5-Dec-17 World View -- Three crises accelerate: Yemen's Saleh killed, Brexit collapses and North Korea war looms

[Tom Mazanec]

> Rising rhetoric increases likelihood of war:
> http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-risky-ga ... war-730814

These analysts are complete idiots. I listen to these people all day
on the BBC and other stations, and they sound like they just got out
of college after majoring in sociology or women's studies. There is
zero probability that Kim would attack right now, because he isn't
ready, and if Kim does, then the retaliation would be enormous.
Practically every statement in that Newsweek article is total idiocy,
but Newsweek and pretty much all the mainstream media are by idiots for
idiots.

Is Trump ready now? Could he attack NK tonight?

[John]

> Is Trump ready now? Could he attack NK tonight?

Ready for what? There are still three aircraft carrier strike groups in the region.

[Guest]

"China couldn't possibly allow this to happen. NK couldn't possibly nuke someone. Even if they do have
something then they couldn't possibly go to war THAT long, it'll be easy."

Do you guys REALLY imagine that China would allow a war on their doorstep?

No we already know China has declared if America moves first they will defend NK.

I can see NK doing some seriously stupid "stuff", but NK isn't capable (in my opinion) of successfully chucking a nuke that will actually function properly.
...
But, on the timeframe question: Until NK successfully launches a missile whose warhead survives reentry, they won't be launching anything on that "wrong" trajectory which will precipitate a reaction. I have no clue as to what the 6-18 months estimate is based, but we need a few more "test launches" to endure before NK is "ready", however long that takes.

Very hard to say a time line particularly if you think china is aiding in some capacity because they could have everything they need as soon as china gives it to them. Its even possible these "R&D attempts" are a facade
of progress so it looks like they are making progress and it isn't blatantly clear china handed it to them.

If they launch a missile with the "wrong" trajectory, that would be considered by everyone an initial attack, whereupon China would do as they said, and allow an attack on NK.

You mean like launches over and adjacent to Japan? If china doesn't want it they will deny everything short of a nuke on US soil as an attack.

Would that be a "war" between the US and NK? My opinion is that within minutes, if not moments, of unit military commanders seeing "big juju bang-bang" they will refuse orders and rid themselves of a few gastric parasites.

I'm pretty sure every war since Vietnam has had similar rational before starting.


In regards to china it is very possible that since as they have said they expect war within trump's term that they have accepted war at any point (which is fairly rational if it is "any" time in the term). Obviously they would like to be more prepared (can you ever be prepared enough for war?) but realized you don't always get to pick that day. So why not see if we can get US to nuke NK in the meantime and try to paint them as war hungry monsters and whereas we are just trying to defend ourselves. I will note this doesn't seem so far fetched from their thinking because they have stepped up rhetoric hard as of recently. I think they want to throw as much verbal shit on the US as they can before this gets started to see if they can't tip anyone sitting on the fence.

[Guest]

The Chinese are not allowed to say if the US can attack or not That's absurd. Since when does America need permission from anyone? The NKs have been given the technology and bomb parts by China and Russia. The North Koreans don't have the ability to do what they have done so quickly. Just nuke th NK and dare the Chinese and Russians to do something about it.

[guestb4]

The Chinese are not allowed to say if the US can attack or not That's absurd. Since when does America need permission from anyone? The NKs have been given the technology and bomb parts by China and Russia. The North Koreans don't have the ability to do what they have done so quickly. Just nuke th NK and dare the Chinese and Russians to do something about it.

I don't know where I said or implied that. Not sure where you got that.

> Rising rhetoric increases likelihood of war:
> http://www.newsweek.com/trumps-risky-ga ... war-730814

These analysts are complete idiots. I listen to these people all day
on the BBC and other stations, and they sound like they just got out
of college after majoring in sociology or women's studies. There is
zero probability that Kim would attack right now, because he isn't
ready, and if Kim does, then the retaliation would be enormous.
Practically every statement in that Newsweek article is total idiocy,
but Newsweek and pretty much all the mainstream media are by idiots for
idiots.

Is Trump ready now? Could he attack NK tonight?

Please no

[Guest]

Gerald Celente says no war in North Korea in 2018. The war will only be in the Middle East.

[More Reflections]

Had a long stream of thoughts. Not sure about all of them but figured I'd share just to stimulate discussion.

