We are just a group of retired spooks that discuss things that you’ll not find anywhere else. It makes us unique. Take a look around. Learn a thing or two.
The U.S. is now involved in more than 130 wars or none, depending on your definition of ‘war.’ Or it is involved in one worldwide “War Against Terror,” that successive U.S. Administrations, with Congressional support, have used to justify U.S. military operations in at least 134 countries, where they are engaged in direct combat operations, conduct special covert missions, act as military advisers, or train foreign troops or militias.
The problem is that our traditional definition of “war” is outdated, and so is our imagination of what war means.
World War II was the last time Congress officially declared war. Since then, the conflicts we’ve called “wars” — from Vietnam through to the second Iraq War — have actually been congressional “authorizations of military force.”
And more recently, beginning with the War Powers Act of 1973, presidential war powers have expanded so much that, according to the Congressional Research Service, it’s no longer clear whether a president requires congressional authorization at all to engage in war.
The recent US wars in Afghanistan and Iraq will likely be the last time, in the foreseeable future, that the United States wages war in the way that’s most familiar to us: a lot of combat troops on the ground in a foreign country with lots of money and support and an ostensibly achievable objective.
US troop presence in Iraq peaked at 187,900 in 2008. In Afghanistan, it peaked in 2010 at 100,000.
On paper, it looked like the United States was fighting two wars. But the reality was much more complicated, and it’s only gotten more complicated. So how many wars is the US fighting right now?
Somewhere between zero and 134+.
Here’s the rationale:
Total # of wars: 0
Congress hasn’t declared war since 1942 so there is no war right now.
Okay, that makes no sense.
Look at a funding profile over time. It’s very clear.
x
From this graph, we can CLEARLY see that American spending on weapons and military are clearly indicative of America waging active wars.
To ignore that outrageous and obvious “tell tale” is to act the fool.
Total # of wars: 6
This maybe sounds more reasonable.
Consider the definition of war put forth by Linda Bilmes (Harvard Kennedy School) and Michael Intriligator (UCLA), who defined war in a 2013 paper as “conflicts where the US is launching extensive military incursions, including drone attacks, but that are not officially ‘declared.’”
By that definition, the United States is at war in six places right now:
Iraq
Afghanistan
Pakistan
Somalia
Yemen
Ukraine
Total # of wars: 8
If you include nations that have American military, American military uniforms, weapons and systems, and is led with / by American generals. This then, adds two additional nations to the list above.
South Korea
Taiwan
Total # of wars: 134+
Whoa! Surprising, right?
In 2013, the US Special Operations Command (SOCOM) — one of the nine organizational units that make up the Unified Combatant Command — had special operations forces (SOFs) in 134 countries.
The American military were either involved in combat, special missions, or advising and training foreign forces.
Since most of what SOFs do is classified, all we know about them is what we get told about them. Here’s what we’re told by the Joint Chiefs of Staff: What are SOFs?
“Special operations forces (SOF) are small, specially organized units manned by people carefully selected and trained to operate under physically demanding and psychologically stressful conditions to accomplish missions using modified equipment and unconventional applications of tactics against strategic and operational objectives.
The unique capabilities of SOF complement those of conventional forces.”
And what do they do?
“Joint special operations (SO) are conducted by SOF from more than one Service in hostile, denied, or politically sensitive environments to achieve military, diplomatic, informational, and/or economic objectives employing military capabilities for which there is no broad conventional force requirement.
These operations may require low visibility, clandestine, or covert capabilities.
SO are applicable across the range of military operations.
They can be conducted independently or in conjunction with operations of conventional forces or other government agencies and may include operations through, with, or by indigenous or surrogate forces.
SO differ from conventional operations in degree of physical and political risk, operational techniques, use of special equipment, modes of employment, independence from friendly support, and dependence on detailed operational intelligence and indigenous assets.”
Examples: These tasks include;
special reconnaissance (SR),
direct action (DA),
unconventional warfare (UW),
foreign internal defense (FID),
counterterrorism, counterproliferation of weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
SOCOM admited to having forces on the ground in 134 countries around the world (in 2014).
That doesn’t mean its forces are carrying out capture or kill raids in every country, but it’s almost impossible to know where and when different operations are taking place.
That’s especially true when it comes to the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), an operational command within SOCOM that operates with an enormous amount of autonomy and secrecy — and, some would say, little accountability.
Founded after the failed mission to rescue American hostages in Tehran in 1980 and designed to handle similarly complex operations in the future, JSOC was a classified and little used command on Sept. 11, 2001.
Since then, it’s more than tripled in size, received an ever-increasing share of funding, and has conducted operations in dozens of countries.
(Journalist Jeremy Scahill wrote in depth about JSOC in his 2013 book, “Dirty Wars.” That’s where the following information comes from.)
JSOC was introduced to the world on May 1, 2011, when Navy SEALs killed Osama bin Laden in a nighttime raid on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.
The raid was a collaboration between the CIA and an agency almost nobody had heard of: JSOC. “We’re the dark matter,” a Navy SEAL told the Washington Post of JSOC in 2011. “We’re the force that orders the universe but can’t be seen.”
We know more about JSOC now, thanks to investigative reporters like Scahill and Mark Mazzetti. JSOC’s core is made up of three acknowledged “Special Missions Units” (SMUs).
You know these folks from TV and movies:
Army’s 1st Special Forces Operational Detachment (Delta Force),
the Naval Special Warfare Development Group (DEVRGU or “Seal Team Six”),
the Air Force’s 24th Special Tactics Squadron.
In addition to the SMUs, JSOC has its own intelligence division, the Intelligence Support Activity, and often oversees the 75th Ranger Regiment, the 160th Special Operations Aviation Regiment (the “Night Stalkers”), and other special operations forces. JSOC, along with the Special Activities Division at the CIA, have been the leading edge of counterterrorism.
Journalists Dana Priest and William Arkin found that JSOC has carried out counterterrorism operations in…
Iraq,
Afghanistan,
Algeria,
Iran,
Malaysia,
Mali,
Nigeria,
Pakistan,
the Philippines,
Somalia,
Syria,
Ukraine,
Taiwan,
Yemen.
An anonymous source with close ties to JSOC gave Scahill an even more expansive list that included those countries along with Indonesia, Thailand, Colombia, Peru, and several countries in Eastern and Central Asia.
“The world is a battlefield and we are at war,”
The source told Scahill of the logic that drives JSOC.
“Therefore the military can go wherever they please and do whatever it is that they want to do, in order to achieve the national security objectives of whichever administration happens to be in power.”
Add such nations of Iran, Bolivia, Kenya and more to the list and it seems really hard to keep track of all the killing, and wars that the United States is involved in.
Total # of wars: 1
“The world is a battlefield” isn’t just a vague, hawkish worldview — it’s a legal understanding of military force in the age of a single, global war: the War on Terror.
The world is a battlefield thanks in large part to the Authorization for Use of Military Force, which Congress passed on Sept. 14, 2001 and which gives the President of the United States broad power to fight terrorism around the world.
It reads in part:
“The President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determined planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2011, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.”
A video that discusses what is next
Yuppur. The USA has Taiwan in it’s sights. Please check out this “must see” video…
Conclusion
So how many wars would you say the United States is now fighting?
"I didn't graduate from the 7th grade to put up with this shit!"
-Chef, "Apocalypse Now"
When I was growing up, my parents raised me on a steady diet of television. Back then in the early 1960’s my favorite shows were “Diver Dan”, “The Jetsons”, “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.”, “Get Smart” and “I dream of Genie”. These shows influenced me as I grew up. It was all about adventure, space and fighting those dastardly communists. Yikes!
Watching TV with mom.
I used to love Saturday mornings.
it would be a morning full of cartoons. I would go get a bowl of sugary cereal, add milk and even more sugar, and sit there in front of the television screen absorbing all the great child entertainment. My favorite cereals from those years were “Froot Loops”, “Coco puffs”, and “Rice Krispies”. I was, I tell youse guys, just a normal kid.
Watching the shows.
In those days, mind control via electronic media was unheard of. It had to be introduced and perfected, which it was indeed, over the next two to three decades.
Now we have very advanced systems to control the minds of people, and they do work. But every now and then, the absurdity of it all becomes so glaringly obvious. And it’s laughable. Really.
If it wasn’t so absolutely sad.
From MoA. Classic.
There seem to be general meme directives for ‘western’ outlets with regards to official enemies.
Russia is said to weaponize everything. The position of China is not (yet) seen as in military terms. The emphasis is on economic competition. Any undeniable Chinese achievement must be declared to have been a bad investment. The directive thus reads:
"When writing about China's achievements - question their costs."
China’s Experimental Cure for Cancer China’s curing cancer faster and cheaper than anywhere else. But some worry they may be going too fast.
– Bloomberg, Dec 12th 2019
I read a few articles on China’s high speed train system, and in the most recent the cost versus revenue was a worry/criticism, even though it would be easy to argue or at least discuss about positive externalities worthy of subsidies.
Similar cost related criticism was laid on the huge program to develop new gas fields in Eastern Siberia and connect them with pipelines to China. It seems to be true that the long term contracts signed with China when the natural gas prices were very depressed were not best possible, but since those projects have to be considered in 20-50 year time frame, it was silly even then. Now the concerns about profitability of delivering natural gas to China in the future look hilarious.
There is an objective aspect in some “cost/global” articles. China is dominating so many commodity markets that decisions impacting import and export of China have tremendous impact on importers and exporters alike.
Most glaring is the lack of “at what cost” questions concerning the West. EU delays approval of North Stream II, but at what cost? Technocrats decreased investments in fossil fuels in EU and reliance on so-called clean fuels, but at what cost?
Both are phenomenal.
Madam Baerbock speaks her mind, but at what cost? This girl sends markets to panic which is not a part of her job description.
Ukraine “decreases reliance on Russia”, but at what cost?
Some estimate that the resulting losses are many times larger than gains from “western orientation”, western commentators do not attempt any such calculations. Freedom is worth every price if someone else pays for it (USA likes when the cost is born by EU, and EU likes when Ukrainians hold the short end of the stick).
Some thoughts…
Now I know to read any title that contains ‘China’ and ‘at what cost’ because it threatens the cult of U.S. hegemony.
1. Articles about environment: After skimming these articles, I agree, the ‘at what cost’ was so inappropriate for the content, it does look like it was planted, ‘will they succeed’ would have been more natural for these articles. Air quality has previously been notoriously bad in China, ongoing efforts to improve it was a very good thing.
2. articles about AI: ‘threatened by U.S.’ would be most accurate or some suitable alternative. This group of headlines says that China is vulnerable in the chip area. There is a condescending tone because it says, ML (Machine Learning) is data sets and processing power, and not so much about innovation, this is true. But I would not discount China’s ability to innovate. In using AI to implement a police state, ‘at what cost’, is appropriate here, as it conjures up everyone’s worst fears, even for our own govt. Pointing out how ML can be abused by a govt is a good thing. But even better is pointing out how it has eliminated rapes, kidnapping, child abductions, and fraud by leaderships inside of China is a great thing.
3. I can see how ‘at what cost’ can be used for the other categories but agree that the repetitious use wreaks of information war.
Infographic
Global Times provides this excellent infographic aimed directly at BigLie media’s propaganda meme as it’s titled, “China’s commitment to the world in 2021.”
Number two…
Number three…
Number four…
I am “chomping at the bit” in anticipation to see the United States versions of these meme’s.
Here’s an article out of Laos…
Laos.
‘The country that bombed you is your friend. The one that built your new railway is your enemy’
Major bridge across the Yuanjiang River along the China-Laos railway in southwest China’s Yunnan Province. Xinhua
Tom Fowdy / RT
This is the Western media’s bizarre messaging to the people of Laos, a nation that was carpet bombed by America, and which is now being vilified for accepting a new $6 billion railway line paid for by China.
Thursday was National Day in Laos, a celebration marking 46 years since the landlocked Southeast Asian nation deposed its monarchy and became a revolutionary communist state, an effort which was supported by Vietnam.
This year, the anniversary had added significance, as it saw the opening of a major new project, an electrified high-speed and freight railway system connecting the capital city, Vientiane with its northern neighbour, China.
The $6 billion project is part of the Belt and Road Initiative, and has been hailed as one of its flagship achievements. It is the first commercial and industrial railway in Laos, which, given its geography and the fact it is surrounded by mountainous terrain, has not previously had many options to expand its exports and generate economic growth.
Now, though, it has a direct rapid link into the world’s second largest economy and the world’s largest consumer market by population, and a connection to the booming ports of Guangdong. In terms of what it will bring to Laos, it is a game changer. So, what’s not to like about it?
To nobody’s surprise, the mainstream media have responded to the railway with the usual anti-China negativity. A plethora of articles sought to paint the project as a ‘debt trap’, promoting the accusation that Beijing loans countries money for projects they cannot afford and then exerts political leverage over it.
The Financial Times, for one, ran with a cynical article headlined ‘Laos to open Chinese-built railway amid fears of Beijing’s influence’. It implied that somehow Laos feels threatened or fears the construction of this very pioneering railway project (which the country’s own leader made sure he was the first to travel on). This suggestion of ‘fears of Chinese influence’ has become a common feature on such stories, which seek to cast doubt over anything positive China may be achieving or doing.
A common Twitter meme among pro-China users which has followed from stories like this asks: “but at what cost?” highlighting the frequency of such negative coverage.
And if you Google “China, but at what cost?” you can find a great many examples of articles published in major outlets. In producing such pieces, the broader intention is to depict Beijing’s actions as unwanted, threatening and constantly facing opposition. In the case of the Laos railway project, the ‘problem’ is it was financed by debt, and therefore it is not a positive step.
Yet this argument is as insulting as it is outright insensitive to Laos’ contemporary history. Anyone who knows anything about Laos’ relatively recent past will be well aware that China is not the country to fear, but the United States – the nation that dropped over 260 million cluster bombs on Laos and completely devastated the country as an extension of the Vietnam War, making it the most single bombed nation in history and claiming over 50,000 lives.
Many of these bombs remain unexploded and litter the countryside of Laos, continuing to kill civilians. In constructing the new railway, workers first had to clear the unexploded ordnance. How is it that the world and the mainstream media remain indifferent to this atrocity? And how, by any stretch of the imagination, can they claim that China is the true threat to Laos, and that the US and its allies act in the true interests of the country?
Herein lies the problem. Such a mindset symbolizes the elitism, chauvinism and self-righteousness of the countries of the West, which are ideologically inclined to believe that they stand for the ‘true interests’ of the ordinary people in the countries they profess to liberate.
Western politics peddles the assumption that through countries’ adherence to liberal democracy, they exclusively hold a single, universal, impartial and moralistic truth, derived from the ontological legacy of Christianity, and they have an obligation to introduce it to others. The West always acts truthfully and in good faith, while its enemies do not. And therefore, so the logic goes, any policy the US or its allies direct towards Laos is motivated by sincere intent and goodwill for its interests, and in turn, anything that China does is bad-faith, expansionist and power-hungry behaviour motivated by a desire to influence or control the country.
This creates the bizarre scenario whereby Beijing is depicted as evil and sinister for building a railway to connect to its neighbour – but we should forget America dropping millions of bombs on the country because it was done in the name of ‘freedom’. I’m sure you can imagine how the media would react if China did the latter.
Those who push this narrative predictably omit any insight into how Laos itself thinks about the situation. Another piece which took a similar stance, published in The Diplomat, was titled ‘Laos-China Railway inaugurated amid mounting debt concerns’.
