Generational Dynamics World View News

[DaKardii]

2034: A Novel of the Next World War kindle version
by Elliot Ackerman (Author) , Admiral James Stavridis USN (Author)
https://www.amazon.com/kindle-dbs/redee ... igin=Other

Here's a link for those who want to buy it, as the one you shared only shows a "rent" option.

https://www.amazon.com/2034-Novel-Next- ... 133&sr=1-1

[thomasglee]

Here's an interesting piece of information...

The Gentleman's Guide To Forum Spies

Learn to Recognize Government Disinformation

thomasglee,

the http://mileswmathis.com/ site is fantastic (Learn to Recognize Government Disinformation

Joe

Thanks.

[Gordon]

Weirdly, what you both have in common is that you both want to believe it's possible.

It is not. Period.

I have advanced degrees in all of this stuff, you can believe me or not, what's more likely though - the Chinese are trying to do something that would help them win a doomsday scenario, or they are just hoping that it might work and are wasting money because of the potential upside.

Anyone with cursory biological knowledge knows this is BS. The only people who would buy this are the futurist types that think humans are so much more advanced than they actually are, and the covidians who think sarscov2 is actually something dangerous, which it is not, according to the data regarding population level studies (it's a strong flu or common cold, period). These same people don't even realize the jabs are meant as the real biological weapon, because in both the short and long term, they do more damage and kill more people, especially when accounting for fertility and age.

I'll laugh if someone talks about how effective China can be if wiping out another country's 80 year olds. LOL!

My prediction, made almost 4 years ago, was that wave after wave of pandemics would sweep the world. The current waves of covid and the pandemics yet to come will sweep the entire world irrespective of differences in human biology.

My more specific predictions would be:

• There will be a major global financial panic and crisis. Supply chains will break, resulting in unavailability of critical raw materials and components. Global trade will begin to shut down. As it begins to become apparent that the supply chain linkages are permanently broken, the global interlinked financial markets will shut down and cease to exist. This will all happen very quickly. It will not take years from the initial panic.
• The focus of governments will turn to controlling their panicked and hungry populations. Due to lack of availability of imported goods and adequate storage "sufficient to reconstitute" a system consistent with nation state government, this will prove to be too little too late and most government will devolve to the local level as populations lose faith in their national governments and the national governments lose the resources and ability to control their populations.
• There will be no large scale nuclear war. Instead, the population will be culled through starvation, local strife (including settling of long-standing scores) and disease. Wave after wave of pandemics will sweep the world.
• Similar to national economies and governments, centralized utilities will fail or become so decrepit as to be unsafe and unusable. All centralized utilities including the power grid will shut down permanently.
• The initial worldwide kill rate during the first couple decades following the financial panic will exceed 90%. The global population will be in the range of a few tens of millions when the bottom is hit in two or three centuries. Similar to the last dark age, the world's largest cities will have a population on the order of 25,000 and a large town will be 1,000.
• Life during the coming dark age will be similar to the last dark age but worse due to environmental damage and pollution.

"Thanks China for pandemic". Do you have anything else for us?

[DT Subscriber]

From the Daily Telegraph

Behind the Headlines


Across Asia, a battle between freedom and oppression is playing out in politics and on the streets

By NICOLA SMITH,
ASIA CORRESPONDENT

US-China relations are likely to start out as frosty in 2022 as they ended in 2021 as the two superpowers continue to vie for influence in the Indo-Pacific.

The House Foreign Affairs Committee is expected to visit Taiwan in January to show support for democratic Taiwan against ongoing invasion and annexation threats from China.

If it goes ahead, Beijing will be furious.

But the protection of Taiwan’s autonomy is increasingly vital to Washington’s strategic blueprint in the Pacific.

It is also important for maintaining free and open global trade routes in the South China Sea – an area where Beijing is likely to further expand its footprint in 2022, inevitably clashing with the interests of the US and its allies.

Since its harsh crackdown in Hong Kong, China has acted with increasing swagger and impunity in the Indo-Pacific region.

The US, accused of neglecting important relationships in Asia during the Trump era, is now focusing on wooing Asian capitals. It is also beefing up its own security presence through defence partnerships such as the Aukus submarine deal, and the Quad – an informal group of India, the US, Australia and Japan.

Underpinning the battle for regional dominance is a renewed struggle between democratic principles and authoritarian rule.

