will strike at their urban antagonists will be to strike at the grid carrying power to the cities. The Metcalf power station incidents in California last year seem to have been a dry run or proof of concept drill. A dozen teams of riflemen could put our grid at danger with a coordinated attack.
Groups from the former Sendero Luminoso in Peru to the Sinaloa Cartel in Mexico to Al Qaeda in Yemen have attacked major power grids. In America, we have allowed electricity to become our oxygen, and it’s naive to expect that in any type of future war, (civil, international, or terrorist), antagonists will not attempt to cut off that oxygen and kill their enemies en masse. Our power grid is our exposed jugular vein.
A couple of post-EMP novels would be a good way to live into this very difficult to imagine world without electricity.
[quote]Russia's military has test-fired three intercontinental ballistic missiles amid increasing tensions with the US on a range of issues, particularly the Syrian crisis.
The Russian Defense Ministry said the Russian forces fired a nuclear-capable rocket from a Pacific Fleet submarine in the Sea of Okhotsk north of Japan on Wednesday.
A Topol missile was further shot off from a submarine in the Barents Sea, while a third was launched from an inland site in the country's northwest, Russian news agencies reported.
The launches come at a time when relations between Russia and the US have hit their lowest point in years following the collapse of a ceasefire in Syria.
‘Russia drills pose no threat to anyone’
In another development on Wednesday, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu accused the West of trying to portray his country’s military exercises as threats, saying the drills are no source of concern but rather part of usual combat training measures.[/quote]
ZH reports that the Sunday Times indicates that the Royal Air Force has given its pilots the OK to shoot down Russian planes over Syria and Iraq that shoot at them or "if he believes he is about to be fired on."
"We have to protect ourselves" [as we slaughter others] they stated.
I also heard a brief report that the USA has begun bombing Yemen on behalf of Saudi Arabia.
All this looks to me that "someone" wants a war with Russia. Should this happen, all of our lives will be touched.
[quote=sand_puppy]ZH reports that the Sunday Times indicates that the Royal Air Force has given its pilots the OK to shoot down Russian planes over Syria and Iraq that shoot at them or "if he believes he is about to be fired on."
"We have to protect ourselves" [as we slaughter others] they stated.
I also heard a brief report that the USA has begun bombing Yemen on behalf of Saudi Arabia.
All this looks to me that "someone" wants a war with Russia. Should this happen, all of our lives will be touched.
[/quote]
Just to be clear, this is from an article from last October (2015).
I remembered it because we discussed it here.
Of course it was a major provocation/escalation back then, but it’s not a new escalation now.
As a final note, I do not recall hearing about it being rescinded, so presumably the RAF still has the green light to shoot. I may be wrong about that.
Thanks for the clarification, Chris.
The RAF green light to its pilots to shoot Russian planes was reported this morning on ZH but the source article 1 year old. The implication was that this was something new or different.
(I didn't look at the source article. I guess I had better do that next time. It is so hard to keep things in perspective.)
The Next Crash is coming. Equity markets (especially U.S. markets) have been pumped up to bubble levels. Bond markets (especially the U.S. bond market) have been pumped up to absurd, bubble levels … monetary criminality of the grossly excessive currency-creation by Western central banks.
The crime syndicate itself must always appear blameless in these bubble-and-crash cycles……
…[T]he oligarchs have made their choice: Queen Hillary. And this takes us back to the Next Crash, and the second reason why the One Bank will apparently choose a geopolitical trigger.
For these reasons, it is important that Queen Clinton and the rest of her regime have an external Boogeyman who can/will be blamed as the source of the Next Crash. …
Enter Russia.
… Plan B appears to be to make Russia the scapegoat for the Next War, as the official cause of the Next Crash.
[quote]"All of this—the aggressive exercises, the NATO buildup, the added US troop deployments—reflects a new and dangerous strategic outlook in Washington. Whereas previously the strategic focus had been on terrorism and counterinsurgency, it has now shifted to conventional warfare among the major powers. “Today’s security environment is dramatically different than the one we’ve been engaged in for the last 25 years,” observed Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter on February 2, when unveiling the Pentagon’s $583 billion budget for fiscal year 2017. Until recently, he explained, American forces had largely been primed to defeat insurgent and irregular forces, such as the Taliban in Afghanistan. Now, however, the Pentagon was being readied for “a return to great-power competition,” including the possibility of all-out combat with “high-end enemies” like Russia and China."