But like the ‘fears of Beijing influence’ expressed in the FT, who are these ‘concerns’ from? The report cites the “Washington-based Center for Global Development” and what it merely describes as a “US based analyst” as sources who push the ‘debt trap’ narrative. But nowhere in any of these articles is there an actual voice direct from Laos who raises any fear of China, or objects to the railway’s existence.
Instead, they simply talk on the country’s behalf, obscuring the reality that a communist state which suffered from extreme levels of aggression from the US probably does not see its northern neighbour – and its most important economic partner – as a threat to its regime. With many more articles running variations of the same theme, there is minimal effort given to the consideration that the railway will help the country rapidly expand its exports, sustain greater growth and help Laos pay for the project.
The Laos-China railway has provided a textbook example of how the media can distort a story in order to fortify an incriminating narrative, while brushing aside brutal realities. We are shown a lopsided world, where the travesty of a country being bombed into oblivion with consequences lasting decades is ignored, and the preference is to try to convince us how that same country’s first commercial railway line is, in fact, what it should really be scared of.
It is a demonstration of how the power of the English-language, pro-US media distorts reality itself and how they can blow up an issue, yet hide the truth, by professing to care dearly about the wellbeing and interests of a country which the West poured death, destruction and carnage upon in the name of freedom.
Here’s an article out of Cambodia…
Cambodia
Cambodia-US Relations: Cambodia is not the enemy of the US
Two U.S. Air Force Boeing B-52D Stratofortress bombers over Cambodia, 1970. Original description: “Aerial bombing of Cambodia: Operation Menu”. Wikipedia
America believes that Cambodia is China’s vassal state. And it does everything to solidify that belief. At the end, they justify their sanctions against Cambodia for being too friendly with China whom the US considers as the “malign actor” and “revisionist state” to the hegemonic order with the US at the top.
But then how much is called overdependent? How much sanction is considered enough against the alleged malign actor?
Americans warn Cambodians to beware of lucrative interactions with China. But Cambodia’s trade and investment with China is less than 10% of the whole of Southeast Asia. Statistically speaking, countries that are close with the US such as Singapore and Vietnam are in fact the highest beneficiaries from trade and investments with China.
Media that are anti-China can lie about Cambodia’s overdependence on China but numbers don’t lie. Impartial academics should look into those number by themselves and make comparison to the whole region to verify and question their established prejudice. The so-called independent minds should not become the trash collectors of all bad press about Cambodia with many hyperlinks to the anti-Cambodia puppet media and organizations.
Cambodia is currently the most sanctioned country in Southeast Asia, even more than the military junta in Myanmar, and the fact is that there is no sanction at all against communist Vietnam, who has no freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of expression. What does anyone say to these? None at all.
What does democracy mean to America when Cambodia is being treated this way by the American government and congress on the aspect of democracy and human rights?
Cambodia is among the few countries in Southeast Asia that has regular multi-parties election.
Cambodia is among the few countries where press, both domestic and foreign, operate freely, and some of the US’ affiliates like the Voice of America, the Voice of Democracy, and Radio Free Asia, bombards daily with verbal diarrhea against Cambodia as if Cambodian people are living in hell. Nothing can be seen positive from the point of view. And they still say that Cambodia has no freedom of expression.
Facebook operates freely in Cambodia. Internet freedom is among the fullest compared to countries in the region. Cambodian people are addicted to Facebook freedom. They really enjoy it. So long as they don’t defame, libel, slander, promote uprising, treason and the toppling of government, they are free to say anything.
Cambodia is hosting more than 5,000 civil society organisations but human right groups in Cambodia, funded by foreign governments, still has liberty to say that Cambodia lacks freedom of association as compared to Viet Nam which has only one state union. In the US, these organisations would have been banned or classified as “foreign agents”. According to the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA), passed in 1938, it is required that agents representing the interests of foreign powers in a “political or quasi-political capacity” disclose their relationship with the foreign government and information about related activities and finances.
But such kind of civil society organisations in Cambodia are hiding behind protection of their foreign embassies crying foul that Cambodia’s Law on NGO (LANGO) is too restrictive because they simply cannot disclose their finance and activities that are fundamentally foreign-owned, foreign-initiated and foreign-led.
What does America want from Cambodia? Does it want Cambodia to become the enemy of China and to fight China on America’s behalf? Where does Cambodia’s national interest stand in supporting the US and in making China its enemy? Where is the right to self-determination of Cambodia that the US often says that it respects fully? Does the US want Cambodia to commit suicide to express its sincerity in wanting friendship with the US?
Cambodia is considered as “gold-standard” in terms of cooperation with the US in area such as POW/MIA. Cambodia even accepted 300 Afghan refugees when only a few countries in the region are willing to do so.
But what does Cambodia receive in return? The US cut off scholarship for military students who are already in the US. The US imposed visa sanctions against high-ranking officials in the whole Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.
They are sanctioning the very individuals that act as the main bridge of friendship and relations between Cambodia and the US.
This is too cruel a treatment from a friend. The US is treating Cambodia like an enemy.
While the US says that it stands with Cambodian people for its independence and march towards stable and peaceful democracy, Cambodia is in fact one of the most sanctioned countries in Southeast Asia, even worst than the so-called US enemies.
People might probably say sometimes, frankness is needed among sincere friends. But a friend should not express solidarity through piles of sanctions like what the US is doing towards Cambodia right now.
How could a friend be so cruel to treat another friend that way? What does friendship mean for the American government and congressmen?
Is this the best treatment that the American government can afford to Cambodia, which is the last beacon of hope of democracy in the Mekong region? Which country in the Mekong region that fares better than Cambodia in terms of democracy and human rights?
Cambodian people like America; they like American democracy; they aspire to have American democracy.
It is totally unfair for Cambodia that it needs to sacrifice its national interest to befriend with the US. Why is it so hard to befriend with the US?
The US should reconsider its relations with Cambodia from the heart, not from the brain of geopolitical strategy. The brightest brain like Henry Kissinger that was behind the dropping of millions of bombs on Cambodian people is not a friend of Cambodia. He is nothing but a war criminal. He should not be the one to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. What does peace prize mean for an individual that was behind the killings of hundreds of thousands of Cambodian people?
Which US congressman and policy-maker want to become the next Henry Kissinger, the war criminal that won a Nobel Peace Prize?
An American B-52 aircraft is not smart to distinguish between the Viet Cong and Cambodian civilians. The fact is that they killed more civilians than the Viet Cong that the US considered as US’ enemies.
There is no better definition than “war crime” and “crime against humanity” considering the US’ acts against Cambodia during the 1970s. America should never forget that. American government, American people, American policy-makers, American congressmen should never forget that. America should remember their atrocity against Cambodian people during the 1970s. Cambodian civilians and government are not US’ enemy.
And another article…
China’s Belt and Road rail services booming despite Covid-19
A train carrying 33 refrigerated containers departs from the Tengjun International Land Port in Kunming, capital of southwest China’s Yunnan Province, for Laos. Xinhua
Beijing has inked more than 200 cooperation documents for the joint construction of the Belt and Road with 145 countries and 32 international organizations
Xinhua – Though the world remains haunted by the still ravaging COVID-19 pandemic in the year 2021, the China-proposed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) has seen a boom in promoting world connectivity.
Under the BRI framework, railway construction is expanding across the global landscape. The iconic China-Europe Railway Express, the China-Laos railway and the railway line in Tanzania have all recorded milestone achievements over the past year.
These important railway projects provide important pillars for the BRI, and also contribute their due share to improving the global supply chain and the COVID-19 fight.
LINE OF HEALTH AND GIFTS
During days just before Christmas, when people in Western countries are worrying that they may not be able to receive their Christmas gifts on time due to clogged shipping lanes, China-Europe trains from different regions were sending products to Europe without delay.
This year marks the 10th anniversary of the launch of China-Europe freight trains. By the end of October, the China-Europe freight trains plying along 73 routes have reached 175 cities in 23 European countries with more than 50,000 kinds of goods.
Amid the pandemic, the number of China-Europe express trains as well as the volume of freight have continued to break new records.
Data from China’s National Development and Reform Commission shows that during the January-November period, the railway service linking the two sides operated 13,817 trains, carrying 1.332 million twenty-foot equivalent units (TEUs), an increase of 23 percent and 30 percent respectively compared with the year 2020.
At the end of November, the cumulative number of anti-epidemic equipment transported by the China-Europe freight trains reached 13.43 million pieces and 103,000 tons.
“China is very important for the global supply chain. And in most cases it’s faster (than the ocean shipping). Therefore, it’s a useful alternative to use the train, and it’s reliable,” said Axel Mattern, joint chief executive officer of Port of Hamburg Marketing.
According to global logistics company MEDILINK, the initial freight rate of the China-Europe rail network is often two-thirds higher than that of sea freight, but the current price is very competitive.
The current freight rates of the China-Europe freight trains are basically the same as those of sea freight, but it only takes nearly half the time, said Logistics industry insiders.
KEY FOR TRANS-ASIAN CONNECTIVITY
On Dec. 3, the China-Laos Railway officially started operation. It marks a crucial step for the trans-Asian railway network, which has been brewing for more than half a century. Since then, the journey from Vientiane to the border with China has been reduced from 2 days to 3 hours, and the journey to Kunming, capital of China’s Yunnan Province, can be made in a day.
“The China-Laos railway is conducive to promoting the development of areas that are located along the line. Countries in the Greater Mekong Subregion, including Thailand, Laos and China, will benefit from trade, agricultural products, consumer products, investment and tourism,” said Pichet Kunadhamraks, deputy director-general of the Department of Rail Transport under the Thai Ministry of Transport, in an interview with Xinhua.
The railway is expected to reduce transport costs between Vientiane and Kunming by 40 to 50 percent, said a World Bank report, noting transport costs from Thailand’s Laem Chabang port to Kunming are expected to fall by at least 32 percent.
It is estimated that by 2030, the annual volume of commercial goods in transit through the Laos section of the China-Laos Railway will reach 3.9 million tons, it added.
This year coincides with the 30th anniversary of the establishment of China-ASEAN dialogue relations, and the two sides are advancing the BRI and the Master Plan on ASEAN Connectivity 2025.
On Jan. 1, 2022, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) will officially enter into force. Experts believe that the BRI will lead to the construction of the trans-Asian rail network and promote regional connectivity.
ROAD OF DEVELOPMENT
In mid-June this year, a ceremony was held to launch the Ithaca-Mwanza section of the Standard Gauge Railway of Tanzania’s Central Line, the construction of which is undertaken by a Chinese company.
After the completion of this project, it will become an important route connecting Tanzania, Uganda, Rwanda, Burundi and other countries, providing a pathway to the Indian Ocean. It is of great importance for promoting the economic development of the countries in the region and improving the living conditions of the people.
From the Tanzania-Zambia railway built in the 1970s, to the Djibouti-Ethiopia and Mombasa-Nairobi railways, and the Standard Gauge Railway of Tanzania’s Central Line, the joint efforts of China and Africa have created jobs, trade opportunities and a better investment environment, thereby contributing to local prosperity as well as to the improvement of the living conditions of the local residents.
As of Dec. 16, China has signed more than 200 cooperation documents for the joint construction of the Belt and Road with 145 countries and 32 international organizations, and financial institutions such as China-proposed Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank and Silk Road Fund have expanded financing channels for infrastructure construction.
According to Bambang Suryono, chairman of Indonesian think tank Asia Innovation Study Center, for many countries, a major obstacle to escape poverty is the weakness of transport infrastructure, and in this regard, China’s success can set an example.
Conclusion
When you measure everything against the cost structure imposed by western capitalism, everything China does inevitably looks costly.
Totally absent from the analysis is the question of benefits.
The west thinks only of profits. China thinks of the benefits not only to China and the Chinese people, but to the countries and peoples with whom they do business.
The West = Personal Profit
China = Benefits for Groups of People
The long term superiority of such a strategy is blindingly obvious to any open minded observer. It’s the reason why China and Russia will eventually pass through this contentious period of change, and prevail in a new better world.
Many other nations see this, and they do remember how the United States treated / treats them. When the shit hits the fan, and it will, the United States will be broke, penniless, scorned and friendless.
No matter how you spin it, it will not a good situation to be in.
Do you want more?
You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.
It’s a never ending onslaught of war preparation, war provocation, and war stockpiling being generated out of the United States. There is ZERO talk about deescalation. I tire of all of this. It seems like the United States is driving the world to war and they aren’t stopping for shit.
There’s no real need for this.
China is minding their own business. Not harming anyone. Sure they make all the products, and are making them better, cheaper and faster than the bloat-ware that is found in the USA. But that is not a reason to kill them. It is a reason to copy them.
Sheech!
And every evil deed is Chinas fault. And China is doing this and that - it’s fucking bad news. My buddy - this past weekend emails me an article about the Chinese military doing something - the article was 7 years old. No matter. It makes China look bad - plaster it all over the news and blame China.When the media - in America - and THIS I know to be true - because I fucking SEEN it - as soon as our media starts showing how the shelves are bare here - because they blame China - but what’s going to happen is right when it gets bad - they are going to show bare shelves here and stocked shelves in China. It’s to anger everyone - I say this specifically because the mass rage that is coming towards Asians is coming - fast. It’s the quickest way to take out an internal threat. Let the CITIZENS do it. -PL
And Russia; what’s the beef with them? It’s not like there are Russian and Chinese aircraft carriers in Boston Harbor are there?
Biden - in HIS infinite wisdom - decides he is going to play Russian Roulette - WITH RUSSIA - they named a suicidal game after the Russians! Again, the irony. So NOW - and let me be very clear - VERY. clear. The average person - people I know throughout the country - and I ask - alllllll know - the ONLY reason we are about to start lobbing nukes at ANYONE is because we all know the money laundering the Biden’s Clinton’s and Obama’s have been doing in Ukraine. It’s been their evil little washing machine AND AMERICA KNOWS IT. So now - people are even more antsy. -PL
Why all this bullshit?
To distract from the reality?
American reality
The thing is - to me - I am amazed by the psychology of it all. And the stupidity - holy shit dude - it’s like everyone is slowly becoming retarded. Like mad cow or something. -PL
They are people just like you and I. But the United States wants to engage in a war to distract Americans, and Russia and China are the enemies chosen for this event. Here’s modern Russia. Video 8MB
Canada Goose
Double arc.
Canada Goose puts spotlight on double standards against Chinese consumers
Canada Goose is feeling the wrath of Chinese consumers after their physical flagship store in Shanghai refused to refund a customer.
She tried to return a jacket the same day she bought it because the embroidering of the logo had an extra arc in the sun. The store refused, citing the company’s return policy for China: “No refunds.”
Netizens quickly pointed out that they have a 30-day return policy for Canada, US and UK. Now Canada Goose is under fire for their double standard.
With all this bad press, Canada Goose decided to refund the customer. But not before sparking a major discussion about brands discriminating against Chinese consumers.
Now LV and Gucci have also become targets as consumers quickly pointed out they have the same difference in return policies across countries.
You’re sick of me saying it but here it is again: The Chinese are the smartest consumers on the planet. They’ll find any discrepancies you have in your offers. And they have high standards.
Doing business here is not cheap. You need to account for dealing with the returns process. Cutting corners will get you in trouble.
What do you think? Are the companies justified in having different return policies for each country, or is this discrimination?
…
Now, let’s check out this little jewel;
Cockroach robot armies!
You betya!
…
Yikes!