It extends far beyond the chest thumping of Chinese and American leaders to younger generations of Asians who are waging fierce fights on the streets to replace autocratic rulers.

Expect to read more this year about the defiant resistance of Myanmar’s anti-coup movement and Thailand’s anti-government protesters as they try to secure basic human rights.

In the global ideological battle of freedom versus oppression, Asia in 2022 will remain very much on the frontlines.

[DT Subscriber]

Beaches suitable for landing troops are highlighted in yellow.

Much of the coastline provides natural deterrence with rugged cliffs in the East and shallow waters in the West.

From the DT.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/world-news/ ... =DM1536761

[Burner Prime]

Pick your propaganda.

Many like to use the term "illegal annexation" when talking about Russia taking control of Crimea. Really no one can define what legal and illegal is anyway, or they do it as it suits their argument. If some Third World court makes 'legal' decisions based on existing law, such as detentions in Myanmar, China, Iran or anywhere really - Westerners simply dismiss the legitimacy of that court. That's very easy to do and is a cheap way out.

What was legal about US invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan? How about Lebanon, Grenada, Korea? What was legal about the annexation of Hawaii or the total invasion of North America? Sure you can get a bunch of suits together and declare some causus belli, but that is just an excuse. 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' - clutch your pearls and choose your propaganda as it suits you. What world court decided based on some international law agreed to by all parties? Who is subject to such a global court? Well no one really.

A perfect example is this World News article - they are some of the best propagandists - talking about how Israel is pushing for more settlements in the West Bank. Here's the good stuff:

...
"Israel annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights in 1981, a move that was not recognised by the international community. Syria demands the return of the strategic plateau, which also overlooks Lebanon and borders Jordan."
...

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... an-heights

Pick your propaganda. They don't call it: "The 'illegal annexation of Golan Heights' - for centuries inhabited by Arabs...", like Neocons do about Crimea and Tatars.

But if some suits like Trump or Blinken legitimize it, it's all good right? Pick your propaganda.

It's all about security, and anyone who dismisses Russia's security concerns over the Black Sea and Ukraine is just choosing their propaganda.

You could easily exchange words in the article to describe events in Eastern Europe:

"Israel [Russia] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Crimea] in 1981 [2014], a move that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA this is fun right?

"Israel [United States] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Hawaii] in 1981 [1898], a move that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA, we could do this all day.

How about this directly from the US Dept of State website about the annexation of Hawaii and deposing of a native born queen.

" When Queen Liliuokalani moved to establish a stronger monarchy, Americans under the leadership of Samuel Dole deposed her in 1893."

https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm

They don't even try to hide it, they know what they did was heinous and "illegal", but after enough time goes by, the legitimacy grows as the status is secured. That's what's going to happen with Crimea and maybe parts of Eastern Ukraine. You can get your panties in a bunch and hot and bothered like psychopath Neo-con Senator Roger Wicker, calling for a nuclear first strike on Russia over Ukraine, and choke on the ashes.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gab ... aine-putin

It's not a football game.

[Cool Breeze]

Pick your propaganda.

Many like to use the term "illegal annexation" when talking about Russia taking control of Crimea. Really no one can define what legal and illegal is anyway, or they do it as it suits their argument. If some Third World court makes 'legal' decisions based on existing law, such as detentions in Myanmar, China, Iran or anywhere really - Westerners simply dismiss the legitimacy of that court. That's very easy to do and is a cheap way out.

What was legal about US invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan? How about Lebanon, Grenada, Korea? What was legal about the annexation of Hawaii or the total invasion of North America? Sure you can get a bunch of suits together and declare some causus belli, but that is just an excuse. 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' - clutch your pearls and choose your propaganda as it suits you. What world court decided based on some international law agreed to by all parties? Who is subject to such a global court? Well no one really.

A perfect example is this World News article - they are some of the best propagandists - talking about how Israel is pushing for more settlements in the West Bank. Here's the good stuff:

...
"Israel annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights in 1981, a move that was not recognised by the international community. Syria demands the return of the strategic plateau, which also overlooks Lebanon and borders Jordan."
...

https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... an-heights

Pick your propaganda. They don't call it: "The 'illegal annexation of Golan Heights' - for centuries inhabited by Arabs...", like Neocons do about Crimea and Tatars.

But if some suits like Trump or Blinken legitimize it, it's all good right? Pick your propaganda.