"It’s hard to know where to begin when commenting on all this, given the atmosphere of Cold War hysteria. There is, first of all, the question of proportionality: are US and NATO moves on the eastern flank in keeping with the magnitude of the threat posed by Russia? Russian intervention in Crimea and eastern Ukraine is certainly provocative and repugnant, but cannot unequivocally be deemed a direct threat to NATO. Other Russian moves in the region, such as incursions by Russian ships and planes into the airspace and coastal waters of NATO members, are more worrisome, but appear to be more political messaging than a prelude to invasion. Basically, it’s very hard to imagine a scenario in which Russia would initiate an armed attack on NATO."[/quote]
The best part about this article is the comments it has received. Here are a sample:
[quote=Ronald Rodarte] The architect of the neoconservative war for profit economic theory, Dr. Paul Wolfowitz, kept a specific fondness for the causes of war - the tripwires and situations that caused the conflagrations and the reasons for intractability. During the development of his theory, he taught courses in economics at UCSB, one which I was enrolled in during the summer of 1976, entitled "Economics of War". The reading material and discussions discussed how nations enter into war so deeply and profoundly committed to intangible reasons that pulling back was an impossibility. This is key in the proposition by Wolfowitz that war is necessary to provide an engine to the "capitalist democracy" of the post Vietnam economy in the perception that global markets could not expand further, that no new markets would be available - so indeed the aspect of war as an economic driver was his brilliant insanity for the neoconservative economic policy.
We are witnessing the principal chapter of the economic madness designed by Dr. Paul Wolfowitz, in the similar global political and economic distresses of the beginnings of the 20th and 21st centuries, issues caused at both centuries by a rampant capitalist economic system run amok without regulation or responsibility, with corruption and injustice as the status-quo norm.
If we read the game plan from Dr. Paul Wolfowitz, and maybe the book "Why Nations Go to War" that was part of the reading assignment for Dr. Wolfowitz' students, the process we will see develop can be read like the script it actually is. These days it is the success of the wagging of the dog that is the most important perception to impress on a citizenry to achieve an end game of capitalist interests, that of consuming the remaining assets on a planet dying from an economic parasite that is systemic unregulated capitalism, now fully engorged on the neoconservative diet of war to profit - at anybody's cost, even the entire planet.[/quote]
[quote=W R Earnest]This is an astonishingly poor article by Klare. For him not to even mention the failure of the US and NATO to recognize the early 90s agreement with the Soviets not to expand NATO and instead move to expand when Russia was prostrate following the breakup of the SU, is simply derelict.
Only by understanding that expansion can you begin to appreciate why Russia has moved, defensively, to support the rebels in the eastern Ukraine and to annex Crimea after Nuland and the neocons - – remember "F— the EU"? — engineered a coup. Klare, lazily decontextualizing, instead treats these Russian actions as provocations that seem to require some reaction by NATO, which he feels is now going too far.
In my view, instead of helping to bring attention to this emerging disaster – if we don't have war, we'll certainly have more resources wasted on war spending – Klare essentially accepts the ideological premises that will be used to justify it. Simply shameful and Klare, who is capable of much better, should be embarrassed over his failure to address plausible Russian strategic concerns.[/quote]
[quote=Time2help]The best part about this article is the comments it has received. Here are a sample:
[/quote]
Yep, those are great. they give me hope.
The spin cycle in this election is crazy enormous. So far off the reservation that I hardly know where to begin untangling it all, but that is exactly how the campaigns are designed.
They are the psychological version of "shock and awe - you rattle the crazy bars so hard the population literally cannot decipher up from down.
The lies are being spread fast and thick right now, about Russia, Trump, HRC - you name it. Too much to process it seems…and then you read comments like the above and you realize that you are not alone, many people do indeed have the appropriate context, and that you are not crazy.
It appears that our intrepid leaders are ready to set the rock rolling downhill to disaster. In addition to the series of provocative moves of the past few years, we are now declaring "cyber war" on the Russians. In view of the fact that our political organizations, businesses and government agencies have been unable to defend themselves from recent cyber attacks, this course would seem foolhardy at best. We are just taunting those who have the expertise to take down our electric grid, markets, banking, or other critical systems in a game of who can out-hack whom.
JT