Ok. Let’s see about the first amendment; “Freedom of Speech”. Does it still exist in America today? Nope. Not in the least…
Establishment institutions usually start their implementation of censorship and the throttling of press freedom by going after individuals and outlets that are small and/or not well liked by a cross-section of the public. The obscurity or general unpalatable nature of the target ensures the success of setting the precedent.
Most Americans have probably never heard of Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF) and many would be unsympathetic once they learn that the U.S. government claims it is a think tank and journal associated with Russian military intelligence, although no evidence is offered to back up this assertion, and SCF denies it has ties to the Russian government.
But years of anti-Russia sentiment in the political sphere and in most American media ensures that the claim alone will suffice to tar any Americans associated with Strategic Culture Foundation with a black brush.
I have confirmed that two American writers for SCF have received letters from the US Treasury Department in recent weeks warning them of fines of over $300,000 if they continue to write for the journal.
These threats are in response to alleged Russian interference in the 2020 US election and part of the US government’s enforcement of Executive Order 13848 signed by President Donald Trump in September of 2018 which sought to ascertain foreign interference in any future elections in the US and to punish those deemed guilty.
Threats to US elections included not only tampering with actual voting and its supporting infrastructure but “covert distribution of propaganda and disinformation.”
According to the Treasury Department’s April 15, 2021 press release in connection with the designation of SCF and other Russian entities to be sanctioned pursuant to the executive order, the US government stated its intent to target those they see as Russia’s enablers on behalf of its alleged program to interfere in US elections:
"Treasury will target Russian leaders, officials, intelligence services, and their proxies that attempt to interfere in the US electoral process or subvert US democracy," said Secretary Janet L. Yellen. "This is the start of a new US campaign against Russian malign behavior." (emphasis added)
The release also accuses SCF specifically, without evidence, of being directed by Russian military intelligence and that its articles spread “disinformation” – which appears to mean opinion and analysis that the US government doesn’t like:
The Strategic Culture Foundation (SCF) is an online journal registered in Russia that is directed by the SVR and closely affiliated with the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs. SCF is controlled by the SVR’s Directorate MS (Active Measures) and created false and unsubstantiated narratives concerning US officials involved in the 2020 US presidential election. It publishes conspiracy theorists, giving them a broader platform to spread disinformation, while trying to obscure the Russian origins of the journal so that readers may be more likely to trust the sourcing……Treasury designated…the Strategic Culture Foundation pursuant to E.O. 13848 for having engaged in foreign interference in the US 2020 presidential election.
The ordeal started for the two American writers in July of 2020 when they each received a visit at their home from FBI agents inquiring about SCF and its connections to Russia. Daniel Lazare, an author and journalist told Finian Cunningham recently that the agents wanted to know about alleged links of SCF to Russian intelligence:
"I replied that I wasn’t interested because I regard the entire avenue of inquiry as bogus and a product of the anti-Moscow hysteria that’s running rampant in Washington. So the agents left. Everything was polite and low-keyed, and the entire exchange took no more than four or five minutes."
Similarly, Michael Averko, who had written for SCF since 2015, stated that two FBI agents came to his home in July of 2020 and asked about SCF ties to the Russian government. They told him at the time that he wasn’t in any trouble and didn’t have to answer their questions, but Averko was hesitant to say much, recalling what had happened to Michael Flynn:
"The only question I answered was on whether the SCF has any ties to Russian military intelligence. I answered by saying I can’t say for sure and doubt it. I added that my impression is that the SCF comprises politically interested Russians, who want to be involved with the issues they cover."
It wasn’t until November of this year that Lazare and Averko both received letters dated October 15, 2021 from the Treasury Department, delivered personally by the FBI. The letters advised that they were in violation of sanctions against SCF per executive order 13848 and were potentially subject to fines of hundreds of thousands of dollars if they did not stop contributing articles to SCF:
"[P]ursuant to Executive Order 13848 of September 12, 2018…all property and interests in property of SCF that are subject to US jurisdiction are blocked, and US persons are generally prohibited from engaging in transactions with them…[E]ach violation… is subject to a statutory maximum civil monetary penalty of up to the greater of $311,562 or twice the value of the underlying transaction."
When asked whether he thought this would set a troubling precedent for Americans who write for foreign media outlets, Lazare said he believed it would:
"Absolutely. Why not ban RT, formerly known as Russia Today? If the government is pissed off against Emmanuel Macron, why not go after Agence France-Presse? The US complains when Russia harasses western news outlets, yet it’s guilty of precisely the same activities at home. As far as I’m concerned, threatening US journalists with fines for writing for a Russian press outlet is a flagrant assault on freedom of the press."
Averko was a bit more circumspect and thinks the government believes because SCF is a relatively small outlet, it can more easily get away with sanctioning it:
"The SCF and its US based American writers are (in the overall comparative scheme of things) small potatoes and an easier target to beat up on."
Both writers say they know of other US contributors to the outlet who have received the same letter and are intimidated. Lazare stated:
"While I have no particular concerns in my own case, other journalists are so frightened that they’ve not only stopped writing, but don’t even want to speak about their experience with other reporters. No one wants to mess with the federal government because they know the feds can make your life a misery if they’re so motivated. So they’ve clammed up. If you’ve ever wondered what “chilling effect” means, this is it."
While US officials may be unlikely to go after major foreign media, it’s very possible this could be a precedent to go after smaller outlets with unsubstantiated accusations of foreign interference and spreading of “disinformation.”
Lazare is in the process of seeking legal advice about the government threats. Averko said he was considering it and believes it would probably be best for all SCF contributors who received the letter to work together on any possible legal claim, though he’s aware of at least one who is unwilling to do so.
This is another example of the US undermining its own purported democratic values, which it touts to the rest of the world, in order to punish those who associate with the latest bogeyman country while providing no evidence that this outlet is even guilty of what they assert. After WMD’s and Russiagate, it would be foolish to take US government claims at face value as we are again being asked to do.
Natylie Baldwin is the author of The View from Moscow: Understanding Russia and U.S.-Russia Relations, available on Amazon. Her writing has appeared in various publications including Consortium News, RT, OpEd News, The Globe Post, Antiwar.com, The New York Journal of Books, and Dissident Voice.
…
Let’s dive in and begin this discussion with this subject; Nuclear armed B-2 bombers with escort wings to be based inside of Australia to “counter” China.
Scheech! How about a role reversal;
"Mexico and Canada to base Chinese and Russian nuclear stealth aircraft to counter America."
Wouldn’t you think that would be enough to start a war, eh?
OK. First up. A lamb to the slaughter. The USA is turning Australia into a battle zone and a sacrificial lamb for “American interests”. Whoo woo!
THE US will send B2 stealth bombers and a fleet of fighter jets to Australia amid a growing military threat from China and North Korea.
Military resources will also be bolstered in Guam with bases there upgraded, according to a new Pentagon review.
The report says the changes are necessary to…
“deter potential Chinese military aggression and threats from North Korea”.
It also suggests new B2 stealth bombers and F-22 and F-35 fighter jets could soon be deployed.
The review looks to a growing focus on the Indo-Pacific region “to enable improved warfighting readiness and increased activities.”
RISING TENSIONS
Mara Karlin, deputy undersecretary for policy at the US’s Department of Defence, said: “In Australia, you’ll see new rotational fighter and bomber aircraft deployments.
"You’ll see ground forces training and increased logistics cooperation, and more broadly across the Indo-Pacific, you’ll see a range of infrastructure improvements, in Guam, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and Australia."
The Biden administration has focused its attention on countering China as it bolsters its own military amid rising tensions over Taiwan.
Taiwan broke away from China in 1949 but the Chinese ruling party government regards the island as a “renegade state” and has repeatedly vowed to take it back by force if necessary by 2050.
Any invasion would represent a serious escalation of hostilities and could drag in the US through its pact to defend Taiwan.
Vice Adm. Karl Thomas said this week that it is important to put on a united front to “other nations that might be more aggressive and authoritarian” when probed on Russia and China.
In October the US formed a strategic Indo-Pacific alliance with Australia and Britain to counter China.
China reacted angrily, accusing the US and its English-speaking partners of embarking on a project that will destabilize the Pacific to the detriment of global security.
…
And what about Taiwan having all the IC manufacturing capability?
Nope. China is getting it.
Foxconn new factory in Qingdao using 46 made by China lithography machines to produce chip (decoupling from the US and Europe technology)
Foxconn has laid a new milestone for both its semiconductor business and China’s semiconductor ambition. Together with China’s Rongkong Group, a state-owned enterprise, Foxconn has invested in an advanced chip packaging facility in China’s costal city Qingdao. Through two intermediaries, Foxconn has a combined 27.5% share in the new facility, while Rongkong Group has a 46.85% share. Volume production will start in December, and by 2025 the plant is scheduled to reach its full capacity of 360,000 wafers per year.
Currently, Foxconn has two chip packaging businesses under its wing. The first of them is ShunSin Technoogy, and the other is Foxconn’s own semiconductor division which oversights the Qingdao-based packaging facility.
Notably, the packaging facility also serves China’s semiconductor industrial policy by using the country’s domestically produced lithography machines. The new packaging facility has reportedly purchased 46 lithography machines from SMEE to support advanced packaging technologies such as Flip Chip, Fan-In WLP, Fan-Out WLP, and 2.5D/3D.
Shanghai Microelectronics Equipment Co. (SMEE), founded in 2002, is expected by the Chinese government to be its answer to ASML, the Dutch lithography machine maker that has dominated the lithography market. Earlier, SMEE only produces 90nm lithography machines. However, SMEE once announced that it would deliver China’s first 28nm lithography machines between 2021 and 2022. Even Huawei has indirectly cooperated with SMEE to solve the EUV chokepoint that has been derailing…
And who are all these terrible bombs and planes going to kill and destroy?
People like you and me. And some very pretty innocent girls. All for American “freedom” and “democracy”! Video 1.1MB
And what is specifically the plan to “Defend Taiwan from Chinese aggression”?
You can’t make this stuff up.
The following paper illustrates the kinds of options U.S. war planners are toying with when strategizing on how to “defend Taiwan”.
Recommendations that appear in the winter issue of Parameters, a quarterly publication from the U.S. Army War College include:
[1] The United States should lay plans for a targeted scorched-earth strategy that would render Taiwan unattractive to China by utterly destroying its most valuable industrial infrastructure, including destroying facilities belonging to Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company.
[2] Fomenting social unrest by destroying Taiwan’s economy and arming insurgents for long-term guerrilla warfare on the island.
In other words, U.S. war planners think the best way to “defend Taiwan” is to raze it to the ground.
Do your best. Be kind. Be fair. Try to work with people, and help people. You are not in a race to make the most money. You are in a situation called “life” and that means participation in your community.
Hate – Hate – Hate spews forth from American “news”
And the anti-China propaganda is really thick and heavy too. Check out this nonsense…
HIDDEN STRIKE
China feared to be hiding missiles in shipping containers for Trojan Horse-style plan to launch attack ANYWHERE in world
CHINA has been secretly developing Trojan Horse-style missiles hidden in shipping containers that can be unleashed on enemy ports, experts warn.
Oh, it's those pesky "experts" again. -MM
Military analysts believe the country’s huge fleet of freighters and fishing vessels could be turned into warships with the use of the secretive container missiles.
Disguised as a regular shipping containers, they can be sneaked on board a vessel to blend in seamlessly with the hundreds of others on board.
The sheer number of container ships in the world makes them harder to pinpoint than warships in the event of war.
Each ship could hide hundreds of dangerous ICBM nuclear missiles…
A dangerous hidden threat!
Like the fabled Trojan Horse, the missiles would be quietly smuggled into or near an enemy port on a civilian vessel before being unleashed in a surprise attack.
Rick Fisher, senior fellow in Asian military affairs at the International Assessment and Strategy Center, told The Sun Online while Chinese have not officially confirmed they have the missiles – it is likely they have them.
Meanwhile, retired Navy Capt. Jim Fanell, a former Pacific Fleet intelligence chief, previously said a containerized anti-ship missile would add a significant threat to the US Navy.
It comes amid a new wave of tensions between the US and China as the Communist giant challenges Washington’s status as the world’s top superpower.
China is known to be aggressively developing its military and is squaring up to the US – expanding its reach around the world, such as in Africa.
A mock-up of the missiles first appeared at an arms fair in 2016 and since then there has been speculation since they may now be in service with China’s armed forces.
Mr Fisher believes the weapon fits with the Beijing’s military strategy and likely would be used as an offensive capability against their enemies – potentially being smuggled into foreign ports anywhere in the world.
Mr Fisher told The Sun Online “Chinese strategic preferences for surprise would strongly argue for acquisition” of the missiles.
These would be fitted to “nondescript small Chinese ships in order to mount surprise missile raids against shore defences to assist follow on amphibious or airborne invasion forces”.
Fisher said shipping container missile launchers can be smuggled through ports or via highway ports of entry
They could then be stored for years in a climate-controlled building within range of US military bases, and taken out when needed for military operations.
Mr Fisher said the containerised missiles would “offer China’s leadership a wide array of options”.
Washington would be in chaos, would not know against whom to retaliate
-Jick Fisher
This includes
“using larger container ships, thousands of fishing ships or stored containers in ports, to undertake military or terror mission strikes in a manner that can be denied if desired”.
“The CCP (Chinese Communist Party) is fully capable of using containerized missiles to sow chaos when desired,” he insisted.
For example Chinese missile launching containers could be stored near the Port of Seattle.
The Chinese would wait for the day they can launch an electromagnetic pulse warhead-armed missiles over the nearby nuclear ballistic missile submarine base Fisher said.
"The EMP blast might take out electronics on the [submarines] and all over the base without having to launch a nuclear missile from China,” he said.
“Washington would be in chaos, would not know against whom to retaliate, and perhaps China uses American distraction to begin its real objective, the military conquest of Taiwan."
According to US officials, the weapons deployed in the containers are an advanced anti-ship missile called the YJ-18C, which is a version of the Russian Club-K weapon.
The missiles fit into a standard 8 feet wide by 8.5 feet high by 20 feet or 40 feet long standard shipping container.
An online animation showing how the Club-K can be fitted into a container shows how the top comes off to reveal the missile with the front making away for the guidance system.
According to the Center for Strategic and International Studies, the missile has speed of up to Mach 3 – three times the speed of sound or 2,300mph.
While not in the league of China’s hypersonic missiles, which can reach speeds of Mach 10, analysts believe they can still pack a punch.
So far the only record of missile being fired from a container ship is a picture of a test carried out by Israel.
A large number Chinese container ships enter US ports on the west and east coast making them well within range of the vast majority of the US fleet.
"If this capability is confirmed, it will require a completely new screening regime for all PRC flagged commercial ships bound for U.S. ports," Fanell said.
The Stockton Center’s study concluded that loading weapons on civilian vessels clandestinely could violate international law.
It wrote:
"Failure to comply with the law of armed conflict by surreptitiously incorporating merchant vessels into China’s warfighting/war-sustaining effort endangers civilian seafarers and puts all civilian ships at risk that may be operating in the area of hostilities."
POWER GAME
China is perceived as directly challenging the West for status as the world attempts to recover from the pandemic.
Beijing is making moves to establish a foothold in the Atlantic Ocean with a new series of naval bases on the west coast of Africa.
The country’s first overseas naval base was built years ago in Djibouti in the Horn of Africa and it is steadily increasing its capacity.
And for some time, many have thought that China was working to establish a naval base in Tanzania, a country on Africa’s eastern coast that has a strong, long-standing military relationship with Beijing.
Meanwhile, China is also seen to have taken the lead in the next stage of the global arms race as it flew a nuke-capable missile around the world.
