Quote from: RE on Feb 09, 2024, 01:36 PM

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 09, 2024, 01:30 AMA despot starting a war would have to promise riches, and he would also have to believe there were riches to be gained, or he would know he had just started the process of executing himself.  Such a lie would be fatal after it was discovered that there were no riches to be gained.

Troubles in the homeland will demand full attention.  There will be no resources for foreign involvements.

Going to war comes from conflict over resources.  It's not so much a single despot wanting to be rich as it is 2 despots each wanting to expand their own sphere of control  fighting over border territory.  England and France for instance, who were nearly constantly at war throughout the middle ages.  The more of the farmland in France the King of England could control, the larger the population he could tax.  Vica versa true, if the King of France could beat the English king, he gets all of England to tax.

...

Once the war begins, it doesn't matter what was used to kick it of, the assassination of an archduke or bombing of ships in a harbor, whatever.  The armies get called up, and now it's all about chain of command and following orders.  Which everyone in the professional class of the military is trained to do, and this holds the country together until they are losing control of the situation at home.  Then they sue for peace and the international war is over.

RE

Your argument appears to be that future events will follow historical precedent.  That is a strong argument.  I can only refute it by pointing out that conditions are not at all the same.

When Hitler marched into the Soviet Union it was to get resources.  He needed oil and there was a chance he could get it.  Had he known that he was going to have to shoot himself while the women of Berlin were being raped in only a few short years, I doubt Hitler would have invaded Russia.  But then, he was Hitler, a crazy MOFO, and this is a point really not worth arguing.

In a world of nuclear weapons nobody is going to steal oil.  Had Hitler got Russian oil he would not have needed millions of dollars worth of equipment to steal it.  He would have needed simple pumpjacks, pipe, tanker trucks, and rail cars.  Now the theft would have to go miles deep in the ground using equipment an order of magnitude more refined.  Infrastructure would take months to set up.  And before theft could begin, a nuclear strike would take out the pumps.

Anybody who starts a major war is going to exhaust domestic resources and gain nothing.  Then they will find themselves with a loaded gun in a bunker having to do themselves in.  Anybody who would help them earns the same fate.  They are doomed to fail as soon as they start the war.  Support for a war will be difficult to find.  Failure will be evident from the start.  Classically a scorched earth policy is when a country burns crops and ruins machinery an advancing enemy could steal.  The enemy must then retreat or starve.  In resource wars there is no reason to scorch the earth, the earth is already pre-scorched to begin with.  There is nothing to steal, and no way to get anything back to the homeland if there was.  That would take oil the world no longer has in a resource war.

Trouble becomes local.  Without oil, foreign resources become unobtainable.  Your example of France and England is between two countries separated by twenty miles of water.  In those days the channel was easily crossed because wood for boats was common as was the skill to use it.  Horses and carts could haul booty.

Once collapse gets rolling England and France could find themselves more separated than they were in the 15th century.  No horses and no carts.

Got Wood?

The other thing that separates today from the World War 2 era is we live in a globalised world where we are interdependent on each other via global supply chains. Countries today are not as self-contained as they were back in the 1940s meaning there is a greater incentive to co-operate. You also got to add the important distinction of the nuclear deterrent as this reduces the chances of global warfare even further.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 09, 2024, 02:24 PMIn a world of nuclear weapons nobody is going to steal oil.

You're missing the point.  There won't be oil really being stolen except in superficial amounts, the reason is simply to provide a pretext for war.  It might not be oil.  The Chinese might be blamed for hacking the electric grid and that passed off as reason for blackouts occuring.  Chinese are also a big part of the wave of refugees crossing at the southern border.  Scuttlebutt among the right wing conspiracy theorists is that this is a covert invasion by the Chinese.  The guy I used to work with up here buys this bullshit.  He sent me a link to a Tucker Carlson interview with some biologist who is selling this fear mongering drivel.


War provides cover for the Elites and the status quo is perpetuated.  Playing to Patriotism stops people from blaming the real enemy and the elites stay in power, in fact gain power.  They'll declare war long before they'll give up their power, privilege and wealth.  They always have.

RE

I confess I once thought he was smart.  Nobody is perfect.  In March 2017, Weinstein wrote a letter to Evergreen faculty (100 miles away) in which he objected to a suggestion pertaining to the college's decades-old tradition of observing a "Day of Absence", during which ethnic minority students and faculty would voluntarily stay away from campus to highlight their contributions to the college.  He was a 'victim' and it all made sense at the time.  Then as time goes by I realize he sniffs out controversy and that I was duped.

Earlier today I tried to snag the the Putin/Tucker Carlson Interview.  Putin tried to make it clear that the Donbas is Russian.  Like the people living there.  Duh!

War is going to be a hard sell when store shelves are empty.  War sells when there is a chance for, something, not nothing.  The Democratic Party support of Israel and Ukraine could cook their goose in the next election.  War has not been giving the returns it used to.

* So according to Brett the Chinese aborted female fetuses to have more soldiers to send up at us through South America.  It was in the plan.  If you believe that, send Brett money.  You are a true disciple.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 09, 2024, 08:50 PMWar is going to be a hard sell when store shelves are empty.  War sells when there is a chance for, something, not nothing.  The Democratic Party support of Israel and Ukraine could cook their goose in the next election.  War has not been giving the returns it used to.

WWII came on the heels of the Great Depression.  Then during the war, rationing was accepted as being part of the war effort.

Granted, the situation today is not the same and exactly how events will play out is impossible to predict.  A big difference is the possibility bombs would drop on FSoA soil.  Also, while shipping was disrupted in WWII, convoys still did get through.  In this age of hypersonic cruise missiles and ICBMs, it's hard to imagine how any ships will stay above the waterline at all.  So even if there is international war, it wouldn't last very long.

In the end, it doesn't much matter since international war will be impossible to keep going long.  Manufacturing high tech jets with computer chips on a production line is not gonna happen.  The cool hardware will all go down early on, fuel and munitions will run short and of course social breakdown at home.  At that point, all anyone will care about is where the next meal will come from.

RE

QuoteWWII came on the heels of the Great Depression.

But you need a Pearl Harbor.  Before Pearl harbor America was going to ignore the mayhem in Europe.

QuoteIn the end, it doesn't much matter since international war will be impossible to keep going long.

That is my point.  Consequences will soon visit those who would start a war.  So only fools would do it.

Pearl Harbor was a manufactured event.  That would not be hard to repeat.

The consequences come either way.  War benefits the elite, it keeps them in control longer.

RE

If there is going to be an international war then the most plausible scenario is one of proxy war. It is hard to come up with a good reason to fight Europe or any country wielding nuclear weapons so the obvious targets would be some Middle East country. The US is already giving beef to Iran so it is not such a stretch to manufacture some event to justify an attack on them or some other similar nation.

However, if the issues of food supplies and civil disorder become too great then I don't think war is feasible. There will too much going on at home to co-ordinate such a major attack. Unlike the World War II period the United States was not at major risk of a civil war. Countries experiencing social strive and civil war don't tend to start wars; the elites are too busy clinging onto power to do that.

Iran is a good choice, but to use Iran as a cover for problems here, TPTB would have to sell the idea that Iranians were responsible for hacking the electrical grid or pull off some really big terrorist action on the scale of 911.  That would be sufficient for a shock & awe style bombing campaign of Iran, but they would still need some continuing threats on home soil to justify full scale Martial Law.

It also has the downside that it could actually set off civil war here, since there probably would be a backlash from conscription to handle the war.  If we have Civil War before the Chinese and Russians, that puts us in the lead in the race to the bottom.  If we go to war, then unless they also face similar predicaments, it's not helpful over the longer term.

Now, China and Russia have similar energy problems to the ones here, so they also might want to distract their own populations with some foreign activities.  Russia is already in Ukraine, they might escalate that.  China has issues with Taiwan, that could be a problem.  Definitely, the longer the FSoA can keep it together, the better the chance those countries descend into chaos first.

Anyhow, there are so many variables speculating exactly how it will develop is kind of pointless, since we know where it's headed no matter what.  As always, the main question is, how long do we have left before TSHTF in SOME fashion?  The timeline appears to be getting shorter to D-Day.

RE

Quote from: monsta666 on Feb 10, 2024, 04:40 AMIf there is going to be an international war then the most plausible scenario is one of proxy war. It is hard to come up with a good reason to fight Europe or any country wielding nuclear weapons so the obvious targets would be some Middle East country. The US is already giving beef to Iran so it is not such a stretch to manufacture some event to justify an attack on them or some other similar nation.

However, if the issues of food supplies and civil disorder become too great then I don't think war is feasible. There will too much going on at home to co-ordinate such a major attack. Unlike the World War II period the United States was not at major risk of a civil war. Countries experiencing social strive and civil war don't tend to start wars; the elites are too busy clinging onto power to do that.

WWII rationing is not going to fly in collapse.  People can't be expected to sacrifice if they are getting nothing for it, war will give nothing, and we all will sacrificing by the time resource war time comes.  We won't need a poster because that will be life.

The whole idea of resource wars was stupid.  For there to be a war there have to be resources to get.  The big brains never stopped to figure that part out.  They all knee-jerked right past it.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 10, 2024, 12:15 PMWWII rationing is not going to fly in collapse.  People can't be expected to sacrifice if they are getting nothing for it, war will give nothing, and we all will sacrificing by the time resource war time comes.  We won't need a poster because that will be life.

The whole idea of resource wars was stupid.  For there to be a war there have to be resources to get.  The big brains never stopped to figure that part out.  They all knee-jerked right past it.

What they would get out of a war is fewer Useless Eaters to have to share the food with.  If war cuts the global population down from 8B to 8M, there will be plenty of arable farmland left for the survivors, as long as it hasn't been poisoned with nukes.  The people who start the war just need to believe they will be one of the survivors.

RE

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 09, 2024, 08:50 PMI confess I once thought he was smart.  Nobody is perfect.  In March 2017, Weinstein wrote a letter to Evergreen faculty (100 miles away) in which he objected to a suggestion pertaining to the college's decades-old tradition of observing a "Day of Absence", during which ethnic minority students and faculty would voluntarily stay away from campus to highlight their contributions to the college.  He was a 'victim' and it all made sense at the time.  Then as time goes by I realize he sniffs out controversy and that I was duped.

Earlier today I tried to snag the the Putin/Tucker Carlson Interview.  Putin tried to make it clear that the Donbas is Russian.  Like the people living there.  Duh!

War is going to be a hard sell when store shelves are empty.  War sells when there is a chance for, something, not nothing.  The Democratic Party support of Israel and Ukraine could cook their goose in the next election.  War has not been giving the returns it used to.

* So according to Brett the Chinese aborted female fetuses to have more soldiers to send up at us through South America.  It was in the plan.  If you believe that, send Brett money.  You are a true disciple.

New Information.







I'm reading the BBC:

QuoteOf migrants from outside the Americas, the greatest increase comes from China. More than 37,000 Chinese nationals were detained at the US-Mexico border last year, about 50 times the figure from two years ago.

So taking this tidbit with what Brett Weinstein said, somebody in China who can legally move between Central America and China has set up a mom and pop business of enabling people who sign up for his service to travel the 'route'.  A route carefully selected to provide the business the most profit.  A real life board game.



Sign up for the service and travel legally to South America.  Go north and get over the Darién Gap and you can stay in the hostel for two days.  New clothes and a full backpack with socks and underwear will be waiting for you there.  A Chinese Coyote will finance your trip.  A prepaid card with a number you memorize and throw away.  Memorize the rest stops where you can use the number.

Which Brett Weinstein suggests is an attack by the Chinese Government rivaling an invasion by Attila the Hun.

What all this means is that eating out at a Chinese Restaurant will become the only Dine Out experience Americans will be able to afford.

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 14, 2024, 10:05 AMSign up for the service and travel legally to South America.  Go north and get over the Darién Gap and you can stay in the hostel for two days.  New clothes and a full backpack with socks and underwear will be waiting for you there.  A Chinese Coyote will finance your trip.  A prepaid card with a number you memorize and throw away.  Memorize the rest stops where you can use the number.

Which Brett Weinstein suggests is an attack by the Chinese Government rivaling an invasion by Attila the Hun.

What all this means is that eating out at a Chinese Restaurant will become the only Dine Out experience Americans will be able to afford.

Actually, anyone who wants to immigrate from Asia, Africa or Europe goes to SA first because it's EZ to get a tourist visa to many of the countries down there.  They can pick up money along the way after that at any Western Union office (at Walmart and many convenience stores) as long as they have somebody in China to send money via wire transfer to that location.   That's also how they send money back home once they start making some.

The only problem here is they have to get from SA to Canada to cross the border legally into the FSaA, which means they have to do TWO illegal crossings first, unless they have a tourist visa for Canada.  If they have one of those, they can just fly straight to Canada before crossing into the FSoA and avoid SA completely.

To get from Mexico to Canada, they have to cross the border down there into the FSoA illegally, then take buses to upstate NY or Maine and cross illegally into Canada, then finally cross back into the FSoA legally and be processed by INS there claiming political asylum.

The only purpose I can see in this is that if you cross the border from Canada, you avoid the refugee camps down in TX and there's much less waiting time for processing by INS.  It takes more money and adds some risk due to the 2 illegal border crossings you have to do first.

The whole "Chinese Invasion" nonsense by Fucker Carlson & Brett Weinstein is typical fear mongering about the ChiCom Yellow Menace that Right Wing xenophobes have been spouting for time immemorial, going back to Joe McCarthy and further.  It's totally laughable, but it sells to the same Red menace phobia that has worked for generations.  Same old playbook there.

Fucker sells that because its mostly single men from China instead of families from SA it must be a covert military invasion. Utter nonsense.  It's mostly single young men because that's what China has too many of after years of the 1 child policy.  Girl babies were aborted in favor of waiting for a male.  Males who have been successful enough in China to get a wife and have a family aren't leaving.  It's the bachelors who dream of marrying an Amerikan female and getting a green card that are leaving.

RE

What would they do with an American female?

Quote from: K-Dog on Feb 14, 2024, 11:02 PMWhat would they do with an American female?

The fantasy I imagine is that they would live in a nice suburban McMansion and drive an SUV to work and take vacations in Hawaii.  Basically the images they have seen in Amerikan TV shows and movies.  Reality has nothing to do with their dreams and aspirations.

RE