It's all about security, and anyone who dismisses Russia's security concerns over the Black Sea and Ukraine is just choosing their propaganda.

You could easily exchange words in the article to describe events in Eastern Europe:

"Israel [Russia] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Crimea] in 1981 [2014], a move that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA this is fun right?

"Israel [United States] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Hawaii] in 1981 [1898], a move that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA, we could do this all day.

How about this directly from the US Dept of State website about the annexation of Hawaii and deposing of a native born queen.

" When Queen Liliuokalani moved to establish a stronger monarchy, Americans under the leadership of Samuel Dole deposed her in 1893."

https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm

They don't even try to hide it, they know what they did was heinous and "illegal", but after enough time goes by, the legitimacy grows as the status is secured. That's what's going to happen with Crimea and maybe parts of Eastern Ukraine. You can get your panties in a bunch and hot and bothered like psychopath Neo-con Senator Roger Wicker, calling for a nuclear first strike on Russia over Ukraine, and choke on the ashes.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gab ... aine-putin

It's not a football game.

This is an accurate representation of history. Mostly, the powerful do what they want and if you live in a world where other people actually have instituted a reasonable civilization, the losers will be given a voice and thus, they complain. That's basically the trajectory of the USA once the transformation was complete - full reversal of european and Christian civilization now with the white (and jew) politicians selling out the country to the increasingly bizarre, detestable, and delusional minority groups (for votes). It doesn't hurt that the midwits also bought the propaganda, as they were bought and sold (white establishment/government workers/education, etc) in order to advance the agenda since they too were on the payroll. It's funny that they are trying to desperately keep it alive for a lame retirement of free money, health care and "golf" (or insert your meaningless activity) to live out their lives on the backs of others, freedom and sanity be damned.

[John]

** 27-Dec-2021 World View: Burner Prime's propaganda

> Pick your propaganda.

> Many like to use the term "illegal annexation" when talking about
> Russia taking control of Crimea. Really no one can define what
> legal and illegal is anyway, or they do it as it suits their
> argument. If some Third World court makes 'legal' decisions based
> on existing law, such as detentions in Myanmar, China, Iran or
> anywhere really - Westerners simply dismiss the legitimacy of that
> court. That's very easy to do and is a cheap way out.

> What was legal about US invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan? How
> about Lebanon, Grenada, Korea? What was legal about the annexation
> of Hawaii or the total invasion of North America? Sure you can get
> a bunch of suits together and declare some causus belli, but that
> is just an excuse. 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' - clutch your
> pearls and choose your propaganda as it suits you. What world
> court decided based on some international law agreed to by all
> parties? Who is subject to such a global court? Well no one
> really.

> A perfect example is this World News article - they are some of
> the best propagandists - talking about how Israel is pushing for
> more settlements in the West Bank. Here's the good stuff:

> ... "Israel annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile)
> Golan Heights in 1981, a move that was not recognised by the
> international community. Syria demands the return of the strategic
> plateau, which also overlooks Lebanon and borders Jordan." ...

> https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... an-heights

> Pick your propaganda. They don't call it: "The 'illegal annexation
> of Golan Heights' - for centuries inhabited by Arabs...", like
> Neocons do about Crimea and Tatars.

> But if some suits like Trump or Blinken legitimize it, it's all
> good right? Pick your propaganda.

> It's all about security, and anyone who dismisses Russia's
> security concerns over the Black Sea and Ukraine is just choosing
> their propaganda.

> You could easily exchange words in the article to describe events
> in Eastern Europe:

> "Israel [Russia] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre
> (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Crimea] in 1981 [2014], a move
> that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA
> this is fun right?

> "Israel [United States] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre
> (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Hawaii] in 1981 [1898], a move
> that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA, we
> could do this all day.

> How about this directly from the US Dept of State website about
> the annexation of Hawaii and deposing of a native born queen.

> " When Queen Liliuokalani moved to establish a stronger monarchy,
> Americans under the leadership of Samuel Dole deposed her in
> 1893."

> https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm

> They don't even try to hide it, they know what they did was
> heinous and "illegal", but after enough time goes by, the
> legitimacy grows as the status is secured. That's what's going to
> happen with Crimea and maybe parts of Eastern Ukraine. You can get
> your panties in a bunch and hot and bothered like psychopath
> Neo-con Senator Roger Wicker, calling for a nuclear first strike
> on Russia over Ukraine, and choke on the ashes.

> https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gab ... aine-putin

> It's not a football game.

Most of what you've written is complete nonsense -- or perhaps you'd
prefer describing what you're written as troll propaganda.

Your trollmaster apparently never told you anything about
"international law" -- which is a real thing.

*** International law
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/international_law

Russia has repeatedly violated international law in Crimea -- by
illegally invading eastern Ukraine, by shooting down an unarmed
passenger plane with a Buk missile, by illegally invading and annexing
Crimea, by illegally attacking maritime traffic in the Sea of Azov,
and so forth.

If Putin thought that Russia had some legal claim to Crimea, then he
should have presented his case to the UN Security Council. He didn't
bother, because he knew that he had no legal claim, and instead he
just went ahead with the illegal invasion and annexation.

I started writing in 2011 about a new policy, stated in Russian media,
that Russia (later joined by China) would use international law to
control the US and Nato. They would violate international law at
will, but they would demand that Western countries remain bound by
international law, and would use their veto power to cripple American
and Nato foreign policy.

So this policy seems to work in the sense that trolls like you have no
idea what's going on. And as this policy has evolved over the last
decade, it has made the United States Security Council pretty much
worthless.

The war in Afghanistan is considered legal because it was in response
to an attack by Afghanistan on the United States. The Security
Council did pass "Resolution 1386 - The situation in Afghanistan" on
December 20, 2001, which many people believe authorized the war in
Afghanistan.

Many people consider Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights and West
Bank as illegal in international law. To show how ridiculous your
arguments are, you even quoted a Newsweek article that says it
violates international law. Al-Jazeera and the BBC regularly refer to
these territories as "the occupied West Bank" and "the occupied Golan
Heights."

So you can argue that Israel's annexation of those territories is
illegal -- and many people do -- but if so, they're illegal under the
same international law that made Russia's invasion and annexation of
Crimea illegal.

[DaKardii]

Russia has published a draft treaty to resolve the ongoing crisis over the status of Ukraine. Many in Western media consider this move to be a semi-formal ultimatum.

The draft treaty can be read here: https://mid.ru/ru/foreign_policy/rso/na ... 3/?lang=en

The proposals made include but are not limited to:

1) All NATO military installations located on non-NATO European territory on or after May 28, 1997 must be removed. This includes NATO military installations located on the territories of current NATO members which had not yet joined the alliance as of that date. In return, Russia will remove all military installations placed on non-Russian European territory on or after that date.

2) All NATO land-based missiles capable of striking Russian territory must be removed. In return, Russia will remove all land-based missiles capable of striking the territory of any NATO member.

3) NATO must not expand any further; no new members are to be admitted.

4) NATO forces are prohibited from entering the territories of any post-Soviet states, with the exception of the Baltic states.

5) NATO forces are prohibited from conducting military exercises above the brigade level within a yet-to-be-determined distance from the borders of Russia or any country that is in a military alliance with Russia (currently Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, and Tajikistan). In return, Russia will not conduct military exercises above the brigade level within that yet-to-be-determined distance from the borders of any NATO member.

[Cool Breeze]

** 27-Dec-2021 World View: Burner Prime's propaganda

> Pick your propaganda.

> Many like to use the term "illegal annexation" when talking about
> Russia taking control of Crimea. Really no one can define what
> legal and illegal is anyway, or they do it as it suits their
> argument. If some Third World court makes 'legal' decisions based
> on existing law, such as detentions in Myanmar, China, Iran or
> anywhere really - Westerners simply dismiss the legitimacy of that
> court. That's very easy to do and is a cheap way out.

> What was legal about US invasion of Iraq, or Afghanistan? How
> about Lebanon, Grenada, Korea? What was legal about the annexation
> of Hawaii or the total invasion of North America? Sure you can get
> a bunch of suits together and declare some causus belli, but that
> is just an excuse. 'Weapons of Mass Destruction' - clutch your
> pearls and choose your propaganda as it suits you. What world
> court decided based on some international law agreed to by all
> parties? Who is subject to such a global court? Well no one
> really.

> A perfect example is this World News article - they are some of
> the best propagandists - talking about how Israel is pushing for
> more settlements in the West Bank. Here's the good stuff:

> ... "Israel annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre (460-square-mile)
> Golan Heights in 1981, a move that was not recognised by the
> international community. Syria demands the return of the strategic
> plateau, which also overlooks Lebanon and borders Jordan." ...

> https://www.usnews.com/news/world/artic ... an-heights

> Pick your propaganda. They don't call it: "The 'illegal annexation
> of Golan Heights' - for centuries inhabited by Arabs...", like
> Neocons do about Crimea and Tatars.

> But if some suits like Trump or Blinken legitimize it, it's all
> good right? Pick your propaganda.

> It's all about security, and anyone who dismisses Russia's
> security concerns over the Black Sea and Ukraine is just choosing
> their propaganda.

> You could easily exchange words in the article to describe events
> in Eastern Europe:

> "Israel [Russia] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre
> (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Crimea] in 1981 [2014], a move
> that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA
> this is fun right?

> "Israel [United States] annexed the 1,200-square-kilometre
> (460-square-mile) Golan Heights [Hawaii] in 1981 [1898], a move
> that was not recognised by the international community. " HAHA, we
> could do this all day.

> How about this directly from the US Dept of State website about
> the annexation of Hawaii and deposing of a native born queen.

> " When Queen Liliuokalani moved to establish a stronger monarchy,
> Americans under the leadership of Samuel Dole deposed her in
> 1893."

> https://2001-2009.state.gov/r/pa/ho/time/gp/17661.htm

> They don't even try to hide it, they know what they did was
> heinous and "illegal", but after enough time goes by, the
> legitimacy grows as the status is secured. That's what's going to
> happen with Crimea and maybe parts of Eastern Ukraine. You can get
> your panties in a bunch and hot and bothered like psychopath
> Neo-con Senator Roger Wicker, calling for a nuclear first strike
> on Russia over Ukraine, and choke on the ashes.

> https://www.foxnews.com/media/tulsi-gab ... aine-putin

> It's not a football game.

Most of what you've written is complete nonsense -- or perhaps you'd
prefer describing what you're written as troll propaganda.

Your trollmaster apparently never told you anything about
"international law" -- which is a real thing.

*** International law
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/international_law

Russia has repeatedly violated international law in Crimea -- by
illegally invading eastern Ukraine, by shooting down an unarmed
passenger plane with a Buk missile, by illegally invading and annexing
Crimea, by illegally attacking maritime traffic in the Sea of Azov,
and so forth.

If Putin thought that Russia had some legal claim to Crimea, then he
should have presented his case to the UN Security Council. He didn't
bother, because he knew that he had no legal claim, and instead he
just went ahead with the illegal invasion and annexation.

I started writing in 2011 about a new policy, stated in Russian media,
that Russia (later joined by China) would use international law to
control the US and Nato. They would violate international law at
will, but they would demand that Western countries remain bound by
international law, and would use their veto power to cripple American
and Nato foreign policy.

So this policy seems to work in the sense that trolls like you have no
idea what's going on. And as this policy has evolved over the last
decade, it has made the United States Security Council pretty much
worthless.

The war in Afghanistan is considered legal because it was in response
to an attack by Afghanistan on the United States. The Security
Council did pass "Resolution 1386 - The situation in Afghanistan" on
December 20, 2001, which many people believe authorized the war in
Afghanistan.

Many people consider Israel's annexation of the Golan Heights and West
Bank as illegal in international law. To show how ridiculous your
arguments are, you even quoted a Newsweek article that says it
violates international law. Al-Jazeera and the BBC regularly refer to
these territories as "the occupied West Bank" and "the occupied Golan
Heights."

So you can argue that Israel's annexation of those territories is
illegal -- and many people do -- but if so, they're illegal under the
same international law that made Russia's invasion and annexation of
Crimea illegal.

So what he has written is "complete nonsense" and he's a troll, but you admit he's right about the Golan Heights? What did the UN do when Turkey invaded Cyprus in 1971 John?

You act like just because more recent globalization / world entities exist, they are legitimate in a way that is so different and departs from the historical realities Burner Prime points out. But we know they are all just about who barks the loudest or pays off the greatest number of people. That's why we haven't heard the cries of the "Holocaust" stop although it was 80 years ago, and Communists killed 10-20x the people in Russia and China (more), but Hitler was "pure evil" while Stalin and Mao (and don't let anyone know the Russian revolution was largely a "jewish" revolution, but I'm sure you know more than Solzhenitsyn does, John) were just sorta bad guys.

You call him a troll, agree with him in part, and don't address any other point of his. Come on, man, this is pretty low level stuff here.