Hypersonic missiles are a game changer because unlike ballistic missiles, which fly into space before returning on steep trajectories, they zoom in on targets at lower altitudes.
China – followed closely by Russia – were already regarded as having the most potent hypersonic missile arsenals pouring billions into them but others had been seen as catching up.
But the shocking revelations of their missile test back in August has sent shockwaves through Western intelligence who fear they actually underestimated Beijing.
US intelligence and military officials were reportedly left stunned after China launched a rocket in space carrying a hypersonic glide vehicle which circled the globe before before speeding towards its target.
Just who are these evil communists that must be killed?
You know for “The American way” of “freedom” and “democracy”! Video 1MB
And now the USA is equipping all the F-16’s and F-35 fighter jets with the ability to drop nuclear bombs. Are they out of their fucking minds????
…
Well, you know, YES they ARE.
China and Russia BOTH treat any weapon system that can deliver nuclear munitions as de facto launching those missiles.
A good look at what America wants to destroy and kill
Soak up the reality. The United States is trying to get everyone to hate – hate – hate so that these people shown in this video will be killed. All for the greedy psychopaths to continue to rule. video 18MB
U.S. assembled the first B61-12 nuclear bomb for F-35A and F-15E
WASHINGTON – In the United States last month, November 23, the assembly of the first serial guided thermonuclear bomb B61-12 Life Extension Program [LEP] was completed. This was announced on December 2, by the US National Nuclear Security Administration, learned BulgarianMilitary.com.
Last week, #NNSA successfully completed the B61-12 First Production Unit @PantexPlant. This is a huge milestone for stockpile modernization and demonstrates our Nation’s commitment to #nuclear deterrence. pic.twitter.com/90ojHPw6cH
— NNSA Administrator (@NNSAHruby) December 2, 2021
According to the report, the B61-12 bomb modernization project lasted more than nine years – such a long period was required for the design, development, qualification, and production of components.
Full-scale mass production of these bombs is scheduled to begin in May 2022. In total, the program is expected to produce more than four hundred bombs by the end of 2026. In total, the project should cost about $ 12 billion.
According to the US National Nuclear Security Administration, the modernization will keep the bomb in operation for another 20 years and “will continue to ensure the safety and effectiveness of weapons.”
It is known that B61-12 should replace other tactical versions of this bomb [-3, -4, and -7] and will probably be stored at US and NATO bases in Europe. The main carriers of this bomb will be F-35A and F-15E fighters.
What is a B61-12 thermonuclear bomb?
The B61-12 thermonuclear bomb belongs to the B61 family. B61 is the main thermonuclear gravitational bomb of the United States, actively developed amid the Cold War with the Eastern blog close to the USSR.
According to the characteristics known to the general public, B61 has the possibility of a complete explosion, ie. a full range of ignition and delivery options, whether by air or ground. The B61 is capable of reaching supersonic flight speeds. The dimensions of the thermonuclear bomb are 3.56 m long, 33 cm in diameter, and a total weight of about 320 kg. Military experts say that depending on the B61 version, the weight can vary.
The latest modification of the B61 is the B61 Mod 12 or B61-12. One of the tests of the B61 Mod 12 at the very beginning of its development showed that this thermonuclear bomb can penetrate underground and reach an equivalent ability to explode on the surface of weapons from 750 kilotons to 1.25 megatons.
Experts say that “underground penetration” was not planned, but it is good news, as B61 Mod 12 could become a successful replacement for B61 Mod 11, whose main function is underground penetration. The B61 Mod 11 is expected to be decommissioned by the end of 2030.
***
So who are these bombs going to kill?
Well, one thing that is omitted PURPOSEFULLY in American media is showing any humanity with the targeted enemies. there are no pictures that show Russians or Chinese people being human. Just these evil narratives, ugly narratives, and fear mongering dangerous narratives. Not here on MM. We are being blunt. These are the people that your government is trying to kill. video. 4MB
Why? Why kill the nice, cute and hard working people of the world?
For this “freedom”, “liberty”, and “democracy”? Are you out of your FUCKING MIND? video 29MB
So, who are these bombs, missiles and war machines going to protect?
Are they going to protect you from the “red menace”? Nope. It is just a way to maintain the status quo and keep the evil greedy in positions of incredible wealth and power. video 14.3MB
Sigh. Here’s Phobos.
Hell, you have to leave the earth to escape this madness.
Marian moon; Phobos.
And let’s not forget about the moon.
China sends lunar rover to probe object on far side of moon
Question: what is the longest time US roller exploring the moon or Mars?
Dose this mean that China roller is more advanced than the USA:
China’s Yutu 2 rover discovered the curious cube on the horizon in the Von Kármán crater in November. The solar-powered rover, which first landed on the moon almost three years ago, has now been tasked to spend the next two to three months investigating the object.
“Over the summer while working a DUI shift, I stopped out at a local gas station to grab a drink. While waiting in line, the lady in line ahead of me offered to purchase my drink. I kindly declined the offer and stated I’d get it but thanked her. The kind lady then politely grabbed the drink out of my hand and set it on the counter to purchase.
It’s it very common in my city for a citizen to purchase food or drinks for police officers. These kind acts do not go unnoticed and I feel blessed to work for a community that proudly supports law enforcement. Building community relationships goes a long way.”
Rufus
With all the bad news being thrown at you, how about some good news to offset it all and find stability in your heart; your mind and your soul? video
Sigh. Make a difference!
Sometimes following in your father’s footsteps can lead you to the most beautiful corners of the world .
Daddy’s big girl now.
Why the CIA is so frustrated with China…
Here’s what the Chinese AI social credit scoring system works. No wonder the CIA and the NED are all upset. Their agent saboteurs cannot do anything. Which is why all the CIA agents in Hong Kong were found, rounded up and either deported or are spending long prison terms in China. video 24MB
Rufus tales
Be the Rufus like this bus driver that gives up his coat to warm up a high school girl on his bus. Video 12MB
Yu Beng Village(雨崩村), Deqing, Yunnan Province, China
China is big. It looks a lot like Switzerland in many places.
AI! I am getting off track…
So what is my point? News out the “West” is fear-hate-fear-hate.
But is that really helping you?
I say that instead, it is making you ill. It is hurting you mentally, emotionally, spiritually, socially, and all the rest. Know that there is a great life here for all of us to live and the answer lies in community. Whether world war III occurs, or the United States and the rest of the world just melts down, or the Prison Planet restructures itself is of no consequence…
…if you always do your best, work as part of a community of others, and do great things. Be the best you can be and be the Rufus that would make your grandmother proud.
In 1981, a clairvoyant contacted British Rail to warn depot employees that she’d been having a recurring vision of a fatal train crash. In her vision, one of their blue engines hauling oil tankers crashed with devastating consequences.
She also saw that the train number was 47216.
Managers took the warning seriously, as they were aware that the clairvoyant had assisted police on several occasions. They applied to have the number of the particular train changed to 47299.
In December 1983, the 47299 train was hauling an oil train when it collided with a DMU at Wrawby Junction. One person died, and it was concluded that a combination of equipment failure and human error was to blame.[6]
.
Afterward, the accident was referred to as an “amazing coincidence.”
Do you want more?
You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.
It’s a never ending onslaught of war preparation, war provocation, and war stockpiling being generated out of the United States. There is ZERO talk about deescalation. I tire of all of this. It seems like the United States is driving the world to war and they aren’t stopping for shit.
A top US general gave a stark warning about the risk of deteriorating ties with the two giant states.
Vice Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff General John E. Hyten told a think-tank meeting that conflict could easily spiral out of control.
“We never fought the Soviet Union,” he said. “As for the great powers, our goal is to never go to war with China and Russia.”
According to Hyten, such an event would “destroy the world and the global economy. It will be bad for everyone, and we have to ensure that we do not go down that path.”
And so everyone is asking these questions.
Why is the United States so fucking hell-bent on creating a major war? And, why isn’t Russia and China responding directly to America’s hybrid wars, clandestine wars, and military provocations?
Observing the mounting provocations by Washington and its NATO puppet, many people in Russia (and abroad) think that Putin's response to the West has been weak, misguided and inordinately accommodationist, a form—in their eyes—of appeasement.
They argue—as does Paul Craig Roberts—that Washington needs to be confronted far more clearly and decisively, with force if necessary, the way one confronts a depraved bully with a long list of crimes to its name.
I have a great deal of sympathy for this point of view, as do many people who don't like seeing an arch-criminal get away with his ever-expanding reign of terror and intimidation.
But, folks, this is a soup with some flies in it, and we need to pay more attention.
While in a non-nuclear world that kind of thinking—giving a bully what he deserves— makes perfect sense, in a nuclearised world the cost/advantage calculus is far more complicated and the right response almost impossible to pin down.
For it is certain that, at this point, an all-out nuclear war between the great powers, a war, mind you, precipitated by the United States and its vassals, besides its unprecedented horrors, is a war guaranteed to have no winners.
This is not the kind of decision that any rational leader would like to make.
So what is Putin or Xi to do?
They face a ruling class that appears to be either technically insane or terminally cynical. Inhabiting a huge bubble of hypocrisy of their own making, drenched in the supremacist myths of US exceptionalism, US elites flail about the world impervious to reality or morality, while wiping their plutocratic asses in the UN charter governing the civilised behaviour of all nations.
Under such circumstances, hubris may blind them to the great risks inherent in their constant warmongering.
But are they really blind and indifferent to the horrific costs, or—as Kissinger and Nixon once supposedly admitted—this is just a bluff to keep the enemy off balance?
Clearly, the Russians and the Chinese, led by rational and competent people, don't want to be forced to find out.
A war between the great nuclear powers is a war with no winners in which the totality of the human race stands to be wiped out.
They know war up, close, and personal in a way that is simply alien to most Americans, and seemingly forgotten by the idiotised vassal nations in what passes for a free Europe.
Well, Russia and China haven't forgotten.
The Soviet Union lost more than 27 million people in WW2, and thousands of towns and cities, plus almost 70% of its hard-won infrastructure and industrial base in her struggle to overcome the Nazi assault.
China chalked up almost 30 million lives in casualties, an enormous figure even in a nation of over one billion inhabitants.
In their eyes, it probably makes sense not to provoke the bully into a fight.
Plus, there are powerful historical reasons for avoiding a shooting war as long as possible. As demonstrated by the Hitler-Stalin non-aggression pact, avoiding war while growing stronger with each passing day is not a bad strategy when confronting a monstrous war machine led by deluded and unstable people.
The USSR, despite its many problems, was a much stronger and more resilient nation in 1941 than in 1939. Those two years allowed her to safeguard and reposition the assets she needed to survive the Nazi attack, and she did. (See for ex. OPERATION BARBAROSSA: MYTHS AND REALITY).
The same can be said for the truly vertiginous development of Russia's modern military in slightly over a decade: the Russia of 2008 (when it had to subdue a NATO-prodded Georgia into some stupid adventurism) and that of today can't be compared from a military standpoint.
Military-naval analyst Andrei Martyanov agrees: "Russia and her Armed Forces of 2021 and of 2008 are separated not just by 13 years, but by two generations of weapon systems and C4ISR."
Let that sink in for a minute.
In sheer speed and effectiveness, Russia's capacity for strategic development is second to none in the world, and is not to be matched or surpassed by the Pentagon in the foreseeable future, no matter how many trillions it wastes on such pursuit.
It's actually a systemic and cultural question not subject to a quick resolution. Ditto with China. Could that be the reason why Putin can afford to look "weak" and calm and non-confrontational toward Washington, despite a non-stop cascade of provocations and vituperations?
Keep these things in mind as you read Paul Craig Roberts' persuasive indictment of the Kremlin posture. —PG
Paul Craig Robert thoughts on this matter…
I can't see Putin trusting any US agreement.
When Russi/Putin acts, it is sudden, swift, and WITHOUT WARNING
So why the PR, the meetings with Biden, Lavrov's diplomatic whirlwind??
Methinks it is to get domestic opinion firmly on his side, a rooted we-back-you-at-any-cost kind of grim determination. Polls show he is half way there. What's the magic #?? 66%?? I would think it in that range.
If this is the case, we have a grim scenario awaiting us in February.
-Les7
While US Whore Media and Whore “scientists” dependent on Fauci-controlled NIH and Big Pharma grants whip up fear over a relatively harmless “Omicron variant,” a real dangerous situation that I have anticipated for seven years is raising its deadly head.
The arrogant fools in Washington lost in their own hubris have been practicing nuclear attacks on Russia within 20 kilometers of Russia’s borders.
Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu announced that Washington’s operationGlobal Thunder rehearsed launching nuclear weapons against Russia from both western and eastern directions.
Russian President Vladimir Putin said that Washington was not taking seriously Moscow’s warning not to cross Russia’s red lines.
Putin is correct.But it is the Kremlin’s fault.
The only decisive action the Kremlin has taken in response to intense provocations from Washington and NATO was the Kremlin’s decision to accept the overwhelming vote of the people in Crimea to be reincorporated into Russia where the territory had resided for 300 years. The Kremlin’s alternative was to lose Russia’s Black Sea navy base.
In a strategic blunder of the first magnitude, the Kremlin refused the same plea from the Russian people in theDonetsk and Luhansk republics, territories that also had been part of Russia for centuries.By refusing to honor the vote of the Donbass Russians to again be a part of Russia, the Kremlin subjected them to war and destruction by the Ukrainian army and various neo-nazi Ukrainian militias.If the Kremlin had accepted the vote of the Donbass Russians to be returned to Russia, the conflict would have ended as Ukraine would not destroy itself by attacking Russian territory. Without the ongoing conflict, Washington would have been unable to continue its machinations against Russia in Ukraine.
In an effort to salvage the situation, the Kremlin put together the “Minsk Agreement,” which Western powers were to support, but didn’t.Thus, the conflict has continued to smolder since 2014, providing Washington with 7 years to use anti-Russian propaganda to define the narrative.
The Kremlin’s passivity and attempt to rely on agreements with the US and NATO to resolve a Ukrainian situation that Washington most certainly does not want resolved has convinced Washington and NATO Secretary Jens Stoltenberg that there is no fight in Russia, thus producing the situation that I have feared:Washington has concluded that Russia’s red lines are merely rhetoric.
Many other Kremlin failures have contributed to this dangerous outcome.The Kremlin still permits Israel to attack Syrian territory when one telephone call from Putin is sufficient to halt the attacks.The Kremlin still permits the occupation of a small part of Syria by US troops and CIA Arab mercenaries hostile to the Syrian state.The Kremlin receives massive insults to the Russian president and still refers to those insulting Russia as “our Western partners.”
These are not responses that create the impression that there is any force behind the Kremlin’s red line.
The Kremlin has also failed miserably in anticipating Washington’s moves, indicating an incompetent intelligence service or a willing disbelief in the Kremlin of Russian intelligence reports.Despite its obviousness, the Kremlin failed to anticipate the invasion of South Ossetia in 2008 by a US and Israeli-trained and equipped Georgian army.Putin was at the summer Olympics in Beijing.The Kremlin failed to anticipate Washington’s obvious overthrow of the democratically elected government of Ukraine and the replacement of a Russia-friendly regime with a neo-nazi regime. Putin was at the Sochi Olympics.
Washington simply will not take seriously a government incapable of paying attention to what is happening to its interests in its own backyard.
One might think that the Kremlin would learn by experience, but apparently not. With reports that half of the Ukrainian army is in the Donbass region threatening the Russian inhabitants, US Secretary of State Blinken threatens Russia with “serious consequences” if Russia protects the Donbass Russians.
Imagine, a cipher like Blinken, a person of no ability or accomplishments, a representative of a second-rate military power that discriminates against its own white troops, issuing threats to the world’s dominant military force.
This is hubris run amuck, hubris encouraged by years of Kremlin low-key response to major provocations.
As I have warned, the low-key Russian response, despite its good intention, encourages more provocations, and sooner or later Washington will go too far and cross a red line that will force a Russian military response.My fear of nuclear war is the reason for my warning that Russia needs to put a strong foot down in order to stop the progression of provocations that can only end in war.
Why has the Kremlin been so meek in response to insults and provocations?I have no inside information.The speculations are that (1) the Kremlin wants the Donbass Russians to remain in Ukraine in order to water down the influence of anti-Russian attitudes in Western Ukraine;(2) the Kremlin did not want to confirm Washington’s propaganda that Russia was rebuilding the Soviet Empire by reabsorbing the Donbass Russians in addition to Crimea;(3) westernized Russian intellectuals have more confidence in the West than in their government;(4) the Atlanticist Integrationists desire to be part of the West than to be allied with China;(5) the Kremlin thinks that by continuing to be low-key and open to cooperation with the West all difficulties will be resolved;(6) Russia knows the horrors of war and wants to avoid war at all costs;(7) Russian billionaire oligarchs want the West as a haven for their stolen wealth.
All of these are sound reasons as far as they go.
The problem is that all of these reasons ignore that Russia is Washington’s enemy of choice.Russia is the enemy that justifies the $1,000 billion annual budget of the US military/security complex.Russia is the enemy that strengthens Washington’s hold on NATO and Washington’s European empire. Russia is the enemy that keeps the Washington-abused American population loyal to the government that is destroying American liberty.Russia is the enemy that can be blamed, along with China, for every failure of Washington.How can the Kremlin forget that the hostility of the American Elite to Russia is so overwhelming that President Trump was confronted with a CIA/FBI/Justice Department orchestrated “Russiagate” for simply stating that he intended to restore normal relations with Russia?
Normal relations with Russia are impermissible to the extent that a President of the United States was removed from office in a stolen election after trumped-up “Russiagate” and “Impeachgate” attempts failed.To complete the lesson to all future presidents that normal relations with Russia are impermissible, Trump supporters are being prosecuted for attending a rally in support of Trump, a rally now known as “the Trump Insurrection.”Six hundred innocent people are held in prison in violation of habeas corpus and First Amendment rights.Not even the US Constitution can protect them.
And this is a government that the Kremlin thinks it can reach an accommodation with!
God help the Russians and all of us as Washington’s provocations continue their march to war.
In a visit to Beijing in March, Moscow’s foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, said that “the US has declared its mission is to limit the technological development opportunities of both the Russian Federation and the People's Republic of China.”
Putin claimed that ties between Moscow and Beijing “have reached the highest level in history,” while Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi insisted both countries “have always been the pillars of peace and stability in the world.” According to him, “the more unstable and turbulent the world is, the more decisive cooperation between China and Russia will become.”
Why Russia didn’t shoot anything down yet?
If Russia shot down a NATO bomber or ship flying or sailing where it shouldn’t be (or even a US one), who would dare respond in kind?
It begs the next question: Why Russia didn’t shoot anything down yet?
Things need to be put in perspective. So here is a third question: Why is the West and the US in particular, so dead set on confronting Russia and China at every corner, short of direct military attack?
It is not because they want to cut Russian gas to Europe (it would terminally break the EU economy and destroy its ability to store increasing dollar reserves), or repatriate jobs from China (systemically incompatible with dollar hegemony) , or even prevent the implementation of the BRI per se (because the matter of fact is that potentially it could become a huge new, and very much needed pit for excess dollars to find their home; if only it were done the “right” way).
When Kissinger invited China into the western world economy, it was understood that it would eternally accumulate dollar trade surpluses, and over time, become another EU or Japan.
In the case of the EU, the US had NATO, and for Japan they had their military bases to make sure these two would dutifully stockpile every dollar that comes their way. But nothing of the sort existed for China.
To make a story short; in the early nineties they took over the largest stash of natural resources that is Russia. With that in hand they thought they now held China on a tight leash.
Late nineties the Asian economic crisis hit; Beijing was livid. 2000 Putin takes over Russia’s natural resources, unleashing China.
The later enters a global buying spree of natural resources through its huge accumulated dollar reserves. Commodities’ prices shoot up, interest rates follow suit and triggers the subprime implosion and all its aftermath.
For all practical purpose, intentional or not, this was an unofficial war declaration. No doubt every central banker on the planet worth his salt understood a new player entered town. It meant business, and was to be reckoned with. US responds with an “epidemic” of color revolution everywhere China was laying the ground work for what was to become the BRI, and dramatically increases the pressure on Russia to force it back into the US$ fold.
Neither China nor Russia blinked. Instead the former announced to the world the official launch of BRI, and the latter openly challenged US military supremacy in Syria, and soon after started in earnest the distribution of S400s (almost as good as the atomic bomb, in diplomatic terms) to the world.
For those holding reservations about the above interpretation of events, please consider: the price of gold went from under 300 US$/ounce in the late 90’s to 1900 US$ by the end of the first decade, bear in mind that this in a market hated by all. To this day less than 1% of global private wealth is held in gold.
In 5000 years of history never did this ratio fall below 5%, even under the most exuberant times. Who was buying? While the western bullion banks acted as “sellers of last resort” with unlimited fictitious supplies on the Futures market to keep the price under cap, so did Beijing act as “buyer of last resort” on the spot market with unlimited dollar supplies from their trade surpluses, thus uncapping the price. The relevance of this is apparent when juxtaposed to the BRI project.
It is estimated tens of thousands tons of gold were disappeared in China; that enters the border but never show up; neither in retails nor official reserves records, but instead just somehow vanish in thin air. At the minimum it shows they’re preparing for a post dollar economy. Then again the BRI makes no secret that it intends to make use of local currencies worldwide.
There are two ways only to have any currency accepted. Either it is backed by the most powerful military, or alternatively it is referenced to gold. Anything else (eg. Petrodollar, Eurodollar…) is military backing under the guise of… and the BRI has also admitted its preferred option for trade account settlements.
Such monetary arrangement (no matter the exact actual architecture) would in short order annihilate any form of western prevalence and privilege on the global scene.
In itself it would just be an ego bruise, but when added to the staggering debt levels, it translates to guaranteed decades of servitude. That my friends is the crux of the matter, the unfathomable horror the west is facing. It is what keeps their elite awake at night, while the population imperfectly senses a looming day of reckoning whether under the traits of a yellow slit eyed giant dragon, a monstrous growling bear, a flood of melted ice, or an amorphous unforgiving pestilence, when instead they should really fear Shylock’s lurking specter and past due pounds of flesh.
Now that the real motive for the Big Boys’ quarrels has been defined, how would a war with Russia or China, even if only through a proxy (Ukraine or whatever) fit in this equation.
First of all the West or the US today is not comparable to say Napoleon’s France or Hitler’s Germany which “benefited” from industrial and military supremacy. It is those specific advantages that allowed them the privilege to make fools of themselves.
Without them, neither Napoleon nor Hitler would have ever thought of heading East. And I might add, nor would have the US embarked on the last 50 years of hegemonic delusions.
Today the latter has lost both trump cards, and with them, one might presume, the luxury to fantasize a swift military solution.
This leaves us with only a proxy war scenario. If realized, that option can only yield very short lived dividends that could never alter the natural course of the empire’s demise.
After all once the Ukrainian army is spent, that card is gone. In fact the Ukraine holds value as long as the status quo last, once the situation is resolved (which ever way that may be) it looses any bargaining stock.
The same holds true for the JCPOA, Syria, North Korea, Taiwan, Myanmar, Ethiopia, and so many others. And what bargaining may I be referring to? Well hold on tight: the West pushes for terms of a new partitioning of the world, while Russia and China expect its terms of surrender.
Sure, until say around 2018, all these pressure points were meant to force China and Russia reconsider the dollar’s role in the BRI and related projects. But then in March of that faithful year (if I remember well) Putin casually announced a panoply of hyper-sonic toys. If the subprime event was a “Wazari”, March 2018 was the “Ipon Seonage”, or basically a “checkmate”.
No doubt every general worth his salt must have raised an eyebrow or two, and every central banker realized the dollar was now naked, with neither gold nor the most powerful military on the planet to enforce it.
All the while Putin was giving his speech, the list of nations that were rejoining the BRI since its official launch and their commitment, were about to dramatically increase.
The practical effect was a gradual and ongoing abandonment of dollars in cross border regional settlement of trades, particularly in South-East Asia were the doomed currency is now considered almost a dirty word among regional players.
Consequently local currencies reserves are displacing US$, which are increasingly being spent on the acquisition of raw materials on the international market for infrastructure projects.
If it sounds like “déjà vu” it’s because it is.
The resulting inflationary pressure on the commodities’ market would again spill over to the interest rate market, triggering the September 2919 REPO event. Because of its brevity, I suppose, few realize how defining that moment was to what came next.
First the Fed met the burst from 0% to 10% on the overnight REPO rate with a 700+ billion US$ barrage within a matter of days to literally drown those darn, messy, uncooperative interest rates. Ever since that market requires a monthly 120 billion allowance just so banks may trust each other and perpetuate the myth of solvency. As the global economy stopped accumulating, or even off-loaded dollar reserves, the greenback’s velocity increased and soon will feel like hot potatoes. A rarely mentioned consequence of this phenomenon (at least I never came across it anywhere), is the severe restriction it imposes on newly printed dollar deployment outside US financial markets, lest it turns the already established price inflation into hyperinflation. Thus it renders the dollar useless as a tool for influencing foreign actors. Those loose dollars must be neutralized. A few months later COVID strikes in China.
Was it just one more sorry attempt to oblige China to reverse its “dollar policy” or whatever favorite narrative one may subscribe, isn’t as relevant as Beijing’s response was remarkable.
There were several instances in the last 20 years when China had to suffer some suspicious biological outbreaks, yet none of the measures taken ever even registered in import/export figures, GDP, or in any other major economic indicator.
Now suddenly under the pretext of one insipid flu-like germ, precisely when the West is shown at its most fragile financially, they decide to entirely shut down one major world industrial production hub.
Again, regardless of one’s view on that epidemic, there’s not a point in the entire space/time continuum where Xi and his team didn’t foresee the consequences of such measures, both on their economy and those of the West respectively.
The West was totally taken off-guard; no point in calling China, the damage was already done, trillions would be needed to absorb the shock, and thus they took the path of least resistance.
They doubled down on the COVID song, proactively shut down their economies to force unanimous political support for direct monetary support of the economy and markets. That the pandemic narrative also served as convenient cover for population movement control, was an extra bonus in an environment ripe for social unrest.
A few months later China unlocks and its economic indicators quickly resume to pre-pandemic levels, all while the US and Europe were still mired in frozen economies.
This showed the world economy did not depend any longer on Western lead. In fact the world can now perfectly do without the West all together.
Now it may still be early to assess with any certainty how the game is being played at this very moment, but based on the evidence over the last 2 to 3 years, here is a proposition which hopefully might offer an answer to our starting questions.
The earlier Putin “checkmate” referred specifically to global dollar dominance. Preserving regional dominion for a little while longer however seems still possible, at least in the minds of the western elites.
However such a region must be isolated from areas that do not submit to the dollar “order” (or whatever new cryptocurrency denomination they may come up with to implement their reset), since direct competition would instantly reveal the currency fraud that it is.
Hence the necessary world partition. In this new context, those pressure points whose main purpose was originally directed against China and Russia, can easily be repurposed to mainly close the ranks in the “salvageable” portion of the world.
That explains nicely the increased hysteria surrounding those sour points; not as means to strike fear in the hearts of Russians and Chinese (which is a ridiculous proposition when considering the ground facts), but to dig it as deeply as possible into their vassals’ hearts instead, with what military and economic might they still muster.
Then in order to preserve their currency’s “credibility”, at least within the remaining sphere of dominion, they need a replacement for the loss of those Central “dollar sinkhole” Banks and respective economies that are escaping to the multi-polar world.
So they “repurposed” (or just upgraded, I’m not sure which) a favorite of theirs: Global Warming, from an obstacle to the BRI momentum, to a black hole for infinite currency issuance.
The basic idea, apart from its green energy infrastructure component which at least is comprehensible to the mind, is to, through the carbon credit market, “financialize” various ecosystems’ contribution to decarbonization. Shares would be available for “investments”.
It’s not clear who or how the book value of these shares would be calculated, but one can be excused for assuming that value will prove as flexible as a COVID infection count.
I suppose the underlying logic goes something like this: ecosystems remove CO2 from the atmosphere, which saves our lives.
Since we can all agree that our lives are infinitely precious, no amount of investments can possibly realize the full valuation of those shares. Et voilàààà, the inflationary dilemma once and for all, forever and ever, eternally and for perpetuity finally solved!
Is it delusional? Of course it is. But as some real wise man said: People rarely think what they must, instead they tend to think what they need to think, when they need to think it.
Obviously the “Grand absurdity” in which their “Great Reset” is being implemented is the sure sign of their impending capitulation. Hence Russia and China patiently awaiting their acceptable terms, which probably means unconditional rendition.
The piper will be paid.
It doesn’t mean they want to destroy, humiliate, or otherwise submit to the West. It’s about facing responsibilities, and within this frame, figure out a convenient, or win-win agreement.
In such an environment a war makes little sense because there is no military threat against western leadership, only military containment.
In typical “Go” fashion, US and NATO bases that were previously seen as power projections enveloping the world, can increasingly be viewed as the boundaries of a shrinking space.
Funny thing is, Russia and China did try really hard to avoid this sorry state; the downright self-inflicted humiliation the West is facing.
Ever since the 1997 Asian crisis, Beijing tried real hard to convince the US to a strategy to solve the Dollar’s paradox in world trades.
During the first decade of the century as preparation for the BRI, they started heavily investing in global natural resources extraction.
Aside from the obvious practical reasons (BRI would require humongous amounts of resources), there was also a financial/monetary aspect.
The commodities sector was suffering from decades of under investments due to price suppression schemes by the usual suspects, in line with the gold price policies.
The idea then was to increase production so that the manipulative Future’s shorts could be gradually unloaded without triggering the typical inflationary bomb and the ensuing interest rate response, and thus freeing the Western banks from exposure at no loss.
At which point international dollar reserves could gradually be unloaded unto an increasing supply of commodities to the BRI, with also minimal (or at least manageable) inflationary disturbance.
Of course it implied a parallel incremental retirement of international dollars to a level commensurate to the US’ economy true size, probably through a series of devaluations against mainly gold. That was China’s plan. Not a bad empire retirement plan when considering where the West stands now.
Just as funny, had the US been agreeable to China’s and Russia’s proposal, better yet had they taken the lead after the USSR collapsed, to “resize” the dollar, neither of the Bear nor the Dragon would have developed their armed forces, instead dedicating their resources strictly to the economy.
The US could have retained Military supremacy and acted as a true policing force of the world, with all the benefits and honors attached to this function, and the eternal gratitude and support of all.
What a monumental waste those last thirty years indeed.
Okay, maybe all wouldn’t have been as rosy, so let’s just say it could have been a great opportunity for a beautiful dream…
MM answers
And kids, this is how World Wars gets started....However, my fear is that the US and Israel will double down and not go quietly. Instead of upsetting the table and waking away when losing; they will flip the table over and rip open their shirt to reveal a suicide vest....-A.L.
There are two possible reasons why the United States is acting like such a dick-head bully and Asia is failing to engage…
[1] America is dying. Let it die. When a person is dying, you allow him to go through the death thrall and stay out of the fray. America will be dead soon enough. There’s no rush to do anything. Russia and China know this and see this. They are watching in real time. Obviously they are guarded and concerned, but their projections obviously show a complete national collapse within the decades, if not much sooner.
[2] Asia is ready to put an end to it all. The death thralls of the empire is getting dangerous. But neither Russia or China will allow these matters to destroy them. If things become unmanageable, they will take the first steps, on their timetable in accordance with their rules. Both Russia and China are ready to take down the Untied States is such a way that the USA will not be able to launch a retaliatory strike. The complexity of such a mission is enormous, and so they are spending the time to make sure that retaliation would be impossible.
To a lesser extent are some other explanations. But I (personally) do not believe that they are valid.
[3] Wishful thinking. Both Russia and China independently believe that the ruling leadership of America will come to their senses and stop all this war-mongering nonsense. Just one or two more elections and it will all be over and change.
[4] Incompetence in Russian and Chinese leadership. Both the Russians and the Chinese are not competent, and have determined that the best actions are ones in which America is permitted to define the rules of engagement and the behaviors during conflict.
What is obvious is that both Russia and China have the ability, the technology and the capability to hurt the United States substantially. But they are not making any overt mores in this regard. The reasoning behind this is many, but I really see the options as I described coming to the forefront.
We will find out soon enough.
And so … the very next day after I wrote those comments…
Ukraine – Russia Makes Serious Demands, Warns Of ‘Confrontation’
Following unfounded U.S. claims of an imminent Russian invasion of the Ukraine U.S. President Joe Biden and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin have held a virtual summit. Little has been released about its real content but the Russian follow up shows that the issues they talked about were deadly serious.
On December 10 the Russian Foreign Ministry published a statement that not only sounds like an ultimatum but seems to be meant as one:
We note US President Joseph Biden’s readiness expressed at the December 7, 2021 talks with President Vladimir Putin to establish a serious dialogue on issues related to ensuring the security of the Russian Federation. Such a dialogue is urgently needed today when the relations between Russia and the collective West continue to decay and have approached a critical line. At the same time, numerous loose interpretations of our position have emerged in recent days. In this connection we feel it is necessary to once again clarify the following.
Escalating a confrontation with our country is absolutely unacceptable. As a pretext, the West is using the situation in Ukraine, where it embarked on encouraging Russophobia and justifying the actions of the Kiev regime to undermine the Minsk agreements and prepare for a military scenario in Donbass.
Instead of reigning in their Ukrainian protégés, NATO countries are pushing Kiev towards aggressive steps. There can be no alternative interpretation of the increasing number of unplanned exercises by the United States and its allies in the Black Sea. NATO members’ aircraft, including strategic bombers, regularly make provocative flights and dangerous manoeuvres in close proximity to Russia’s borders. The militarisation of Ukraine’s territory and pumping it with weapons are ongoing.
The course has been chosen of drawing Ukraine into NATO, which is fraught with the deployment of strike missile systems there with a minimal flight time to Central Russia, and other destabilising weapons. Such irresponsible behaviour creates grave military risks for all parties involved, up to and including a large-scale conflict in Europe.
All the NATO action mentioned above directly endangers Russia’s security. It has to cease. Some of the steps taken must be reversed and Russia will have to be given guarantees that certain measures will not be taken. The statement includes this list of demands:
No more NATO expansion towards Russia’s borders. Retraction of the 2008 NATO invitation to Ukraine and Georgia.
Legally binding guarantee that no strike systems which could target Moscow will be deployed in countries next to Russia.
No NATO or equivalent (UK, U.S., Pl.) ‘exercises’ near Russian borders.
NATO ships, planes to keep certain distances from Russian borders.
Regular military-to-military talks.
No intermediate-range nukes in Europe.
That the above is not a “pretty please” wishlist has since been emphasized by several Russian authorities:
Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov on Monday warned of confrontation should the United States and NATO fail to give Russia security guarantees concerning its eastern expansion, the RIA news agency reported.
President Vladimir Putin has demanded legally binding security guarantees that NATO will not expand further east or place its weapons close to Russian territory; Washington has repeatedly said no country can veto Ukraine's NATO hopes.
We have openly pointed out that there are red lines which we will not allow anyone to cross, and we also have certain requirements, which have been formulated exceedingly clearly.
Russia can of course veto the Ukraine’s entry into NATO. It can destroy the Ukrainian military, take the regions of Ukraine where a majority speaks Russian and create a new sovereign state from them.
The remaining agricultural Banderastan would be left for Poland and Romania to feast on. This would give Russia the strategic depth it needs and it would limit the NATO friendly coastline in the Black Sea to the south western parts.
A Russian attack on the Ukraine is however what western weapon producers and their adjunct think tanks, ‘experts’ and political hawks, mainly in the U.S., deeply wish for. It would isolate Russia, increase the U.S. role in Europe, justify increasing military budgets and end the Nord Stream 2 pipeline and other Russian export routes.
In a phone call with Britain’s Prime Minister Boris Johnson Putin repeated the demands and explained his reasoning:
Like other Western leaders, Boris Johnson expressed concern about Russia’s alleged large-scale troop movements near the Ukrainian border. In this regard, Vladimir Putin provided in-depth and principled assessments of the current situation in Ukraine.
Specific examples of Kiev's destructive course on derailing the Minsk agreements, which are the only viable path towards resolving the internal Ukraine crisis, were given. It was also pointed out that the Ukrainian authorities are purposefully aggravating the situation on the line of contact and are using heavy weapons and attack drones, which are prohibited by the Minsk Package of Measures in the conflict zone. Ukraine’s policy of discrimination against Russian-speaking people was pointed out as well.
It was emphasised that all this is happening amid the active military “exploration” of Ukraine’s territory by NATO, something that poses a direct threat to Russia’s security.
With this in mind, Vladimir Putin stated the need to immediately begin talks in order to develop clear international legal agreements that can preclude NATO’s further eastward advance and the deployment of weapons that pose a threat to Russia in neighbouring states, primarily Ukraine. Russia will present draft documents to this end.
The NATO countries which push for further moves against Russia, mostly the Baltic 3 and Poland, see all their dreams endangered. They will resist any move towards a fulfillment of Russia’s demands. They are however not the ones that count.
It is the U.S., Germany and France that Russia is counting on to get some senses. The upcoming winter, which is predicted to be somewhat harsh, is a good opportunity to apply a little pressure to Europe and to show that it is Russia, not the U.S., which provides Europe energy security. The new Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer understands that:
In an interview published on Tuesday in the German newspaper Die Welt, Nehammer, who was elected chancellor earlier this month, was asked if the Austrian government will continue to support Nord Stream 2. He replied, “Of course,” adding that he expects the pipeline to begin operating soon.
“I don’t consider it necessary to connect Nord Stream 2 with Russia’s behavior in Ukraine,” he went on, referencing a recent political standoff between Moscow and Kiev. “The EU can only hurt itself by doing so. Nord Stream 2 doesn’t only serve Russia’s interests – Germany, Austria, and other EU countries will profit from it. Nord Stream 2 is a European project, which shouldn’t be used as a tool to pressure Moscow.”
This winter Russia will use its market power to press for a fulfillment of its demands. Russia has stopped to provide natural gas to the European spot markets. It continues to deliver in full to customers who have long term contracts. This will squeeze Poland and a few others who depend on the spot market in times of peak demand. Russia hopes that those countries learn that their excessive hostility towards it can have serious consequences.
As Russia has no direct tool to squeeze the U.S. it will need a different strategy to push Biden to change course. The current main foreign policy concern in the U.S. is China. Russia is therefore coordinating its strategy with it:
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping will discuss "aggressive" language from the U.S. and NATO during their virtual meeting later this week, according to the Kremlin.
"The situation in international affairs, especially on the European continent, is very, very tense right now and requires discussion between allies," Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said, according to a Reuters report. "We see very, very aggressive rhetoric on the NATO and U.S. side, and this requires discussion between us and the Chinese."
Notice Peskov’s use of the word “allies”. This is, as far as I know, new. There is no formal treaty between Russia and China that makes them ‘allies’ so the use of the word is highly significant.
This is a concern for an Asia pundit who fears that any Russian move on Ukraine would be accompanied by a Chinese move on Taiwan. To prevent that she urges the U.S. to end the endless confrontation with Russia and to concentrate on the far east.
We can only hope that Biden understands such reasoning, finally shuts up the Russia hawks and ends the conflict with Moscow.
Otherwise we will all be in for some interesting times.
Yes. The USA is marching straight towards war!
And it’s going to be horrific. Imagine DEMANDING Russia do this, and DEMANDING China do that. These demands will be met with extreme force. And I do mean EXTREME.
All of this reminds me of the scenes from the UK movie about the build-up to Nuclear war called “Threads”.
It is the first time that others are dictating to the West rather than being instructed on how to conform to American red lines.
There was an almost audible sigh of relief echoing around western corridors. Though there were no breakthroughs in the Team Biden-Putin virtual meeting, the talks not surprisingly, were heavily focussed on the matter of immediate concern: Ukraine – amid widespread fears that the Ukrainian volcano might irrupt at any moment.
At the meeting: Agreed was the proposal to initiate ‘lower-level’ government-to-government discussion of Russia’s red lines and any halt to NATO expansion eastwards. Jake Sullivan, however, spilt a little cold water over that when he firmly emphasised that the U.S. had given no commitments on either issue. Biden (as advertised in advance), warned of strong economic and other measures should Russia intervene in Ukraine.
What was more notable however, was that the U.S. is ‘only’ threatening to sanction Russia, or to move more troops into the region, as opposed to posing explicit western and NATO militarily intervention in Ukraine. In earlier statements, Biden and other U.S. officials have been vague about what Washington’s response to a Russian invasion would be: warning repeatedly of ‘consequences’, even as it re-committed to Ukraine’s sovereignty.
So, should we all begin to breathe again? Actually, no. In fact, the immediacy of the Ukraine issue was always something of a red-herring: Russia has no desire to wade into the thick, cloying mud of a regional quagmire, however much some in the West would ‘love it’. And the Kiev forces are tired, bedraggled and demoralised from sitting in cold trenches along the Contact Line for months. They have little appetite to take on the Donbass militias (unless aided from the outside).
Nothing was resolved about what to do about the wider dark dystopia that is Ukraine – in all its various manifestations. President Putin raised the Minsk Accord, but nobody, it seems, was biting; the fishing line remained limp. Nor was anything agreed about what to do with the accumulating debris of what once was called U.S.-Russian ‘diplomatic relations’. The latter term (diplomatic relations) is now but a poor joke.
Celebration therefore, is not in order. The viscerally anti-Putin factions in U.S. and Kiev are furious: A U.S. Republican Senator, Roger Wicker has warned that in any stand-off over Ukraine, “I would not rule out military action. I think we start making a mistake when we take options off the table, so I would hope the president keeps that option on the table”. Asked what military action against Russia would comprise, Wicker said it could mean “that we stand off, with our ships in the Black Sea – and we rain destruction on Russian military capability”, adding that the U.S. also shouldn’t “rule out first-use nuclear action” against Russia.
So Ukraine festers on. If we are now to have a lull, then it is just that – ‘a lull’. The ‘hawks’ in U.S. and Europe have not raised the white flag: Ukraine is too good a weapon for their needs, to be tossed lightly aside.
This focus on the Ukraine crisis however, is to ‘see the trees, yet miss the wood’: We have three – not one – ticking landmines, ready to ignite. Three ‘fronts’: Each are distinct, yet closely inter-related, and are now threaded by unknown levels of strategic aims and synchronicity: Ukraine, Taiwan, and the faltering JCPOA Accord – which is now sparking untold angst in Tel Aviv.
The wood not seen for these three trees lies with the unresolved issue of European security architecture; Middle East security architecture; and indeed, of global security architecture. The existing rules-based order has passed its sell-by date: It provides neither security, nor does it reflect the reality of today’s Great Power balances. It has become a pathogen. Simply put, it is too fossilised in the post-WW2 lietkultur.
In a recent CNN interview, Fareed Zakaria, asked Jake Sullivan, Biden’s Security Adviser:
So what is it, after all your ‘tough talk’, that you have been able to agree with China; what has been negotiated? ‘
Wrong question’ was Sullivan’s sharp retort. “Wrong metric”, he said flatly: Don’t ask about bilateral agreements – ask about what else we have secured. The right way to think about this, he said, is:
“Have we set the terms of an effective competition where the U.S. is in a position to defend its values and advance its interests – not just in the Indo-Pacific, but around the world…”.
“We want to create the circumstance in which two major powers will operate in an international system for the foreseeable future – and we want the terms of that system to be favorable to American interests and values: It is rather, a favorable disposition in which the U.S. and its allies can shape the international rules of the road on the sorts of issues that are fundamentally going to matter to the people of our country [America] and to the people everywhere … “.
It is this maximalist lietkultur which is leading us to a point where these three explosive issues together risk a fundamental convulsion of the global order.
You have to go back a long way to find a moment when our world was as vulnerable to a sudden change in fortunes – what Ambrose Evans-Pritchard in The Telegraph terms, “The West’s nightmare: a war on three fronts”.
What is going on?
Well, it is certainly something very far-reaching.
And why the U.S. insistence on such an absolute stance for the global order – according to which other Great Powers get no right to set their own security red lines?
Well, it is because … the ‘four horsemen’ of the Great Transitions:
The Pandemic – leading into a global health regulatory system;
the Climate Emergency – leading to a global CO2 regime of credits and debits;
the tech and AI revolution – leading us into a global era of automation and ‘bots’ (and job losses); and fourthly,
the Transition from classical economics to that of global Modern Monetary Theory that requires a global re-set of the world’s mountain of debt that will never be repaid.
Sullivan’s vision of the ‘foreseeable future’ is essentially conceived around this ‘higher order’ project: The preservation of global ‘rules of the road’, framed to reflect U.S. and allied interests’, as the base from which the clutch of ‘transitions’ – health, climate change, managerial and monetary technocracy – can be levered from the national parliamentary prerogative, up to a supra-national level of business and tech managerial collectives of ‘expertise’ (devoid of accountability to national parliamentary oversight).
Separated in this way into such spheres as health precautions, climate recovery, fostering tech ‘miracles’, and money issuance severed from taxation – they sound non-ideological, and somehow almost utopian.
It was well understood that all these transitions would overturn long-standing human ways of life that are ancient and deeply rooted, and inevitably would trigger dissidence – which is why new forms of social ‘discipline’, and the usurpation of control from national accountability, to the supranational plane, is so important. It certainly isn’t making people “happy”, (as per Davos).
Hmmm! … the ideological underbelly to this ‘higher order’ re-set may be obscured from view, as non-partisan, but it is he who decides the international standards, the protocols, the metrics, and the rules for these transitions, who is Sovereign – as Carl Schmitt once noted.
Sullivan at least has the integrity to be frank about the unseen ideology to the re-set:
“We want the terms of that system to be favourable to American interests and values: It is rather, a favourable disposition in which the U.S. and its allies can shape the international rules of the road on the sorts of issues that are fundamentally going to matter to the people of our country [America] and to the people everywhere …”.
We are talking here of something which clearly goes well beyond the scope of the Biden summits with Xi and Putin, and the Vienna JCPOA talks.
President Putin has warned that any encroachment of NATO infrastructure or forces into Ukraine would not be permitted.
Similarly, Iran has stated explicitly that any Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities will not be tolerated. It would result in the Iranian destruction of Israeli vital infrastructure across the full territory.
And Iran’ and Russia’s stance is identical with that of China in respect to Taiwan: President Xi made that plain in the virtual summit that he held with Biden on 15 November.
Xi warned that any move by Taiwan to secede is not permitted, and would be met by a military response.
In Vienna, Iran simply stated its ‘red lines’:
No discussion of Iran’s ballistic missiles;
no discussion of Iran’s regional role; and
no freezing of enrichment – as long as the mechanism for lifting sanctions and ensuring their non-recurrence is not agreed upon – effectively calling for a return to the original framework of the 2015 accord.
Iran demands binding guarantees that sanctions will not arbitrarily be re-imposed; that trade normalisation will not be informally hobbled again contrary to the terms of the accord, as happened under Obama (the U.S. Treasury Department pursued its own anti-trade policy, at variance with that of the White House); and that all sanctions must be lifted.
What should be noted here is the context: Note that the Iranian position is almost identical in content to that enunciated by Russia, vis à vis the U.S., in respect to Ukraine: Putin’s demand to Washington is that Russian interests and ‘red lines’ be formally acknowledged and accepted; that legally binding agreements be made in respect to Russia’s security in eastern Europe; and the absolute demand for no further NATO encroachment to the East, and a veto on any NATO infrastructure exported to Ukraine.
This is very new – in geo-politics, co-incidences of this nature don’t just spontaneously happen.
It is evident that the three powers are strategically co-ordinated, politically and likely militarily, too.
Western states are stunned: It is the first time that others are dictating to them – setting out their red lines – rather than being instructed on how to conform to American red lines.
They are disconcerted, and unsure what to do next.
And, as Anatol Lieven astutely notes, some actions would have grave strategic consequences:
“quite apart from the global economic damage that would result from a war in Ukraine, and the ways in which China would take advantage of such a crisis, the West has a very strong reason indeed to avoid a new war: the West would lose”.
Lieven continues:
“This would also risk becoming a world war; for it is virtually certain that China would exploit a war between the United States and Russia, thereby threatening the United States with the risk of two wars simultaneously – and defeat in both”.
For now, the U.S. and its allies repeat the usual bromides about ‘all options being on the table’; of crippling sanctions, and of an international coalition being formed to pressure and oppose such non-compliance.
For, without competitor compliance (or these states’ effective political isolation and condemnation), the higher project of raising these seemingly ‘non-ideological’ transitions to a supra-national sphere whose standards, protocols, etcetera (‘terms of the system’ in Sullivan’s words) will not be achieved.
It will not prove possible to upload a ‘Washington Consensus’ software update when these three states simply refuse Sullivan’s ‘rules’.
A strategic reset however will not come easily.
The west is embedded in meme-warfare, which makes a strategic order partition all the harder.
Any compromise on the narrative that Russia cannot have its own red lines; cannot dictate whether not Ukraine joins NATO; nor determine where NATO sites its missiles and nukes, risks Biden being seen as weak.
Republicans already pre-emptively have blamed what they call Biden’s ‘weakness’ for having encouraged ‘dangerous adventurism’ from Moscow.
Then again, perhaps these two summits – together with Iran’s stance in Vienna – represent the beginning of the end to the West’s Rules-Based Order, and a countdown to a new geo-strategic balance between the two axis – and ultimately therefore, to peace or war.
Meanwhile…
US bans UAE from hosting Chinese navy
So the UAE is not a sovereign nation? It is a vassal state under the thumb of America? From HERE.
During a conference call on 15 November 2021, President Joe Biden assured his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping that his country was not seeking war with China, but only loyal competition. As for China, it rejects any form of rivalry and aims to establish “win-win” relations.
However, according to the Wall Street Journal, back in September the CIA had spotted construction activity for what appeared to be a Chinese naval military facility in Abu Dhabi.
That same month, National Security Secretary Jake Sullivan together with his Coordinator for the Greater Middle East, Brett McGurk, were dispatched to the Emirates.
The two American men presented Prince Mohammed bin Zayed (“MBZ”) with satellite photos, ordering him to stop the construction immediately or face “consequences”.
China currently boasts the most powerful navy in the world, outdistancing the United States. She built a naval base in Djibouti in 2017 to grapple (efficiently) with the threat of Somali pirates, then signed a secret agreement in 2019 to establish a base in Cambodia. In addition, she set up civilian naval bases in Pakistan and Sri Lanka which could quickly be repurposed for military use.
The United Arab Emirates are home to a large US naval base and, in order to safeguard their independence, also host a French base.
…
And the UAE response?
UAE threatens to pull out of massive military deal with US
From HERE.
The United Arab Emirates has reportedly threatened to quit a $23-billion military deal with the US over Washington’s tough requirements meant to shield the weapons against what the Americans call “Chinese espionage.”
The deal was made during former US president Donald Trump’s twilight days in office. On paper, it enables the Emirates to acquire American-made F-35 aircraft, Reaper drones, and other advanced munitions.
On Tuesday, however, The Wall Street Journal cited an Emirati official as saying,
“The UAE has informed the US that it will suspend discussions to acquire the F-35.”“Technical requirements, sovereign operational restrictions, and the cost/benefit analysis led to the reassessment,”
The source added.
The Journal considered the development to be equal to
“a significant shake-up between two longtime allies.”
It tried to attribute the Emirati snub to Abu Dhabi’s partnership with Beijing and the latter’s growing influence in the region.
“The collapse of the deal would fuel perceptions within the Middle East and elsewhere that America’s decades-long role as security provider of choice in the region is diminishing,”
It wrote.
Among other things, the paper said, the US has long been concerned about Abu Dhabi’s economic ties with Beijing and its involvement with the Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei Technologies Co.
Huawei provides the Emirates with its communications infrastructure. US officials and members of Congress allege, though, that the company is a national-security threat. The company and the Chinese government have denied such allegations.
An important comment
As one who played “duck, cover & kiss your sweet a*s good-bye” in my fourth grade grammar school during the Cuban/Turkish Missile Crisis, I still think that a repeat of such a memorable event is more probable than a European conflict.
The reasons are as follows:
1) As pointed out by many in this drinking establishment, the Russian leadership is pretty miffed that the Americans get to hide behind an ocean and Europe while the latter plays “Russian Roulette” with the crispness of Eurasia region. Methinks the Russians would prefer the Americans get to feel the heat for a change. At the same time, strategically, its better PR with the locals to threaten the Americans rather than their European cannon fodder.
2) The Russians have already given an indirect threat of moving mobile missile launchers into the Western Hemisphere. Read below in Sputnik. In that article the authors claimed that the Chinese have the capability of moving mobile launchers anywhere in the world inside shipping containers. This article was published the same day as Blinken’s assertion that Russia has no right to drawing red lines, and was picked up by Global Security, the Sun, and others.
Overlooked is a reference in Wikipedia, posted by who knows who, which describes just that with the the Club K Kalibr cruise missile. The article was posted a number of years ago, and is complete with a photo in a container launching platform and a reference to a 2011 showing at the MAKS 2011 Air Show. I’m sure US intelligence is aware of this fact, as it was also covered in navyrecognition.com in 2019. As I stated in the open thread when I first posted it, the Neo-cons are not that bright and need to be hit over the head emotionally to have that “ah-ha” experience.
3) One of the biggest televised events in the original stand-off was the blockade of Cuba by the US Navy. This is interesting in two respects. First, that maneuver is much more difficult due to much better aircraft transport and smaller rockets, and secondly it will be seen as hypocritical to a possible blockade by the Chinese of Taiwan and American stated “Freedom of Self Defense”, and “Freedom of Navigation”. It therefore underlines the notion of “spheres of influence” at a visceral level.
It’s getting to be a very, very interesting world.
-Michael.j
Putting all the pieces together…
Now I know it's serious.-Keith Granger
[1] America has established who their allies are. (With the “Summit for democracy”.)
[2] It has promised financial outlays for their version of “democracy” to all the nations that will side with them. (Just look at the financial budgets out of Washington DC.)
[3] It is really pushing towards war with the nations that are not part of their coalition. (Russia, China, Iran, and any other nation that shows any kind of independence.) They are making bold demands, and pushing, pushing, and pushing for a response. They do not expect anything other than a localized strike, where they can then retaliate with the full force of their military currently in place.
To me, it is obvious. The United States has determined to wage war. Not just against China but against the entire rest of the world, and is now trying to determine who it’s friends and enemies are.
They are pushing for their “enemies” to “make the first move”. Then they will act, with systems already put in place and ready to launch.
No wonder China is building nuke swarm hyper-velocity missiles like there’s no tomorrow.
Maybe it’s because maybe there isn’t going to be one.
We will all be in for gruesome times. No need to play with words here.-Pnyx
Do you want more?
You can find more articles related to this in my latest index; A New Beginning. And in it are elements of the old, some elements regarding the transition, and some elements that look towards the future.
Well, if you want to be technical it is that he used nuclear weapons via proxy against a Chinese BRI installation within Beirut, Lebanon.
Most people are unaware that the United States has been waging a full-on “hybrid war” against China since late 2016. They see bits and pieces, and conclude that it is just more media nonsense. They do not see the “big picture” of how everything fits together. Well, as frightening as the “big picture” is, you need to see the historical context to see what the fuck we are marching forward. And, people (!) if you are not squirreled away in some safe hiding-hole by now, you had best start making preparations this afternoon.
First off, I covered the “Big Picture” regarding the United States and China here in this long and detailed post;
Thirdly, I covered the details about the use of a (micro) nuclear weapon to destroy the BRI gateway in Lebanon, with a post on the destruction of the Bruit Port in Lebanon here…
Fourthly, I had a warning to the oligarchy. This “Great Reset” will hit everyone everywhere, and you cannot hide alone in your hidy-hole and avoid it. You need to show your true colors and live and work as part of a community…
Of course, you won’t be able to find any of this in the mainstream or alternative media. Their links (internally to the articles) are flagged as “dangerous” and are scrubbed from common viewing. (Man! I never thought that it would happen to me, but it has.)
In any event, let it be well understood that…
World War III is engaged.
It is not being televised.
All of this stuff—the beautiful and the ugly—is really happening and really matters, but you have to be extremely careful in using news reports to develop a sense of how much of what is happening where.
-Resist the Crazy
What now?
No one is going to believe you.
Most people feed at the trough of “news” and they believe what they are told to believe. The “free thinkers” have been successfully funneled into what ever exists in Alt-Right and Alt-Left media. They all are being led like the sheep they are.
"...this idiocy is on a par with the "q-anon" facebook extravaganza which, with
equal scientific and religious fanaticism, identifies a secret plan, only
known to several million with access to top secret conspiratorial websites,
to get rid of trump…who knew?"
You cannot change a sheep. You cannot change a cow. Just give it grass to graze upon and lead it into the proper field so that you can get the wool or milk from them.
And does it matter that you are alone with this knowledge?
"...while the U.S. and Israel represent a threat to humanity, humanity is the
even greater loser when things like this nonsense about a nuclear attack in Beirut take hold among otherwise thoughtful people..."
What benefit could you possibly derive from telling everyone what is actually going on? None. That is what. In fact, you are more aptly and likely to be ridiculed.
So do not even bother.
What to do now, is to take care of you and your loved ones.
That’s what you need to do.
When I walked away from New York City and Wall Street ten years ago it was clear what sort of trajectory the country was on, and it’s only gotten worse since. We’re now in the crucial period spanning 2020-2025 that will decide what the next several decades look like. The big battle for the future is here. Right now. If there’s ever been a time in your life to step up, this is it.
-It's time to step into the arena
The way of the world
At this point, I want to impress to everyone the yin-yang philosophy of the Chinese. For they are the ones that are going to survive all these global changes. And make no mistake, they ARE going to survive. And they ARE going to pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and prosper.
And it goes something like this…
The yin-yang philosophy says that the universe is composed of competing and complementary forces of dark and light, sun and moon, male and female. The philosophy is at least 3,500 years old, discussed in the ninth-century BCE text known as I Ching or Book of Changes , and influences the philosophies of Taoism and Confucianism.
And, what I want to do is apply it to what is going on, but at a deeper level.
You see, if you really are paying attention, you will note that the Chinese are trying very desperately NOT to react to any of the United States (Donald Trump) aggravations. They are trying to move like water around them.
And there are very good reasons for this.
One of which is that whatever the Chinese do, it comes back to them. And what ever the United States does, it comes back to them…
So the USA clamps down on every things Chinese. Students no longer attend American schools, Billions of dollars lost.
So the USA clamps down on the use of Chinese APPs. iPhone and GM sales are way down inside of China. Billions of dollars lost.
So the USA launches COVID-19 to suppress China, and the USA gets crushed in the process. Death rate in the hundreds of thousands.
So the USA launches a nuclear warhead to obliterate a city port and…
…
…
What you can do
People(!) if you are in a major city, I would strongly advise you to move. I do not want to announce that MAD-level nuclear destruction is imminent, but I will say that the forces are arrayed in that direction. Only the wise man listens and takes action.
.
My guess is that you have three years before things get dicey.
This will occur regardless of who is in the office of Presidency. Trump, Biden, Harris, Peter Pan. It will not matter.
This will occur whether the villain-of-the-day is China, or Russia, or Iran, or North Korea. It will still occur.
The systems are all in place, the slow grinding of the stone gears are a turning, and there is nothing that mice, or men can do at this point in time. The juncture has been passed, and its a long slow slide into the abyss.
I’m sensing a very dark and vicious energy out there which seems to be affecting all sorts of people who normally wouldn’t be sucked into it. I need to make a conscious effort to not have it influence me or my thoughts. If you’re feeling the same, try to retain sanity.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) June 4, 2020
But live life
Life must go on. You must work, buy food, and have some semblance of life. Your children must attend school and you must disentangle yourself from all the worries of the world.
Don’t let my warnings get to you.
There is really nothing you can do about anything. Your hands are tied. The systems are all in motion. The things are moving. The chess pieces are on the board, and like the automatons that we are, we are all slowly walking to death’s door.
You just have awareness.
What’s happening in America right now is what happens in a failed state.
The U.S. is a failed state. Now the imperial national security state is going to flex at home like never before.
I spent the last decade of my life trying to spread the word to avoid this, but here we are.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) May 31, 2020
The mad elephant
The United States right now is like a mad elephant inside of a cargo jet aircraft.
The United States is collapsing and thrashing about like a crazed, mad elephant, trumpeting and stomping, and snarling and biting. Those near it are trying like the dickens to hold on to the ropes that are tying this beast in place. The straps are straining and they are breaking. They are beyond unraveling. A number of the ropes are disengaged and whipping about dangerously.
But it’s only a matter of time, don’t you know.
The elephant must be put down.
It is doing more than just stomping and crushing things. It is shitting all over the place, it is using it’s trunk to pick up the handlers and smash them against the inside of the plane fuselage. Windows are getting cracked. Inside of the plane the metal sides are getting dented and chairs are being smashed.
And the pilot is opening the rear door…
As a cold gust of air floods the inside of the chamber…
And you?
Well, you are that little beetle that is riding on the elephant’s tail. And it is really, really uncomfortable.
What are you going to do? What are your options?
Stay on the tail?
Jump off the tail now?
Wait until the very last minute before you jump off… maybe while the elephant is outside the plane perhaps?
Move to a better vantage point on the elephant?
Jump onto one of the handlers next to the elephant?
Jump onto one of the ropes that are flinging about wildly?
The longer you wait, the less options you will have.
The clueless leadership
The neocons that are all involved in this haven’t a real clue as to what they are doing. They do not see this as opening Pandora’s box that will remake America, and distort the world. They see it as their God-Given Right to reshape the world in “the way of the Lord”.
America today.
In truth, they are like Nero Playing the fiddle while Rome burns.
In July of 64 A.D., a great fire ravaged Rome for six days, destroying 70 percent of the city and leaving half its population homeless. According to a well-known expression, Rome’s emperor at the time, the decadent and unpopular Nero, “fiddled while Rome burned.” The expression has a double meaning: Not only did Nero play music while his people suffered, but he was an ineffectual leader in a time of crisis. It’s been pretty easy to cast blame on Nero, who had many enemies and is remembered as one of history’s most sadistic and cruelest leaders—but there are a couple of problems with this story.
For one thing, the fiddle didn’t exist in ancient Rome. Music historians believe the viol class of instruments (to which the fiddle belongs) was not developed until the 11th century. If Nero played anything, it would probably have been the cithara, a heavy wooden instrument with four to seven strings—but there is still no solid evidence that he played one during the Great Fire. The Roman historian Tacitus wrote that Nero was rumored to have sung about the destruction of Troy while watching the city burn; however, he stated clearly that this was unconfirmed by eyewitness accounts.
When the Great Fire broke out, Nero was at his villa at Antium, some 35 miles from Rome. Though he immediately returned and began relief measures, people still didn’t trust him. Some even believed he had ordered the fire started, especially after he used land cleared by the fire to build his Golden Palace and its surrounding pleasure gardens. Nero himself blamed the Christians (then an obscure religious sect) for the fire, and had many arrested and executed. But while Nero may have been guilty of many things, the story of him fiddling while Rome burned belongs firmly in the category of popular legend rather than established truth.
-History.com
The idea behind this is that most people see their lives turned upside down by the action of the leadership. They see the fire. They see the destruction. They see the ruin. But the leadership remains the leadership. They still live in their nice palaces, eat their fine food and drink their fine wines.
Here’s Trump and his oligarchy buddies at a fund raiser event at one of his golf clubs…
President Trump talking to his peers.
Cops and protesters banging heads while bankers sit at home drinking wine with their newly printed Federal Reserve dollars. Same as it ever was.
— Michael Krieger (@LibertyBlitz) May 30, 2020
The God-Given Right to Reshape the World
When I make this statement, many “normals” think I am a loon. But you must understand that there are people who believe that they themselves ARE the the mouth-piece of God. As such, they can do no wrong, because everything that they do is blessed by God, and that they will be rewarded in Heaven when they die.
Nothing is more dangerous than a narcissist that believes that he is the “hand of God” and is in charge of the vast array of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in the American military arsenal.
In the 21st century alone, I’ve been given good reason to distrust all sorts of things around me, including the U.S. government (all governments really), intelligence agencies, politicians, mass media, Wall Street and Silicon Valley, to name a few. These power centers make up “society” as we know it in 2020, which is really just massive concentrations of lawless financial and political power obfuscating rampant criminality behind the cover of various ostensibly venerable institutions. What’s most remarkable is how many people still maintain trust in so many of these provably untrustworthy organizations and industries, which speaks to the power of propaganda as well as the comfort of denial.
-Trust No One
And what does all this mean?
Well, using weapons of mass destruction against other large and power nations, all in the name of God, is opening up Pandora’s box…
Pandora’s Box
A “Pandora’s box” is a metaphor. It refers to a source of endless complications or trouble arising from a single, simple miscalculation.
Pandora’s story comes to us from ancient Greek mythology.
Or, more specifically, a set of epic poems by Hesiod, called the Theogony and Works and Days.
These poems were written during the 7th century BC in Greece.
These poems relate how the gods came to create Pandora and how the gift Zeus gave her ultimately ends the Golden Age of humankind.
The Story of Pandora’s Box
According to Hesiod, Pandora was a curse on mankind as retribution after the Titan Prometheus stole fire and gave it to humans.
Pandora was to be the first of a race of women.
She was the first bride and a great misery who would live with mortal men.
The women would be wonderful companions, but only in times of plenty. And they would quickly leave them when times became difficult.
Her name means both “she who gives all gifts” and “she who was given all gifts”.
All the Ills of the World
Then Zeus sent this beautiful treachery as a gift to Prometheus’ brother Epimetheus, who ignored Prometheus’s advice to never accept gifts from Zeus. In the house of Epimetheus, there was a jar—in some versions, it too was a gift from Zeus—and because of her insatiable greedy woman’s curiosity, Pandora lifted the lid on it.
Out from the jar flew every trouble known to humanity.
Strife, sickness, toil and myriad other ills escaped from the jar to afflict men and women forever more.
Pandora managed to keep one spirit in the jar as she shut the lid, a timid sprite named Elpis, usually translated as “hope.”
Hurwit (1995) says that the myth explains why humans must work to survive, that Pandora represents the beautiful figure of dread, something for which men can find no device or remedy. The quintessential woman was created to beguile men with her beauty and uncontrollable sexuality, to introduce falsehood and treachery and disobedience into their lives. Her task was to let loose all the evils upon the world while trapping hope, unavailable to mortal men. Pandora is a trick gift, a punishment for the good of Promethean fire, she is, in fact, Zeus's price of fire.
- Thought Company
Putting it all together
The world is heading to a “Great Reset”.
The leadership of the greatest nation on the earth, in economy and weapons, believes that he was empowered by GOD to remake the earth.
He has used both biological weapons and nuclear weapons in this quest.
Once used, it will be much easier to use them again, and again, and again as he seems fit.
And the rest of the world is watching with a great deal of consternation. Most do not want to believe it. But the leadership of the other powerful nations are aware of what is going on, and making preparations.
What do you think they are doing? What if you were Xi Peng, or Alexander Putin, what would you be doing right now? Would you be reading CNN, MSNBC, or listening to Alex Jones? What would you be doing, and how would you be acting?
…
…
And you. What are you doing?
Some History
It’s been a long time for many in America to know what total war is. They never experienced it. Aside from an attack on Hawaii for an hour, the last real fighting was the American Civil War, and much of the nation remained unscathed. So let me tell you all something…
Real war is ruthless.
The historical “normal” is returning. Buckle up. You and yours are all in the cross hairs.
Greek authors rarely go into any detail when describing the fall of a city, so if we want to know what this really means, we are to some extent forced to use our imagination. However, it's clear from what little we hear that Xenophon's 'universal law' usually meant 3 things:
All movable property was taken
All adult men were killed
All women, children and elderly men were sold into slavery.
The first of these points is least well attested, but probably most widespread. Every warrior who was sent against an enemy settlement would hope to come away with a profit.
Homes could be stripped of furniture and metal objects; temples could be robbed of their dedications and temple treasuries emptied. If there was time, even the rooftiles and wooden fittings of houses could be torn off and carried away.
The simple fact that large amounts of ancient coinage and jewellry was preserved in its hiding place (buried, thrown into wells, etc.) shows that people were quite concerned to keep their valuables out of the hands of greedy invaders.
The second point is better known, because it was a matter of justice and pride. When a city was attacked, it could choose to surrender; if it did not, it forfeited any claim to mercy. Those who had decided to resist their enemies would get what they deserved. The most explicit example of this is the fate Agamemnon desired for Troy:
Not a single one of them must escape sheer destruction at our hands. Not even if a mother carries one in her belly and he is male, not even he should escape. All together they must be exterminated from Troy, their bodies untended and invisible.
-- Iliad 6.57-62
There are loads of examples from Greek history of sieges ending with the slaughter of all adult men. These massacres removed the defeated community's ability to fight and ensured that there would be no further resistance.
The third point arises from the fact that the Greeks seem to have considered it barbaric to kill captured women and children as well as men. The few examples of this in Greek history were condemned as savage. Once the needs of revenge had been satisfied, the remaining population was instead considered a potential source of profit:
When they were delivered to her by the Persians, Pheretime took the most guilty of the Barkaians and set them impaled around the top of the wall; the breasts of their women she cut off and planted around the wall in like manner. As for the rest of the Barkaians, she told the Persians to take them as plunder.
-- Herodotos 4.202
There was substantial money to be made from this, which is why commanders sometimes tried to restrain the bloodlust of their victorious troops. Even if it was just, as well as satisfying, to kill the defenders, it still amounted to the destruction of a source of income:
Dionysios' entire army burst into the city (...) and now every spot was a scene of mass slaughter; for the Sicilian Greeks, eager to return cruelty for cruelty, slew everyone they encountered, sparing without distinction not a child, not a woman, not an elder. Dionysios, wishing to sell the inhabitants into slavery for the money he could gather, at first attempted to restrain the soldiers from murdering the captives, but when no one paid any attention to him and he saw that the fury of the Sicilian Greeks was not to be controlled, he stationed heralds to cry aloud and tell the Motyans to take refuge in the temples which were revered by the Greeks. When this was done, the soldiers ceased their slaughter and turned to looting the property.
-- Diodoros of Sicily 14.53.1-3
The beginning of this passage is unique in actually describing a scene that must have been typical when a city fell to a Greek army. Most successful siege assaults were not the result of elaborate circumvallation, but of a surprise assault or betrayal.
As a result, rather than bottling up the helpless enemy from all sides, the attackers usually entered the city from one point and began their rampage from there.
Those left in the city therefore had two choices: either to resist or to flee. The former would result in the brutal fate sketched above - but the latter explains how Greek communities often seem to have survived a lost siege despite the genocidal intent of their attackers. It was often possible for a substantial part of the population to get away.
Their ultimate fate would then depend on what the victorious enemy intended to do with the settlement. Sometimes (especially in the Archaic period) their intent was to seize the territory for themselves; in these cases the town would be razed, and the fugitive population cast adrift. Fear of this outcome was supposed to keep the Spartans in the fight against the Messenians early in their history:
The most wretched of all things is for a man to leave his city and its fertile fields, reduced to the life of a beggar, wandering with his mother and aged father, his little children and wedded wife. Wherever he ends up, he will be as an enemy dwelling among them. He will succumb to need and detestable poverty, bring shame upon his family, disgrace his splendid looks. All forms of dishonour and misery will dog him. Since this is how it is and no one cares for or respects a wanderer or his offspring at all, let us fight hard for our land and die for our children without sparing our lives.
-- Tyrtaios fr. 10.3-14
If they had friends elsewhere, they might be able to obtain a temporary home, or even gain resident status and a home away from home, as the Plataians did at Athens when the Spartans razed their settlement in 427 BC.
In the Classical period, the intention was often rather to plant settlers on the conquered territory in order to expand the victorious city's number of land-owning citizens. This is what Athens did with the land of most of its defeated enemies from 506 BC onward. In such cases, the captured city might be reinhabited - at times by the new settlers along with the old population of women and children, whom they took as wives or slaves.
Alternatively, once due vengeance had been exacted, the remnants of the city's population could simply be allowed to return to it, often subjected to tribute and an imposed political regime. When the Athenians finally lost their fleet at Aigospotamoi in 405 BC, fear washed through the city, because the Athenians fully expected to meet the same fate that they had inflicted upon other Greeks throughout the decades of their Empire - the eradication of their community, the death of their men, and the sale of their women into slavery. However, for reasons that are still debated today, the Spartans decided to spare them. They got away with "only" a sack, the destruction of their walls, and the imposition of the tyrannical yoke of the Thirty.
- What actually happens when a city is sacked?
You should have paid attention to history class. The historical normal is one where no one is ever safe. It is always a short bubble of time, no more than one or two generations in length where people can live together in some sort of sanity.
But that bubble always pops, and the people living their nice safe lives are often overtaken by the shock and brutality of the reality that will overwhelm them.
We know what will happen. It has been well documented. People will be collected. They will be rounded up into urban areas, or centers. The men will be separated out from the group. They will be led to an isolated area, a cellar, a warehouse, a cluster of tree, an area behind a bulldozer. They will then be held down by two people and shot dead.
We are coming for you.
It’s going to be historical. It will be Biblical, and it will consist of many elements that are not at all “enlightened” and “progressive”. It will be raw and unbridled.
It will be historical
Prepare for a resurgence in the “old ways”.
Pandora has opened up the box.
Large Urban Cities…
Worse was to come in 1221 — ‘a year to live in infamy’. While Genghis’s other armies had been busy in the east, threatening Tbilisi in Georgia and terrifying the Christian world, Tolui, one of Genghis’s equally reprehensible sons, took Merv (in modern-day Turkmenistan), one of the largest cities in the world.
Promised safety, the citizens surrendered and emerged from behind their walls. Tolui ‘surveyed the masses dolefully gathered with their possessions, mounted a golden chair and ordered mass executions to commence’.
They took four days and nights to complete.
Genghis’s rotten fruit did not fall far from the tree. Terror — and the certainty of its visitation — was a major weapon in Genghis’s arsenal: decapitated women, children and even cats and dogs were reputedly displayed.
- Was Genghis Khan the cruellest man who ever lived?
Complete devastation…
Incursions into Southeast Asia were largely successful, most factions agreed to pay tribute, and only the Invasions into Vietnam and Java failed.
Europe was devastated by the Mongols.
They destroyed near enough every major Russian city, and invaded Volga Bulgaria, Bulgaria, Poland, and Hungary.
If rumours spread that the Mongols were coming, then it would cause a mass panic, and some would run to safety.
There was no guaranteed way to defeat the Mongol hordes, they continuously defeated much larger armies, so numerical strength couldn’t protect you.
Mongol conquests would leave once populous and flourishing areas as wastelands, with little to no people, those remaining would be slaves.
-ESKify
Everyone thinks that change will never come to them.
The Women…
Genghis Khan had so much power that he could do whatever he wanted.
For instance, when Genghis occupied some new area, he would kill or enslave all the men and share all the women amongst his tribe.
Genghis Khan would even make beauty contests of captured women to decide which woman is the most beautiful one.
Yeah, he was having his Miss Universe competition before it was cool. So, the queen of those beauty competitions would win the privilege to become one of many Genghis Khan's women.
Rest of the Mongolian army would share all the other contestants.
-The Richest
The Wealthy…
Genghis Khan was the most feared human of the 13th century, who could destroy dynasties just by moving his little finger. He created the Mongol Empire all by himself and earned his eternal spot in the history books.
However, a lot of people had to suffer for Genghis Khan to succeed. Oh yes, the Mongolians were known for their horrendous torturing techniques.
One of the most popular was pouring molten silver down the throat and ears of a victim. Genghis Khan also liked bending his enemy's back until the backbone snapped. If that sounds barbaric, skip this next part.
So, the Mongols once celebrated victory over Russians in a very bizarre way. They picked all the Russian survivors, dropped them on the ground and put a heavy wooden gate on top of them.
Then, Genghis Khan and the entire Mongol army had a huge banquet on that wooden gate. They ate, drank, and watched how Russians were dying one by one from the suffocation, pressure, and wounds.
-The Richest
A return to the old ways…
“The greatest joy for a man is to defeat his enemies, to drive them before him, to take all they possess, to see those they love in tears, to ride their horses, and to hold their wives and daughters in his arms.”
-Genghis Khan.
Do you want more?
Do you want to see similar posts?
I hope that you found this post curious. Please take care. You can view other similar posts in my SHTF Index, here…
You’ll not
find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy
notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a
necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money
off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you
because I just don’t care to.
Please kindly help me out in this effort. There is a lot of effort that goes into this disclosure. I could use all the financial support that anyone could provide. Thank you.