NK is stressed out and intentionally inflaming tensions which seems
to indicate they are far more "rational" then they lead on, or are atleast aware of
the dangers

China has stood by them in the past and aided their arms development
this we know. The fact that they don't seem ready for war and NK
behavior means they probably put NK up to this just to see how
Trump will respond and see if they can pressure him out of asia.

China IMO seems to be using the bluff card a lot recently. This is probably
in part because bluffing got them so far. The problem is because they
weren't ever seriously challenged before I don't think they really realize
that they aren't all that great at bluffing. One thing I have noticed is
that when China bluffs they don't commit to the bluff all the way. They
put on a face but don't realize they are acting logically inconsistent
with the face they are putting on, they hedge against their bluff.
For instance if China was just trying to bluff to see what happens
it would make sense for them to state publicly if the US moves first
they will defend NK. This is essentially a hedge against the NK bluff
to try and get America out of Asia. They are pushing America away from
acting because they really don't want all of this to happen and they
haven't fully committed to it. Kim is shitting his pants because he is
in on the bluff and if it backfires he is the one that gets nuked. China
is saying "don't worry we wont let it get that far and we will say we
will defend you, besides America isn't ready for war".

Of course there is added complexity in all of this because we already know
that china is on some level aware of GD (DDoS of wiki) so we can't even be
sure that they aren't reading this right now. This in turn could lead them
to realize they have been called out in which case they decide to change
tactics. Not likely but also not out of the question. And what if by stating this,
if they are reading this they now, they can no longer change tactics.
Which begs the question we have constantly been and will continue to
ask: What even is reality and what isn't? Is the cat in the box dead?
Won't know until we look and furthermore
WHY THE FUCK DOES BITCOIN KEEP GOING UP?!?

If we take the very long perspective, barring some critical strike, we could probably recover
from one nuke and there wouldn't be any problem getting support within the country and
around the globe to fight afterwards.
Not to mention if there are people (who mostly incorrectly assert) America
is a bad nation now, how will it go in the future knowing we took the initiative in wiping out
korea based on fear. Doesn't leave a ton of moral ground to stand on.

One thing I am a firm believer in is individual choice. There are always influencing factors
in choices and we are not free to make any choice (breaking laws of physics, etc.) but we
still have choices. Even if that means choosing between your life and your ideals.
So a large part of life becomes making those choices in the face of obstacles and influencing
factors. Choice: within the constraints we are given.

GD says that our national identity must change but it doesn't assert as to what it has to be.
It is also important to note how the concept of identity (be it group or individual) permeates
GD. It is helpful to frame macro in the micro (where things actually happen) even if not
everything "translates". On an individual level you do not get to control the situations that
you are faced with. But you do always get a choice on how you repond to those situations
(and everyones path is unique). I have no way of "proving" but would assert that the accumulation
of those choices you make in the path of your life become who you are and your identity.
Obviously what shoes you wear matter far less than the values you choose to make your decisions.
My point in all of this is GD predicts a change but it doesn't predict what the change will be
to because it can't. The choices made in the constraints of GD and the crisis
are the choices that will form the identity of the group moving forward.
The turmoil is the decision point that solidifies the new identity.

If generational dynamics predicts America is no longer to be the policeman
what if part of overcoming the cycle means attempting to transition to this new role without
bloodshed. Or maybe it means we risk taking a non-terminal nuke for the sake of who we want to be.
If china says we aren't the policemen they maybe this situation shouldn't be handled
like we are the police taking down a bad guy. Its hard to say what that role is/will be but
moving forward we can't act as we have in the past.
As has been pointed out in trump's speeched, it isn't
fair to us nor to the world for America to continue to bear the brunt of a growing world.
If the identity is going to change from the policeman it is impart because the people after
the fact are also going to see something very troubling/flawed about the policeman approach,
maybe it will be this very event. who knows.

Where do we go from here? If GD turns out to be true the cat is already out of the bag so to say.
Moving forward it seems unlikely that these ideas wouldn't spread. If we have a problem already
of people arming up just imagine if the whole world sees all of this as inevitable. What then?
a self fulfilling prophecy? If "peace is that time between reloading" was a saying before
it becomes full blow reality once everyone is "on the same page". So there we have it.
Life no longer becomes worth living because we all serve this endless war machine always
putting off until the next crisis war.

Foregone conclusions are immensely dangerous

[John]

From today's edition of KGS Nightwatch:

<BEGIN QUOTE>

NightWatch *For the Night of 6 December 2017*

* *

*North Korea*

*A new anti-US comment.* On 6 December, the */Korean Central News
Agency/* */(KCNA) /*published anti-US remarks by a Foreign Ministry
spokesman.

"A spokesperson for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) gave the following answer to a
question raised by */KCNA/* on Wednesday, 6 December, as regards the
fact that high-level politicians of the U.S. are now constantly making
reckless remarks about our country...."

"The national security advisor of the White House and a Republican
senator said that 'the chances of war with north Korea' are increasing
every day, a 'preemptive war' with north Korea is becoming more
likely, the families and dependents of the U.S. troops should be moved
out of south Korea."

"These confrontational warmongering remarks cannot be interpreted in
any other way but as a warning to us to be prepared for a war on the
Korean peninsula."

"Worse still, the CIA director has made a provocation against us by
impudently criticizing our supreme leadership which is the heart of
our people."

"This is the revelation of the U.S. cunning and heinous intention
which is to instigate our strong countermeasures and use them to
ignite the fuse for a nuclear war on the Korean peninsula."

"The large-scale nuclear war exercises conducted by the U.S. in
succession are creating a touch-and-go situation on the Korean
peninsula and the series of violent war remarks coming from the
U.S. high-level politicians amid such circumstances have made an
outbreak of war on the Korean peninsula an established fact."

"The remaining question now is: when will the war break out."

"The careless remarks of war by the inner circle of Trump and the
reckless military moves by the U.S. substantiate that the current U.S.
administration has made a decision to provoke a war on the Korean
peninsula and is taking a step-by-step approach to get there...."

"We do not wish for a war but shall not hide from it, and should the
U.S. miscalculate our patience and light the fuse for a nuclear war,
we will surely make the U.S. dearly pay the consequences with our
mighty nuclear force which we have consistently strengthened."

"If the U.S. does not want to be burnt to death by the fire it
ignites, it would better behave with prudence and caution.'

*/ Comment: /*This comment carries the approval of the Foreign
Ministry. Most recent comments have been by various North Korean
Ambassadors, who restated established propaganda themes.

This statement implies that North Korean intelligence can no longer
distinguish demonstrations from real war preparations. Its conclusion
apparently is that the US has made a decision to go to war on an
undetermined date. Its advice is that North Korea must be prepared.

One significant remark is the statement "we do not wish a war..." This
is the first time in months that the North has made that point. The
success of an extortion operation is to get something significant at
little or no cost.

The North Korean regime is serious about not wanting a war. It would
represent a negative return on the expense and energy North Korea has
invested in the strategy to neutralize the US in a reunification bid.
It would call their bluff, but the North Korean leaders would order
national suicide rather than lose face by backing down.

*China*

*Chinese forces recently conducted an unusual exercise near Korea.*
Air force spokesman Shen Jinke made the announcement at an airport in
northern China on 4 December. The */South China Morning Post/*
*/(SCMP)/* article made the correlation that the Chinese exercise was
announced the same day the US and South Korea began their biggest
joint air force exercise.

Shen said Chinese combat aircraft flew in airspace they had never
flown before. He also said that this kind of training would become a
regular feature as the air force worked to strengthen its capabilities
so that it was ready to safeguard China's strategic interests.

The exercise included reconnaissance planes, fighter jets, an early
warning and control aircraft, and a joint operation with
surface-to-air missile units, Shen said.

The */SCMP/* article quoted "Chinese military expert" Li Jie who said
the drills were intended to show that the People's Liberation Army Air
Force was making strides in joint operations, which are an important
part of modern warfare.

Li also said that Monday's announcement also was aimed at sending a
message to the United States and South Korea.

"The timing of this high-profile announcement by the PLA also is a
warning to Washington and Seoul not to provoke Pyongyang any further,"
Li said.

*/Comment:/* The official announcement did not specify the Chinese
exercise area or the dates of the exercise. We delayed writing about
the announcement, pending disclosure of additional information, which
has not occurred.

Senior Captain Li Jie is a naval strategist and military expert with
the Chinese Naval Research Institute. Our searches found that his
comments are infrequent, but authoritative. He has been making them
at key moments since at least 2010.

The Chinese use military exercises to send political messages,
especially to Taiwan. Li makes comments when the Chinese leaders need
to be sure that a behavioral message is clear and understood by a
target audience. In this case, the targets are the US and South
Korea.

The message is stark and highly unusual, something that would be
inappropriate to state officially in public. However, it almost
certainly has been conveyed in verbal communications between Chinese
and US officials. The exercise and its public announcement reinforce
the gravity of the Chinese message.

Last spring the quasi-official newspaper */Global Times/* published
the conditions under which China would intervene in a Korean conflict
or would refrain from intervening. It restated long-standing Chinese
policies.

China would prevent the collapse of North Korea under almost all
circumstances. If the US and the US allies fired the first shot,
China would aid and defend North Korea and ensure that it did not
collapse.

If North Korea started the war, China would not intervene to prevent a
US counter-attack. However, it would intervene to prevent the US from
devastating North Korea. China also would intervene to keep North
Koreans in North Korea during a war.

The exercise details and Li's remarks in the */SCMP/* article suggest
two scenarios worry the Chinese leadership. The first is that the
North Korean leadership is likely to misread US actions as precursors
to an imminent attack, rather than as demonstrations.

The second scenario is that the US actually has decided to conduct an
attack on a target or set of targets in North Korea.

The article also suggests that the Chinese judge that demonstrations
of US power have reached the point of diminishing returns and the US
knows it because the Chinese have told the US. Thus, the Chinese
analysts are interpreting the scheduling and conduct of more and
larger US and allied exercises can only be interpreted as war
preparations under cover of exercises.

The exercise announcement also signifies that the Chinese have begun
taking measures to prepare for a war contingency and are practicing
them. A state-run local newspaper in Jilin, near North Korea,
published civil defense instructions on how civilians should protect
themselves in the event of a nuclear war in Korea. It concluded that
there is absolutely nothing to worry about.

<END QUOTE>

[Tom Mazanec]

Maybe NK can only deliver one or two nukes, but if it is an EMP attack that could theoretically kill a couple hundred million Americans.

[StillMoreReflection]

more reflections, this time much more choppy

More and more this world is starting to look the scene in the dark knight involving the two boats
with the prisoners and the civilians. Each has a button to blow one another up.
"No one wants to get their hand dirty. Fine. I'll do it. Those men on that boat
chose to murder and steal it doesn't make any sense for us to have to die too"

I'd like to think of America as a great nation. A nation that was able
to fuse the pragmaticism of the british with the ideals of the french.
The only nation to encapsulate simultaneously reason and feeling.
To be able to be strong when it calls for it but vulnerable when the time comes.
I have no doubt we are strong enough to
press the button but I do doubt we can be vulnerable enough
not to push it.

Did Jesus die to break the cicle of violence for this? Better yet can we say
we are fighting to protect Juedo-christian values if we stomple on them first?
Talk is cheap the best expression of values is with choices, when it counts.

“Everyone believes the world's greatest lie..." says the mysterious old man.
"What is the world's greatest lie?" the little boy asks.
The old man replies, "It's this: that at a certain point in our lives, we lose control of what's happening to us, and our lives become controlled by fate. That's the world's greatest lie.”
― Paulo Coelho

What better way to strip someone of their humanity than to convince them they have no choice.
What are you left with? Just being a product of your circumstances, purely a product of
genetics and your environment. What a dangerous oversimplification.
Everyone thought at the birth of the nuke it would mean the end of the world. That
once we got nukes clearly humanity would wipe itself out. Yet here we still stand today, with a choice.

The fact is there are many things we can't control but we can control
how we choose to view the world and how to react to what is given us.
The choices that we do get to make end up shaping the world we live in.
Ultimately it is that simple: nuke them and be ruled by your environment
or hold back, risk peril, but preserve our ideals and our nation.
We can likely rebuild from the fall out from a nuke. Allies would come to
our side and probably even nuke them for us if we are completely disabled.
I think we have the strength to overcome the challenge similar to the Japanese,
but I don't think America can survive knowing it is the monster.
America while strong and coming from diverse backgrounds is ultimately sewed together by
the delicate thread of our ideals. I think America
will crumble if we drop the bomb. Our ideals
immediately go out the window the second the bomb drops.

Lets face it if anyone can afford to risk it, it is us, and if we can't who can?
It is our burden to bear. We brought this monster into the world and unleashed it on mankind.
We aren't God. We can't expect to dish shit out and not expect it to come back our way.

"You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain"