Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory

(07-03-2018, 03:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]> Whatever you're using to post, it sucks. I haven't dealt with the
> hard per-line character limit in 20 years!

Well, it's a generational thing. You kids use the new-fangled long
lines, but I prefer the old-fashioned way, sticking to the 72
characters per line of text (to the left of the 8-digit sequence
number) on IBM punch cards.

(07-03-2018, 03:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]> Well, you can certainly hold a grudge if you want to look back 50
> years. Just fyi: most of that was political theater.

Really? Were Hitler's concentration camps just political theatre
too? You're an idiot.

(07-03-2018, 03:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]> Since I've never been fond of Chavez either, and thought Stalin
> and Mao were as despicable as you do, what's your beef here? You
> can't just assign political positions to others because it's
> convenient for you.

Well, I did assume that you're a left-winger. Maybe you should drop
the left-wing political theatre and start supporting MAGA.

(07-03-2018, 03:42 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]> He's going after Merkel as hard as he can, and he's insulted just
> about every ally we have in Europe and the Far East. Of course,
> he loves the Saudis, Erdogan and Duterte -- to say nothing of
> Putin. He's even friendly with Kim Jong-un, for God's
> sake!

Merkel? You love Merkel?

• Is she the one that just agreed to border migrant camps and fences
  -- just like Trump wants on our border? Is that the one you mean?
  
  
• Or do you mean the Merkel who lectures everyone about climate
  change to fool left wing useful idiots, while Germany's CO2 emissions
  keep increasing, and the 2020 goals are a joke?
  
  
• Are you referring to Germany, the "dieselgate" country that sold
  emissions detection defeat devices for over ten years so that, once
  again, Germany could make fools out of useful idiot climate change
  activists? Is that the Germany that you mean? (I won't include you
  among the useful idiot climate change activists, since I don't want to
  "assign" to you the view that you support the climate change treaty
  nonsense. It's all political theatre and a financial scam.)
  
  
• Or maybe you mean the Germany with the rising AfD neo-nazi party?
  Is it that Germany you're so in love with?
  
  
• Or do you mean the Germany that charges 10 times as much in
  tariffs for American imports as America charges for German imports,
  but still refuses to remove all tariffs as Trump suggested? Is that
  the one you mean?

Which of those Germanies do you find so exciting that you've fallen in
love with them?

I'll go back and answer one more of your questions, the one about why
Trump is friendly with Kim Jong-un. Donald Trump is well aware that
we're headed for war with China (Steve Bannon is an expert on
Generational Dynamics), and is well aware that Kim Jong-un building an
arsenal of nuclear weapons pointing at the United States -- leading to
World War. Trump is aware of all this, and by befriending Xi Jinping
and Kim Jong-un, he's desperately trying to prevent a world war, and
befriending these two maniacs is a small price to pay to prevent a
world war. Trump is aware of the Generational Dynamics predictions,
but like many people (probably including yourself), he probably
believes the predictions can be prevented -- which they can't. World
war is coming with 100% certainty, but I can't blame Trump for trying
the impossible - to prevent it.

As I've written in the past, everything that Trump does makes
sense to me. That doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes, but
it makes sense.

I noticed that YouTube has a video regarding a secessionist movement in northern Mexico. Reddit even displays a secessionist flag for the region.

Northern Mexico is the part of the "MexAmerica" described in The Nine Nations of North America. Also referred to as "El Norte" in American Nations.

It has been nearly a century since the end of Mexico's last Crisis period.

*** 4-Jul-18 World View -- German leaders agree to migrant refugee camps on border with Austria

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• German leaders agree to migrant refugee camps on border with Austria
  
• Egypt refuses to build refugee camps for migrants deported from Europe
  

****
**** German leaders agree to migrant refugee camps on border with Austria
****


A migrant holds a sarcastic protest sign after failing to enter the EU (Reuters)

The government of Germany's Chancellor Angela Merkel appeared to be
near collapse on Monday, because of a challenge by the leader of
another party in her governing coalition. Horst Seehofer, leader of
the Bavarian CSU party, was demanding that Merkel agree to tough new
rules regarding migrants -- that migrants crossing the border from
Austria into Germany who are registered in another EU country will
automatically be rejected and sent back.

Since Seehofer is also Minister of the Interior, he has the power to
enforce that rule by himself, without Merkel's permission. But if he
had done so, then Merkel would have been forced to fire him, resulting
in the withdrawal of the CSU from the governing coalition, and the
collapse of Merkel's government.

This situation has resulted in a great deal of anger and shouting in
Berlin, according to reports. At one point Seehofer threatened to
resign, saying angrily, "I won’t let myself be sacked by a chancellor
whom I made chancellor in the first place," referring to the fact that
the CSU joined Merkel's governing coalition last year.

However, let's face it, Merkel and Seehofer are both politicians who
crave power, and the collapse of Merkel's government would put both of
them out of power. So a way had to be found that would save face for
both of them, and allow them both to remain in power.

The solution was a fudge, kicking the can down the road in a
remarkable manner: Germany will set up migrant refugee camps on the
border, and border controls will be set up to stop registered asylum
seekers at the border. If there's a bilateral deal with the country
of registration, the refugees will be sent back.

But here's the really amazing part: The refugee camps will be deemed
to be part of the border and not part of either country, which means
that the refugees will not be legally deemed to have crossed the
border into Germany. Germany would be allowed to expel them from
Germany because they never legally were in Germany.

This deal doesn't solve anything, but supposedly it kicks the can down
the road to the Bavarian elections in October, at which time the
government may collapse anyway. The deal may not even be legal --
officials in the European Commission have said that they'll be
reviewing it.

But we've had so many proposals for refugee camps for migrants in the
last few months, and I don't believe any of them have succeeded, so
there's no reason to believe that refugee camps on the border between
Germany and Austria will succeed either. Austria has already said
that it will refuse to take back refugees under any circumstances, and
so these new border refugee camps will presumably just become flooded
with refugees, until the government is forced to let them all go.
Whether Merkel and Seehofer have a solution to that problem remains to
be seen.

This proposal could make things worse for the entire European Union in
that it may cause a chain reaction of border closings by different
countries, essentially bringing the Schengen Zone agreement to an end.
Austria, Italy and the Czech Republic have already threatened to
introduce controls on their borders in response to the new German
plan. Handelsblatt (Germany) and Reuters and Irish Times and Sky News

****
**** Egypt refuses to build refugee camps for migrants deported from Europe
****

It was just a few days ago that a summit of EU leaders came up with a
plan for "Regional Disembarkation Platforms." These would be, once
again, migrant refugee camps. But this time, they would be located in
countries in northern Africa, away from the EU. ( "30-Jun-18 World View -- EU leaders agree on fantasy migration plan after all-night meeting"
)

The idea is that migrants would be rescued from drowning in the
Mediterranean Sea, but instead of being taken to Italy or another EU
country, they would be taken to a Disembarkation Platforms in northern
Africa. Their asylum requests would be processed, and if rejected
they would be sent back to the countries of origin.

Algeria, Morocco and Tunisia immediately announced that they would not
permit Disembarkation Platforms to be hosted on their soil, and on
Tuesday, Egypt announced that it would not permit them in Egypt.
Egyptian Parliament Speaker Ali Abdul Aal said:

<QUOTE>"EU reception facilities for migrants in Egypt would
violate the laws and constitutions of our country. Our capacities
are already utilized today; therefore, it is important that Egypt
receives support from Germany and the EU."<END QUOTE>

The same EU Summit meeting also agreed to set up "Controlled Centers"
in EU countries, "on a voluntary basis." Once again, this would just
be another name for a migrant refugee camps. France and Austria
immediately announced that they would not be willing to host
Controlled Centers on their soil.

There have been many proposals in recent weeks, in Europe and the
United States, and these proposals all have some kind of refugee camp
or refugee prison or refugee detention center as a core proposal.
These proposals always result in enormous national and international
outrage, as well as political chaos. It remains to be seen if any of
them will work. Middle East Monitor and Reuters

Related Articles:

• EU leaders agree on fantasy migration plan after all-night meeting (30-Jun-2018)
  
  
• Europe and North America overwhelmed by growing migration crisis (21-Jun-2018)
  
  
• Desperate European Union considers 'Disembarkation Platforms' for migrants (23-Jun-2018)
  
  
• Italy begs for help after 12,000 migrants arrive in four days (30-Jun-2017)
  
  
• France, Italy have bitter feud over migrants as quota system collapses (16-Jun-2015)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Germany, Angela Merkel,
Horst Seehofer, Bavaria, CSU, Austria,
Austria, Italy, Czech Republic, Schengen Zone
Disembarkation Platforms, Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia,
Egypt, Ali Abdul Aal, Controlled Centers, France

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(07-03-2018, 05:03 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]I'll go back and answer one more of your questions, the one about why
Trump is friendly with Kim Jong-un.  Donald Trump is well aware that
we're headed for war with China (Steve Bannon is an expert on
Generational Dynamics), and is well aware that Kim Jong-un building an
arsenal of nuclear weapons pointing at the United States -- leading to
World War.  Trump is aware of all this, and by befriending Xi Jinping
and Kim Jong-un, he's desperately trying to prevent a world war, and
befriending these two maniacs is a small price to pay to prevent a
world war.  Trump is aware of the Generational Dynamics predictions,
but like many people (probably including yourself), he probably
believes the predictions can be prevented -- which they can't.  World
war is coming with 100% certainty, but I can't blame Trump for trying
the impossible - to prevent it.

As I've written in the past, everything that Trump does makes
sense to me.  That doesn't mean he doesn't make mistakes, but
it makes sense.

Trump is not preventing anything by appeasing Kim, by keeping the citizens in the dark post-summit he potentially endangering the American People, Trump would have had much more credibility if He followed through with "Fire and Fury" like he threatened to do last year. The Will be a world war, but that World war does not have to Initially involve the US. The Boomers are not considering all the options, they are considering all the options that conform to their generations "morality" criteria, both Here and in Europe. That is the problem they (both EU boomer and US leadership) refuse to consider the absolute "all options". Any option that turns the refugees back in the case of Europe, or in which the US either abandons it's commitment to south Korea OR launches the first shot against the North in the case of US vs North Korea, is immediately rejected by the boomers without anything remotely resembling a fair and cool analysis of the option.

Also by the way, don't even think about only replying to the first sentence if you decide to reply to this statement.

(07-03-2018, 03:45 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-03-2018, 09:42 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-02-2018, 03:44 PM)David Horn Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-02-2018, 02:05 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]This forum really needs an upvote capability.  Thanks, John.

Is the upvote for demagoguery?  I don't assign beliefs to you that you don't espouse yourself, but John had not trouble using the BIG COMMIE paint brush on pbrower and me?  I wonder why?

Actually, you assign beliefs that I don't myself espouse all the time, as I've previously pointed out.  You just deny you do it.

I just take you at your word.  At most, I extrapolate.  John just assigns beliefs at will.

John is merely extrapolating your beliefs.  The difference between you and him is just that he does so correctly.

(07-04-2018, 12:43 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is not preventing anything by appeasing Kim, by keeping the citizens in the dark post-summit he potentially endangering the American People, Trump would have had much more credibility if He followed through with "Fire and Fury" like he threatened to do last year. The Will be a world war, but that World war does not have to Initially involve the US.

The way not to have the US in the first stages of the war involves not having the US take the first military action against a nuclear power like North Korea.

(07-04-2018, 01:32 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 12:43 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is not preventing anything by appeasing Kim, by keeping the citizens in the dark post-summit he potentially endangering the American People, Trump would have had much more credibility if He followed through with "Fire and Fury" like he threatened to do last year. The Will be a world war, but that World war does not have to Initially involve the US.

The way not to have the US in the first stages of the war involves not having the US take the first military action against a nuclear power like North Korea.

Except that John Wants us to retain the interventionist policy but at the same time pursue an appeasement/delaying strategy. John's position is that an Attack bringing the US into war must come and must occur at or near the beginning of the war with the appeasement meaning that "at least we delayed the enemy attack originally planned for (lets say) 2015 until (lets say) 2020 at least we had five extra years of peace to enjoy" such is the policy of a weak country like Poland or Belgium, not that of a great power. Trumps meeting with Kim Changed Nothing substantially, North Korea is still developing it's nuclear arsenal, and US troops and Fleets are still opposite North Korea. 

Johns position is that "American Values" means that Americans must be all good and reject all evil everywhere and rely only on the good, which means any policy other than the traditional one is unacceptable to him because such shifts would compromise the ideal of America as the beacon of morality. Hence Both the option of Nuking North Korea OR signing a peace treaty that puts the US out of the Korean peninsula are both unacceptable to him. John Assumes that boomer ideologues will force their preferences down everyone throats by delaying any actual decision until after a war had already started at which point the citizens would have no choice but to submit to the boomers preferences in order to prevent the country being conquered. Hence a scenario in which the US disarms and warehouses most of its nukes in a few select facilities and then later there is a sneak attack by either Russia, China or any other adversary that includes taking out both our standing forces and the warehouses, such a scenario does not trouble John because it would mean that the Enemy is evil for striking and the strike eliminates the US arsenal which eliminated any Chance of American leaders embracing evil, because John fundamentally distrusts anyone born after the late 1950s, he much prefers that those generations not have that option. Hence his support for nuclear disarmament and his endorsement of boomers refusing to retire and opposition to term limits, thats why he also endorses expanding and hardening the Nuclear Boomer fleet but not the Nuclear Missile arsenal. The Very thought of an unshackled gen-xer holding the "nuclear football" terrifies John. A "pearl harbor" Scenario that occurs while the boomers are still in charge thus an ideological "best case" scenario for JohnX. All of the more positive outcomes generally involve the boomers handing over power to young people for the good of the country, or at the very least an unorthodox boomer faction coming to power. 

Make No mistake, JohnX is a ideologue who associates globalism with American values, his current support for Trump does not fool me since back when we all were discussing these issues back in 2015 on the old forum, John was gleeful in his support for Hillary and her establishment foreign policy.

(07-04-2018, 02:40 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 01:32 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 12:43 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is not preventing anything by appeasing Kim, by keeping the citizens in the dark post-summit he potentially endangering the American People, Trump would have had much more credibility if He followed through with "Fire and Fury" like he threatened to do last year. The Will be a world war, but that World war does not have to Initially involve the US.

The way not to have the US in the first stages of the war involves not having the US take the first military action against a nuclear power like North Korea.

Except that John Wants us to retain the interventionist policy but at the same time pursue an appeasement/delaying strategy. John's position is that an Attack bringing the US into war must come and must occur at or near the beginning of the war with the appeasement meaning that "at least we delayed the enemy attack originally planned for (lets say) 2015 until (lets say) 2020 at least we had five extra years of peace to enjoy" such is the policy of a weak country like Poland or Belgium, not that of a great power. Trumps meeting with Kim Changed Nothing substantially, North Korea is still developing it's nuclear arsenal, and US troops and Fleets are still opposite North Korea. 

Johns position is that "American Values" means that Americans must be all good and reject all evil everywhere and rely only on the good, which means any policy other than the traditional one is unacceptable to him because such shifts would compromise the ideal of America as the beacon of morality. Hence Both the option of Nuking North Korea OR signing a peace treaty that puts the US out of the Korean peninsula are both unacceptable to him. John Assumes that boomer ideologues will force their preferences down everyone throats by delaying any actual decision until after a war had already started at which point the citizens would have no choice but to submit to the boomers preferences in order to prevent the country being conquered. Hence a scenario in which the US disarms and warehouses most of its nukes in a few select facilities and then later there is a sneak attack by either Russia, China or any other adversary that includes taking out both our standing forces and the warehouses, such a scenario does not trouble John because it would mean that the Enemy is evil for striking and the strike eliminates the US arsenal which eliminated any Chance of American leaders embracing evil, because John fundamentally distrusts anyone born after the late 1950s, he much prefers that those generations not have that option. Hence his support for nuclear disarmament and his endorsement of boomers refusing to retire and opposition to term limits, thats why he also endorses expanding and hardening the Nuclear Boomer fleet but not the Nuclear Missile arsenal. The Very thought of an unshackled gen-xer holding the "nuclear football" terrifies John. A "pearl harbor" Scenario that occurs while the boomers are still in charge thus an ideological "best case" scenario for JohnX. All of the more positive outcomes generally involve the boomers handing over power to young people for the good of the country, or at the very least an unorthodox boomer faction coming to power. 

Make No mistake, JohnX is a ideologue who associates globalism with American values, his current support for Trump does not fool me since back when we all were discussing these issues back in 2015 on the old forum, John was gleeful in his support for Hillary and her establishment foreign policy.

As usual, you're a total moron, probably on hallucinatory drugs. And
I've certainly never supported Hillary, gleefully or otherwise.

(07-04-2018, 04:26 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 02:40 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 01:32 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 12:43 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]Trump is not preventing anything by appeasing Kim, by keeping the citizens in the dark post-summit he potentially endangering the American People, Trump would have had much more credibility if He followed through with "Fire and Fury" like he threatened to do last year. The Will be a world war, but that World war does not have to Initially involve the US.

The way not to have the US in the first stages of the war involves not having the US take the first military action against a nuclear power like North Korea.

Except that John Wants us to retain the interventionist policy but at the same time pursue an appeasement/delaying strategy. John's position is that an Attack bringing the US into war must come and must occur at or near the beginning of the war with the appeasement meaning that "at least we delayed the enemy attack originally planned for (lets say) 2015 until (lets say) 2020 at least we had five extra years of peace to enjoy" such is the policy of a weak country like Poland or Belgium, not that of a great power. Trumps meeting with Kim Changed Nothing substantially, North Korea is still developing it's nuclear arsenal, and US troops and Fleets are still opposite North Korea. 

Johns position is that "American Values" means that Americans must be all good and reject all evil everywhere and rely only on the good, which means any policy other than the traditional one is unacceptable to him because such shifts would compromise the ideal of America as the beacon of morality. Hence Both the option of Nuking North Korea OR signing a peace treaty that puts the US out of the Korean peninsula are both unacceptable to him. John Assumes that boomer ideologues will force their preferences down everyone throats by delaying any actual decision until after a war had already started at which point the citizens would have no choice but to submit to the boomers preferences in order to prevent the country being conquered. Hence a scenario in which the US disarms and warehouses most of its nukes in a few select facilities and then later there is a sneak attack by either Russia, China or any other adversary that includes taking out both our standing forces and the warehouses, such a scenario does not trouble John because it would mean that the Enemy is evil for striking and the strike eliminates the US arsenal which eliminated any Chance of American leaders embracing evil, because John fundamentally distrusts anyone born after the late 1950s, he much prefers that those generations not have that option. Hence his support for nuclear disarmament and his endorsement of boomers refusing to retire and opposition to term limits, thats why he also endorses expanding and hardening the Nuclear Boomer fleet but not the Nuclear Missile arsenal. The Very thought of an unshackled gen-xer holding the "nuclear football" terrifies John. A "pearl harbor" Scenario that occurs while the boomers are still in charge thus an ideological "best case" scenario for JohnX. All of the more positive outcomes generally involve the boomers handing over power to young people for the good of the country, or at the very least an unorthodox boomer faction coming to power. 

Make No mistake, JohnX is a ideologue who associates globalism with American values, his current support for Trump does not fool me since back when we all were discussing these issues back in 2015 on the old forum, John was gleeful in his support for Hillary and her establishment foreign policy.

As usual, you're a total moron, probably on hallucinatory drugs.  And
I've certainly never supported Hillary, gleefully or otherwise.

And Now I summon the Fourthturning archive painstakingly salvaged by You, me and several others when the old forum closed down in order to record the sites discussions for posterity. Here I Found the relevant statements from December 2015. Here you mention Hillary as someone who "knows whats going on in the world", whereas I predicted that either Trump or sanders would win due to growing popular hostility to establishment politics.

http://generationaldynamics.com/tftarchi...-00115.htm

*** 5-Jul-18 World View -- Al-Assad's attacks on Daraa threaten clashes with Israel and Jordan on Syria's border

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Syria and Russia resume full-scale assault on Daraa
  
• Jordan fears repercussions from Syria's military offensive in Daraa
  
• Israel concerned about infiltration from Iran and Hezbollah
  

****
**** Syria and Russia resume full-scale assault on Daraa
****


Displaced Syrians camp near border with Israel-controlled Golan Heights (AFP)

After a brief lull in the attacks to provide an opening for
negotiations, Syria and Russia have resume full-scale attacks on
rebel-held areas in Daraa province. As in the attacks on Aleppo and
Ghouta, women and children are particularly targeted. Syria's
president Bashar al-Assad uses the technique of attacking peaceful
protesters and then, when there's some sort of violent revenge attack,
uses that as an excuse to call the entire population "terrorists," and
then perform genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Daraa has played a special part in Syria's war, and is considered the
place where it started. In spring of 2011, two 15-year-old boys
posted graffiti in Daraa saying, "Freedom. Down with the regime. Your
turn, Doctor," suggesting that al-Assad would suffer the same fate as
as leaders in Egypt and Tunisia during the "Arab spring." The word
"Doctor" refers to the fact that al-Assad, had been a ophthalmology
student when he attended college in London, at a time when his father
Hafez al-Assad had been conducting genocide in Syria. This graffiti
infuriated al-Assad, who is a psychopathic killer. He ordered the two
boys to be tortured and imprisoned, and he launched a furious attack
on the people of Daraa. Now he wants to finish up the genocide and
ethnic cleansing of Daraa. There's no hope of a negotiated peace in
Daraa because al-Assad has every intention of completing the genocide
and ethnic cleansing.

That's presumably the reason that al-Assad and the Russians
aren't giving the people of Daraa the same choices they gave to
the people of Aleppo and Ghouta. In the latter two cases,
the rebels were allowed to leave with their weapons and their
families and travel to Idlib province. But in the case of Daraa,
al-Assad and Russia are demanding that the rebels immediately
give up their weapons, and are prohibiting the families from
going anywhere. We can expect to see a bloody genocidal attack
of monumental proportions.

EU foreign affairs spokesman Maja Kocijancic said on Saturday
that the attacks by al-Assad and the Russias are violation of
international law:

<QUOTE>"Such attacks are clear violations of international
law and international humanitarian law that also put at risk any
progress in Geneva for the resumption of the political talks under
UN mediation."<END QUOTE>

I assume that Kocijancic must be a comedian in her spare time, because
this statement will only bring laughter from al-Assad and the
Russians. Over the years, I've documented several attempts at peace
talks, and each time, al-Assad has made complete fools of the peace
mediators, by making promises and then immediately ignoring them.
Al-Assad uses peace talks as a cover for further genocide and ethnic
cleansing. Al-Assad is the worst genocidal monster and war criminal
so far this century. (I always receive comments from people who say
that al-Assad is a nice guy because he supposedly protects Christians.
That's like saying Hitler was a nice guy because he protected
Christians -- except that he didn't. Al-Assad may protect Christians
now because he considers them to be useful idiots, but he wouldn't
hesitate to kill all of them if he had no further use for them.)

About 300,000 people in Daraa and in the adjacent Quneitra province
have been fleeing their homes and heading to the borders with Jordan
and Israel. Both Jordan and Israel have closed their borders to the
refugees, but are providing humanitarian aid. More people are moving
to the Israeli border because they believe that al-Assad and Russians
will not risk a war with Israel by attacking them there. AFP and Arab News and Middle East Online and World Bulletin (Turkey)

****
**** Jordan fears repercussions from Syria's military offensive in Daraa
****

There's a great deal of international pressure on Jordan to allow the
Syrian refugees fleeing the violence in Daraa to cross the border into
Syria. A spokesman for Human Rights Watch said:

<QUOTE>"The abject refusal by Jordanian authorities to allow
asylum seekers to seek protection not only goes against their
international legal obligations, but against basic human decency.
Jordanians themselves are appealing to their government’s basic
decency and calling for those in need to be let in."<END QUOTE>

The European Union is making a similar plea.

However, Jordan estimates that it is already hosting some 1.3 million
refugees, and earlier this week said that it is unable to host a new
wave of refugees, and so the border will remain closed, although
Jordan is providing humanitarian aid.

However, Jordan has several major concerns about the military action
in Daraa.

First, closing its border to refugees fleeing violence is a great
embarrassment for Jordan, which maintains good relations with all
Western powers and human rights organizations.

However, Jordan believes that the world has given up on refugees, and
are no longer willing to provide funding for the support of refugees
in refugee camps. There is particular concern that earlier this year
the Trump administration cut funding to the UN agency for Palestinian
refugees, but there are 193 countries in the United Nations, and those
other countries aren't stepping up to fund Palestinian refugees
either. The cut in funding is particular hard on Jordan, which hosts
more than two million Palestinian refugees, and Jordan's economy is
already in serious trouble.

Another concern for Jordan is the lack of security along the border.
Jordan has suffered previous terrorist attacks in 2005 and 2016 when
jihadists entered Jordan along with waves of refugees.

Jordan is also concerned about a demographic change in Daraa. In
particular, Jordan is concerned that al-Assad's ethnic cleansing and
genocide will empty the region of its Sunni population, to be replaced
by people from Iran and Hezbollah. Jordan Times and Human Rights Watch and Middle East Eye and Jordan Times

****
**** Israel concerned about infiltration from Iran and Hezbollah
****

Like Jordan, Israel is keeping its border closed to the hundreds of
thousands of refugees fleeing violence from al-Assad and Russia.
Syrians are coming to the area because they hope e that the proximity
to Israel will protect them and that al-Assad's troops and warplanes
will not bomb them there.

Israel has technically been at war with Syria since 1948, and there is
a UN peacekeeping force on the border between Syria and
Israeli-controlled Golan Heights. Israel has been working with the
peacekeeping force to set up "safe zones" within Syria that will be
safe from al-Assad's ground forces and Syria's and Russia's warplanes.

On Friday, the Israeli army announced that it had taken 300 tents and
several tons of food, medicine and clothing to the other side
overnight, as humanitarian aid for the Syrian refugees. However,
Israel will not allow Syrian refugees to cross the border because of
the fear that Iranians and Hezbollah will infiltrate.

Debka, an analyst service based on Israeli military and intelligence
sources, but which sometimes gets things wrong, is reporting that the
US and Israel have begun launching military actions along the border,
to counter infiltration by Iran and Hezbollah.

It had been hoped that Iran and Hezbollah would not take part in the
Daraa and Quneitra attacks, but Russia's foreign minister Sergei
Lavrov said on Wednesday, "Iran is one of the key powers in the region
and it would be absolutely unrealistic to expect it to abandon its
interests." Times of Israel and Deutsche Welle and Debka

Related Articles

• Syria and Russia create humanitarian catastrophe in Daraa (01-Jul-2018)
  
  
• Tens of thousands fleeing Syrian bombs trapped at closed Jordan border (27-Jun-2018)
  
  
• US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF) clash with Syrian regime forces (09-Feb-2018)
  
  
• Israel bombs targets in Syria with Russia's tacit cooperation (06-Dec-2015)
  
  
• Syria and allies threaten war with Israel in the Golan Heights (22-May-2013)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Syria, Bashar al-Assad, Daraa,
Russia, Jordan, Aleppo, Ghouta, Turkey, Jordan, Quneitra,
Israel, Golan Heights, Iran, Hezbollah, Maja Kocijancic

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

(07-04-2018, 08:56 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: [ -> ]> And Now I summon the Fourthturning archive painstakingly salvaged
> by You, me and several others when the old forum closed down in
> order to record the sites discussions for posterity. Here I Found
> the relevant statements from December 2015. Here you mention
> Hillary as someone who "knows whats going on in the world",
> whereas I predicted that either Trump or sanders would win due to
> growing popular hostility to establishment politics.

> http://generationaldynamics.com/tftarchi...-00115.htm

In preserving the fourthturing forum archive, I spent many hours in
painstaking software development to collect the threads, and make
preserving it possible. Without all my work, the archive would not
exist. All you did was suggest the names of a couple of threads.
That you're now claiming equal credit with me in preserving the old
forum, as if you had done any actual work, is just another example of
how delusional and hallucinatory you are.

What I wrote at the time (12/25/2015) was:

Quote:> Trump is going to get Hillary elected. Which is probably just as
> well because Hillary at least knows what's going on in the world,
> while Trump doesn't have a clue.

That was a statement of fact, not a statement of support for Hillary.
At that time, Trump had absolutely no clue what was going on in the
world, which was clear every time he opened his mouth. On the other
hand, Hillary had been Secretary of State, so she did have some
knowledge about what was going on in the world.

So your statement that "John was gleeful in his support for Hillary
and her establishment foreign policy" is a 100% misrepresentation of
what I wrote. I return to my previous statement: As usual, you're a
total moron, probably on hallucinatory drugs. And I've certainly
never supported Hillary, gleefully or otherwise.

What's interesting is what's happened to Trump since then. What
I never expected, and which is incredibly amazing, is that Trump
hired as his chief adviser Steve Bannon, who is an expert on
both military history and Generational Dynamics.

What I've continually found to be amazing is that Trump's foreign
policy decisions always make sense from the point of view of the
Generational Dynamics analysis. On 12/25/2015, Trump had absolutely
no clue what's going on in the world, but now Trump seems to know a
great deal about what's going on in the world, but from the point of
view of Generational Dynamics.

Generational Dynamics makes it possible to understand the world in a
way that no other method allows (including your own incessessant
idiotic boomer nonsense). Not only does Generational Dynamics
explain what's going on in the world, but it also provides a
methodology for sorting through the millions of things that go
on in the world each day to identify the few things each day
that are important to foreign policy and the world. In that
sense, Trump's understanding of Generational Dynamics from Steve
Bannon has provided Trump with a shortcut to understanding what's
going on in the world, and therefore the ability to make sensible,
coherent decisions which, incidentally, Obama could not.

This is an important way of looking at it. Left-wing and right-wing
ideologies sort through each day's events and pick out the supposedly
important ones, but the ideological choices are consistently wrong,
while the choices dictated by Generational Dynamics are the correct
ones.

It's interesting to speculate what would have happened to Trump if he
hadn't hired Steve Bannon as his chief adviser. My guess is that his
foreign policy would have been as incoherent as Obama's or Hillary's,
though since we're headed for World War III anyway, maybe it wouldn't
have made any difference.

Incoherence of foreign policy fits a President who recognizes that Congress has budgetary power over war. The President can get away with a short, swift war such as invasions of Grenada and Panama against anti-American dictators who start posing some clear and present danger to American lives or security interests, or for the liberation of Kuwait. We get into big trouble when the President and Congress both approve of a war that starts going badly and then one of the partners starts to want out. So a practice of getting involved only in wars in which there is a clear objective, an easily-expressed justification, and an exit strategy might look incoherent, but it also keeps one from distinguishing the foreign policy of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama from that of the elder Bush.

A President with more vainglory, like Dubya to a lesser extent or Trump to an overpowering extent might not show so much scruple. Wars for profit have their constituencies. entities that I have no desire to discuss in detail. A steady flow of body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan can discredit a President's policy with Dubya.

Vainglory is dangerous, whatever ideology or personality it allegedly serves. As Americans recognize how badly things could go in Iraq and Afghanistan, we get another story about Venezuela. The President asked about the wisdom of invading the country. It looks like a big win due to profits for the armaments industry and quite possibly a takeover of the state-owned  oil company by American oil companies. Aggressive war is analogous in some ways to a hostile takeover in business -- the difference being that people don;t get killed in hostile takeovers in American business (so long as the businessmen aren't gangsters).

From the Associated Press:

Quote:BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — As a meeting last August in the Oval Office to discuss sanctions on Venezuela was concluding, President Donald Trump turned to his top aides and asked an unsettling question: With a fast unraveling Venezuela threatening regional security, why can’t the U.S. just simply invade the troubled country?

The suggestion stunned those present at the meeting, including U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both of whom have since left the administration. This account of the previously undisclosed conversation comes from a senior administration official familiar with what was said.

In an exchange that lasted around five minutes, McMaster and others took turns explaining to Trump how military action could backfire and risk losing hard-won support among Latin American governments to punish President Nicolas Maduro for taking Venezuela down the path of dictatorship, according to the official. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

But Trump pushed back. Although he gave no indication he was about to order up military plans, he pointed to what he considered past cases of successful gunboat diplomacy in the region, according to the official, like the invasions of Panama and Grenada in the 1980s.

The idea, despite his aides’ best attempts to shoot it down, would nonetheless persist in the president’s head.

The next day, Aug. 11, Trump alarmed friends and foes alike with talk of a “military option” to remove Maduro from power. The public remarks were initially dismissed in U.S. policy circles as the sort of martial bluster people have come to expect from the reality TV star turned commander in chief.

https://www.apnews.com/a3309c4990ac45818...a-invasion

Venezuela is neither Grenada (which the Reagan team handled well) nor Panama (where the military strongman had threatened Americans and had been shown to be in collusion with international drug syndicates) ... it's a much bigger country. Despise Chavez or Maduro for demagoguery and a dictatorial course all that you want, an invasion of Venezuela is something that grown-ups  not going senile do not want unless those grown-ups consider war profits or asset seizures more valuable than human life. The adults in the room (then Tillerson and McMaster) are now.

This may not be so much a generational issue as one of character of a political leader. Maybe our current Crisis Era has been marking time until the leaders are in place to bring out its worst. I would not be surprised if President Trump called for some War for Profit -- and his glorification.

(07-05-2018, 09:27 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-04-2018, 08:56 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]>   And Now I summon the Fourthturning archive painstakingly salvaged
>   by You, me and several others when the old forum closed down in
>   order to record the sites discussions for posterity. Here I Found
>   the relevant statements from December 2015. Here you mention
>   Hillary as someone who "knows whats going on in the world",
>   whereas I predicted that either Trump or sanders would win due to
>   growing popular hostility to establishment politics.

>   http://generationaldynamics.com/tftarchi...-00115.htm

In preserving the fourthturing forum archive, I spent many hours in
painstaking software development to collect the threads, and make
preserving it possible.  Without all my work, the archive would not
exist.  All you did was suggest the names of a couple of threads.
That you're now claiming equal credit with me in preserving the old
forum, as if you had done any actual work, is just another example of
how delusional and hallucinatory you are.

What I wrote at the time (12/25/2015) was:

Quote:>   Trump is going to get Hillary elected. Which is probably just as
>   well because Hillary at least knows what's going on in the world,
>   while Trump doesn't have a clue.

That was a statement of fact, not a statement of support for Hillary.
At that time, Trump had absolutely no clue what was going on in the
world, which was clear every time he opened his mouth.  On the other
hand, Hillary had been Secretary of State, so she did have some
knowledge about what was going on in the world.

So your statement that "John was gleeful in his support for Hillary
and her establishment foreign policy" is a 100% misrepresentation of
what I wrote.  I return to my previous statement: As usual, you're a
total moron, probably on hallucinatory drugs.  And I've certainly
never supported Hillary, gleefully or otherwise.

What's interesting is what's happened to Trump since then.  What
I never expected, and which is incredibly amazing, is that Trump
hired as his chief adviser Steve Bannon, who is an expert on
both military history and Generational Dynamics.

What I've continually found to be amazing is that Trump's foreign
policy decisions always make sense from the point of view of the
Generational Dynamics analysis.  On 12/25/2015, Trump had absolutely
no clue what's going on in the world, but now Trump seems to know a
great deal about what's going on in the world, but from the point of
view of Generational Dynamics.

Generational Dynamics makes it possible to understand the world in a
way that no other method allows (including your own incessessant
idiotic boomer nonsense).   Not only does Generational Dynamics
explain what's going on in the world, but it also provides a
methodology for sorting through the millions of things that go
on in the world each day to identify the few things each day
that are important to foreign policy and the world.  In that
sense, Trump's understanding of Generational Dynamics from Steve
Bannon has provided Trump with a shortcut to understanding what's
going on in the world, and therefore the ability to make sensible,
coherent decisions which, incidentally, Obama could not.

This is an important way of looking at it.  Left-wing and right-wing
ideologies sort through each day's events and pick out the supposedly
important ones, but the ideological choices are consistently wrong,
while the choices dictated by Generational Dynamics are the correct
ones.

It's interesting to speculate what would have happened to Trump if he
hadn't hired Steve Bannon as his chief adviser.  My guess is that his
foreign policy would have been as incoherent as Obama's or Hillary's,
though since we're headed for World War III anyway, maybe it wouldn't
have made any difference.

Ideologues can only harangue because our current political system is one in which only "experts" are allowed to make actual policy decisions. And this is a system fanatically supported by your generation. As long as that is the case no one would be allowed to change anything unless there is a catastrophic collapse. The citizens want their actual rights back, the swamp WILL LOSE.

(07-05-2018, 11:00 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: [ -> ]Incoherence of foreign policy fits a President who recognizes that Congress has budgetary power over war. The President can get away with a short, swift war such as invasions of Grenada and Panama against anti-American dictators who start posing some clear and present danger to American lives or security interests, or for the liberation of Kuwait. We get into big trouble when the President and Congress both approve of a war that starts going badly and then one of the partners starts to want out. So a practice of getting involved only in wars in which there is a clear objective, an easily-expressed justification, and an exit strategy might look incoherent, but it also keeps one from distinguishing the foreign policy of Bill Clinton or Barack Obama from that of the elder Bush.

A President with more vainglory, like Dubya to a lesser extent or Trump to an overpowering extent might not show so much scruple. Wars for profit have their constituencies. entities that I have no desire to discuss in detail. A steady flow of body bags from Iraq and Afghanistan can discredit a President's policy with Dubya.

Vainglory is dangerous, whatever ideology or personality it allegedly serves. As Americans recognize how badly things could go in Iraq and Afghanistan, we get another story about Venezuela. The President asked about the wisdom of invading the country. It looks like a big win due to profits for the armaments industry and quite possibly a takeover of the state-owned  oil company by American oil companies. Aggressive war is analogous in some ways to a hostile takeover in business -- the difference being that people don;t get killed in hostile takeovers in American business (so long as the businessmen aren't gangsters).

From the Associated Press:

Quote:BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) — As a meeting last August in the Oval Office to discuss sanctions on Venezuela was concluding, President Donald Trump turned to his top aides and asked an unsettling question: With a fast unraveling Venezuela threatening regional security, why can’t the U.S. just simply invade the troubled country?

The suggestion stunned those present at the meeting, including U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and national security adviser H.R. McMaster, both of whom have since left the administration. This account of the previously undisclosed conversation comes from a senior administration official familiar with what was said.

In an exchange that lasted around five minutes, McMaster and others took turns explaining to Trump how military action could backfire and risk losing hard-won support among Latin American governments to punish President Nicolas Maduro for taking Venezuela down the path of dictatorship, according to the official. The official spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the discussions.

But Trump pushed back. Although he gave no indication he was about to order up military plans, he pointed to what he considered past cases of successful gunboat diplomacy in the region, according to the official, like the invasions of Panama and Grenada in the 1980s.

The idea, despite his aides’ best attempts to shoot it down, would nonetheless persist in the president’s head.

The next day, Aug. 11, Trump alarmed friends and foes alike with talk of a “military option” to remove Maduro from power. The public remarks were initially dismissed in U.S. policy circles as the sort of martial bluster people have come to expect from the reality TV star turned commander in chief.

https://www.apnews.com/a3309c4990ac45818...a-invasion

Venezuela is neither Grenada (which the Reagan team handled well) nor Panama (where the military strongman had threatened Americans and had been shown to be in collusion with international drug syndicates) ... it's a much bigger country. Despise Chavez or Maduro for demagoguery and a dictatorial course all that you want, an invasion of Venezuela is something that grown-ups  not going senile do not want unless those grown-ups consider war profits or asset seizures more valuable than human life. The adults in the room (then Tillerson and McMaster) are now.

This may not be so much a generational issue as one of character of a political leader. Maybe our current Crisis Era has been marking time until the leaders are in place to bring out its worst. I would not be surprised if President Trump called for some War for Profit -- and his glorification.

You do notice that there was a discussion of geopolitical issues on this thread? The Rest of us do not want to be distracted by this partisan clap-trap. Stop Cluttering up this thread with politically motivated nonsense.

(07-05-2018, 11:19 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: [ -> ]You do notice that there was a discussion of geopolitical issues on this thread? The Rest of us do not want to be distracted by this partisan clap-trap. Stop Cluttering up this thread with politically motivated nonsense.

So what? This news item demonstrates the impulsiveness and quick anger of the President. Political choices include military blunders (including pointless war crimes*) of political leaders, and can make the geopolitical reality. They can force people who dislike discussing it to contemplate it.

It is not partisan claptrap. Personalities matter greatly in events. Have someone like Konrad Adenauer as Chancellor of Germany in 1938, and history is very different. The faults with geopolitics include its neglect of personalities as drivers of military decisions..

History is more than a collection of disjointed biographies, but personalities matter, too. Generational theory connects people to the times of their origins and in to the times in which they do their critical deeds )if ever) or are parts of mass markets or cultural trends even if 'only' consumers. Time is environment, too.

Conduct matters.

I separate news from comment because I respect AP. If you want to say that the story is a fabrication, then that is your choice. That is not to say that you made a mistake in doing so.

*I attribute the Allied victory to Axis war crimes more than to anything else -- even better generalship, greater economic power, tighter economic controls, and better use of science and technology. Had it not been for the horrible crimes that the Nazis committed in Poland from the start of their invasion, the British would have surrendered at the decisive defeat at Dunkirk and steered clear of the fanatical anti-Nazi Churchill. The Allies had the great Jewish scientists that the Nazis would have murdered had they gotten the chance. The Poles successfully slipped an Enigma machine to the British, and the British practically invented a computer to read the Nazi naval 'mail'.

*** 6-Jul-18 World View -- Sec of State Pompeo visits North Korea amid reports that sanctions will be softened

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Sec of State Pompeo visits North Korea amid reports that sanctions will be softened
  
• Pompeo's visit will test Trump's negotiating strategy
  
• Commentary: The US imposes tariffs on Chinese imports
  

****
**** Sec of State Pompeo visits North Korea amid reports that sanctions will be softened
****


Kim Jong-un makes a big show of taking notes at a factory in this North Korean media photo

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo headed to North Korea for another
meeting with Kim Jong-un on Thursday, amid reports that sanctions will
be softened, either by the US or by China.

According to a Japanese report on a meeting last week in Beijing
between North Korean leader Kim Jong-un and China's president Xi
Jinping, Kim asked Xi to help end sanctions targeting North Korea.
The report quotes Kim as telling Xi:

<QUOTE>"We are feeling great pain due to economic
sanctions. Now that we have concluded the US-North Korea summit in
success, I want (China) to work toward early lifting of the
sanctions."<END QUOTE>

According to the report, Xi said that he would do his "utmost" to
satisfy the request.

However, since the June 12 summit meeting between Kim and president
Donald Trump, there has been no evidence that North Korea intends to
keep its promise to denuclearize.

At the same time, there were reports last week, based on satellite
imagery, that North Korea has been rapidly building new
infrastructure at its Yongbyon Nuclear Scientific Research Center,
where plutonium for nuclear weapons is produced.

Since China has always been North Korea's main trading partner, China
has had to take responsibility for implementing many of the sanctions.
However, there have been reports in recent weeks that China has
already partially weakened its own enforcement of the sanctions.

Some analysts are claiming that Trump has already given up a lot by
agreeing to cancel the joint military drills with South Korea, without
getting anything in the return from the North.

The State Dept. on Thursday denied that it has softened its approach
to North Korea denuclearization. According to State Department
spokesman Heather Nauert:

<QUOTE>Nothing could be further from the truth. Our policy
toward North Korea has not changed.

We are committed to a denuclearized North Korea and Secretary
Pompeo looks forward to continuing his consultations with North
Korean leaders to follow up on the commitments made at the
Singapore summit."<END QUOTE>

Many people, including myself, are skeptical that Kim Jong-un has any
intention at all of denuclearizing. The purpose of Pompeo's current
trip is to get some specific commitments. According to Pompeo, "On
this trip I’m seeking to fill in some details on those commitments and
continue the momentum toward implementation of what the two leaders
promised each other and the world." AFP (1-July) and Reuters and 38 North (26-June)
and Joongang Daily (Seoul)


****
**** Pompeo's visit will test Trump's negotiating strategy
****

The reality of the situation is that the negotiations could break down
very quickly, and we could very quickly be as close to war as we were
in January, before Kim Jong-un's charm offensive at the Seoul
Olympics.

As I've said in the past, in my opinion the North Koreans have had one
and only one objective: Use diplomacy to force the Trump
administration to lift the sanctions, while continuing nuclear weapons
and missile development.

North Korea is said to be asking for "staged denuclearization." This
means that North Korea and the US alternate in making concessions on a
step by step basis, with the US removing each sanction in return for
North Korea taking a denuclearization step.

If this is Kim's strategy, it doesn't seem that he's following it.
The satellite imagery that shows infrastructure development at the
Yongbyon Nuclear Research Facility cannot be a surprise to Kim. The
North would have been aware that the infrastructure changes would be
detected by satellite imagery, and it's therefore reasonably to
conclude that Kim wanted this development to be made public, perhaps
as a warning to the US that unless concessions are made rapidly, the
North will continue developing nuclear weapons.

According to reports, Pompeo is going to press Kim to provide a
complete list of all nuclear and ballistic missile production sites,
and a timetable for shutting them down. If, as expected, Kim refuses
to produce such a list, then there might be a major confrontation, or
they may kick the can down the road to a later meeting.

Trump said on Thursday,

<QUOTE>"I really believe that he sees a different future for
North Korea. I hope that’s true. If that’s not true, we’ll go back
to the other way."<END QUOTE>

In other words, the North Korean situation could blow up into a full
"crisis" again for the first time in months. The real disaster would
be if Trump gives in and reduces sanctions, getting nothing in return.
Korea Times and Channel News Asia

Related Articles:

• After the Kim-Trump summit, US and N. Korea plan denuclearization details (14-Jun-2018)
  
  
• China angrily demands that the US retract the new North Korea sanctions (25-Feb-2018)
  
  
• What was Kim Yo-jong thinking as she returned to North Korea from the Olympics? (12-Feb-2018)
  
  
• NY Times publishes a generational analysis of South Korea (30-Jan-2018)
  
  
• Donald Trump, Steve Bannon and Generational Dynamics (07-Jul-2017)
  

****
**** Commentary: The US imposes tariffs on Chinese imports
****

The US has gone ahead with tariffs on Chinese imports, as of 12:01 am
on Friday.

China's statements in response to these tariffs have been getting
increasingly angry in tone. The Chinese appear to be infuriated and
humiliated by the tariffs, much more strongly that Europe, Canada or
Mexico.

If you're looking for a historical analogy, one place where you might
start is the sanctions that the US imposed on Japan on July 24, 1941.
The sanctions were in retaliation for Japanese occupation of French
Indo-China (Vietnam). Four and one-half months later, on December 7,
1941, Japan's bombers attacked Pearl Harbor. History.com


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un, Mike Pompeo,
China, Xi Jinping, Yongbyon Nuclear Research Facility

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

*** 7-Jul-18 World View -- Russia's actions in Sea of Azov raise fears of another invasion of Ukraine

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Russia's actions in Sea of Azov raise fears of another invasion of Ukraine
  
• Ukraine's Donbas war continues, as US supplies Javelin anti-tank missiles
  

****
**** Russia's actions in Sea of Azov raise fears of another invasion of Ukraine
****


Ukraine. In 2014, Russia invaded and occupied Donbas, and invaded and annexed Crimea. In 2018, Russia completed a bridge over the Kerch Strait, controlling access to the Sea of Azov.

The Russian navy in recent weeks has boosted its presence in the Sea
of Azov to approximately 40 ships, giving it the ability to control
that body of water and to strike virtually at will along Ukraine's
coastline there. This is the latest in a series of Russian threats
and acts of harassment direct at crippling Ukraine's economy, and
possibly preparing for new military actions.

Ever since 2014, when Russia invaded and occupied eastern Ukraine
(Donbas), and then invaded and annexed Ukraine's Crimea peninsula,
there have been continuing fears that Russia would launch a new
invasion and annex another portion of Ukraine.

It's been thought that the most likely target of a new Russian
invasion would be the port cities of Mariupol, Berdyansk, and the
entire strip of land along the Sea of Azov connecting Russia to
Crimea, creating a land bridge from Russia to Crimea, and taking total
control of the Sea of Azov.

No such invasion has occurred, but starting in May 2015, Russia began
constructing an 11.8 mile bridge across the Kerch Strait, from Russia
to Crimea, to allow transport of goods and people between Russia and
Crimea, and also to control access to the Sea of Azov. The
construction of the bridge immediately had a severe effect on
Ukraine's economy. Russia several times closed the Kerch Strait to
maritime traffic, trapping commercial vessels docked in Mariupol and
Berdyansk seaports. During 2017, freight traffic was reduced 43% and
transshipments shrank by 30%, totally $54 million in 2017.

The Kerch Strait bridge officially opened on May 16, a year earlier
than initially announced. Many vessels that used to deliver goods to
Azov seaports can no longer do so at all because the Russians have
deliberately made the passageways under the bridge too small for many
vessels. The Russians have all but blocked the Ukrainian seaports on
the Sea of Azov, stopping international vessels from shipping goods to
and from Ukrainian cities. Russia's security forces stop and search
dozens of vessels, and delay them for days. In the four days last
week from July 2-5, Russia's security forces detained seven cases.
Jamestown and Hromadske (Ukraine) and Eurasia Review and Maritime Bulletin and Jamestown

****
**** Ukraine's Donbas war continues, as US supplies Javelin anti-tank missiles
****


In Kiev, a metal silhouette of a girl with a balloon, dotted with bullet holes, a reminder of the war in Donbas. (Getty)

The war in Ukraine began in 2014 when Russian troops invaded eastern
Ukraine, a region known as the Donbas. The war is entering its fifth
year, and with no end in sight. More than 10,000 people have been
killed, including 2,800 civilians. Nearly two million people have
been internally displaced or put at risk if they remain in their
homes.

Because of a fear of a further major Russian military invasion, the
Donald Trump administration last year approved the sale of Javelin
anti-tank missile systems. A $47 million U.S. military-aid package
approved last year specified 210 Javelin antitank missiles and 37
Javelin launchers, two of them spares. Ukraine announced on April 30
that they had been delivered.

The missiles are to be used only for defensive purposes. According to
a US statement at the time of the sale last year:

<QUOTE>"This proposed sale will contribute to the foreign
policy and national security of the United States by improving the
security of Ukraine.

The Javelin system will help Ukraine build its long-term defense
capacity to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity in
order to meet its national defense requirements. Ukraine will have
no difficulty absorbing this system into its armed forces.

The proposed sale of this equipment and support will not alter the
basic military balance in the region."<END QUOTE>

The U.S.-made FGM-148 Javelin is a fire-and-forget anti-tank missile
that uses infrared guidance to hit armored targets. The guidance
system is contrasted to wire-guided anti-tank missiles, which require
a shooter to actively guide the weapon until it hits its target. A
Javelin shooter can immediately seek cover after firing its shot.

Russia's foreign ministry reacted to the sale by accusing the United
States with "fomenting a war." Such statements from Russia are always
laughable, since Russia has absolutely no credibility. Russia invaded
Ukraine and annexed Crimea, lying about it every step of the way, and
continually supplied weapons to the forces in the Donbas. In
particular, it was a Russian-made Buk missile that shot down the
Malaysian Airlines passenger plane in July 2014, killing hundreds of
passengers. Washington Post and RFE/RL and Newsweek and Defense News

Related Articles:

• Ukraine seizes Russian ship in Sea of Azov in retaliation for Kerch Strait blockade (06-Apr-2018)
  
  
• Fears grow that a new Russian invasion of Ukraine is imminent (12-Aug-2016)
  
  
• Dutch report confirms that Russian missile shot down airliner over Ukraine (14-Oct-2015)
  
  
• BBC reporters attacked by Russian thugs after finding evidence of new Ukraine invasion (19-Sep-2014)
  
  
• Russia's sophisticated disinformation campaign over Ukraine (15-Aug-2014)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Ukraine, Russia, Donbas, Crimea,
Kerch Strait, Sea of Azov, Mariupol, Berdyansk

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

Once again the Government ignores the American people and the fact that the administration had popular support in the election because they had promised that the US would get out of Ukraine, and Syria for that matter. Death to globalism, death to Human Rights Tyranny, Death to THE SWAMP.

*** 8-Jul-18 World View -- North Korea issues vitriolic anti-US rant, collapsing denuclearization talks

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• North Korea issues vitriolic anti-US rant, collapsing denuclearization talks
  
• The North Korean demands: total American withdrawal from South Korea
  
• The future of the denuclearization negotiations
  

****
**** North Korea issues vitriolic anti-US rant, collapsing denuclearization talks
****


Mike Pompeo in Pyongyang after his meetings on Saturday (AFP)

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited North Korean on Friday and
Saturday, where he was snubbed by not having a meeting with the child
dictator Kim Jong-un.

Pompeo characterized the meeting as "successful," but the North Korean
news agency KCNA issued a 1,300 word vitriolic anti-US rant,
criticizing the "gangster-like demand for denuclearization," and then
contradicting itself by threatening to end its alleged "unshakable
will for denuclearization." Here are some excerpts:

<QUOTE>"It was, however, so regretful to mention what the
U.S. side had shown in its attitude and stand at the first
DPRK-U.S. high-level talks held on 6 and 7 July.

The DPRK [North Korea] side, during the talks, put forward the
constructive proposals to seek a balanced implementation of all
the provisions of the Joint Statement out of its firm willingness
to remain faithful to the implementation of the spirit and agreed
points of the DPRK-U.S. summit meeting and talks. ...

But, the U.S. side came up only with its unilateral and
gangster-like demand for denuclearization just calling for CVID,
declaration and verification, all of which run counter to the
spirit of the Singapore summit meeting and talks. ...

The issues the U.S. side insisted on at the talks are all roots of
troubles, which the previous administrations also had insisted on
to disrupt the dialogue processes, stoke the distrust and increase
the danger of war. ...

The first DPRK-U.S. high-level talks this time brought us in a
dangerous situation where we may be shaken in our unshakable will
for denuclearization, rather than consolidating trust between the
DPRK and the U.S.

In the last few months, we displayed maximum patience and watched
the U.S. while initiating good-will steps as many as we can.

But, it seems that the U.S. misunderstood our goodwill and
patience.

The U.S. is fatally mistaken if it went to the extent of regarding
that the DPRK would be compelled to accept, out of its patience,
the demands reflecting its gangster-like mindset. ...

But, if the U.S., being captivated in a fidget, tries to force
upon us the old ways claimed by the previous administrations, this
will get us nowhere. ...

We still cherish our good faith in President Trump.<END QUOTE>

The acronym CVID refers to "complete, verifiable, irreversible
denuclearization," which has been the stated objective of the Trump
administration from the beginning. KCNA (North Korea) and AP

****
**** The North Korean demands: total American withdrawal from South Korea
****

As I wrote two days ago ( "6-Jul-18 World View -- Sec of State Pompeo visits North Korea amid reports that sanctions will be softened"
), the objective
of Pompeo's trip was to press Kim to provide a complete list of all
nuclear and ballistic missile production sites, and a timetable for
shutting them down. Obviously the North Koreans balked at that
request.

As I've said in the past, in my opinion the North Koreans have had one
and only one objective for these meetings: Use diplomacy to force the
Trump administration to lift the sanctions, while continuing nuclear
weapons and missile development.

Saturday's KCNA statement is exactly in line with that objective. The
North Koreans made the "reasonable" demand that the Korea war be
officially ended (as opposed to the current status, officially still
at war after an armistice was signed in 1953):

<QUOTE>"The U.S. side never mentioned the issue of
establishing a peace regime on the Korean peninsula which is
essential for defusing tension and preventing a war. It took the
position that it would even backtrack on the issue it had agreed
on to end the status of war under certain conditions and excuses.

As for the issue of announcing the declaration of the end of war
at an early date, it is the first process of defusing tension and
establishing a lasting peace regime on the Korean peninsula, and
at the same time, it constitutes a first factor in creating trust
between the DPRK and the U.S. This issue was also stipulated in
Panmunjom Declaration as a historical task to terminate the war
status on the Korean peninsula which continues for nearly 70
years. President Trump, too, was more enthusiastic about this
issue at the DPRK-U.S. summit talks. ...

The U.S. side, during the talks, made a great publicity about
suspension of one or two joint military exercises. But suspension
of one action called exercises is a highly reversible step which
can be resumed anytime at any moment as all of its military force
remains intact in its previously-held positions without scraping
even a rifle. This is incomparable with the irreversible step
taken by the DPRK to explode and dismantle the nuclear test
ground."<END QUOTE>

This is all a demand that the US withdraw all its forces from South
Korea before any denuclearization can take place. Related to this are
other demands, including removal of the THAAD defensive anti-missile
system from South Korea, and removal of American forces from Okinawa.
At one time in the past, a North Korean official was quoted as saying
that North Korea will give up its nuclear weapons after the US gives
up its nuclear weapons.

It's true, as the North Koreans claim, that the suspension of the
joint military exercises is reversible, but the claim about the
exploding and dismantling the Punggye-ri nuclear test site in Mount
Mantap is also reversible, and may be completely fraudulent. The
North Koreans did not permit nuclear experts to witness the
explosions, and so the explosions may only have been a big show to
gain negotiating leverage. Furthermore, as we discussed at the time,
other parts of Mount Mantap can be
used as nuclear test sites, and there may be dozens of other locations
in North Korea. This is probably one of the reasons why Pompeo's
request for a list of test sites was denied on Saturday.

The purpose of the KCNA statement was to make a "reasonable" request,
in order to get the Trump administration to lift the sanctions, with
no significant concessions by the North. At the end of the day on
Saturday, the sanctions were still in full force.

****
**** The future of the denuclearization negotiations
****

There's no doubt that the denuclearization "negotiations" have
now taken a sharp turn.

Recall that Trump canceled the summit negotiations six weeks ago.
( "25-May-18 World View -- North Korea suffers diplomatic defeat as Trump cancels summit"
)

One of the things that triggered Trump's cancelation was continued
criticism of and contempt for Trump in the North Korean media. Since
the cancelation, the NK media have been consistently "nice" to Trump
and the US.

So Saturday's criticism is extremely significant because it's the
first hostile comment in the NK media since the cancellation. In a
sense it represents NK's first real counter-response to Trump's
cancellation.

One thing that's notable about the KCNA statement on Saturday is that
it came a few hours after Pompeo had said the meetings had gone well,
so there was no need to make this statement right away. I've said in
the past that if Kim tried to really denuclearize, then he'd be shot
and killed by his own generals. The denuclearization negotiations
must have, at the very least, caused bitter disagreements in NK's
leadership, much like what's happening in London with Brexit or in
Berlin over the migration issue.

So the statement, when it wasn't even necessary, is a sign that the
faction opposing the negotiations has just gained the upper hand.
This is probably the real significance of the statement, and it means
an end to current track of negotiations.

The South Korean's must have seen this coming, because they've been
urging the US to soften its demands on NK. Going along with the South
Koreans would have meant making concessions without any
denuclearization steps by NK, so it had to be rejected, but now
we're facing the inevitable outcome.

There's one more thing that has to be remembered: From the point of
view of Generational Dynamics, this is a generational Crisis era,
where nationalism and xenophobia are at historical high points. So it
wouldn't take much to reach a tipping point for the North Koreans to
abandon the negotiations.

(People always point to the East-West Germany reunification talks in
1991 as examples that could be followed for Korean reunification. But
that example is completely irrelevant, since those talks occurred
during a generational Unraveling era, where nationalism and xenophobia
are at historical lowest points.)

The other thing that's going on, as I pointed out in my article two days ago
is that the Chinese
are furious about the tariffs that president Trump has been imposing.
The Chinese are liars and cheaters and criminals, but like the Nazis,
they consider themselves to be the Master Race who have the right to
lie and cheat and extort to get whatever they want, because they have
such total contempt for the West. The statement that NK issued
Saturday may have been encouraged by the Chinese, because of their
fury over the tariffs.

I also pointed out that there's an analogy with the sanctions imposed
on Japan on July 24, 1941, which infuriated the Japanese and motivated
the Pearl Harbor attack on December 7. I can't prove this, of course,
but with nationalism and xenophobia at their historic peaks, I have
the feeling that a similar dynamic is going on with China and North
Korea towards America and the West.

What choices are now available to the Trump administration? Here
are some possibilities:

• Trump could order a resumption of the canceled
  joint military drills with South Korea, assuming that the South
  Koreans agree.
  
  
• Trump could offer some major new concession to the North,
  such as removing 5% of the American troops in South Korea.
  
  
• Trump could replace Pompeo with someone else as North
  Korean negotiator. This might buy a few days of time, kicking
  the can down the road.

Any of these choices have unpredictable results, because
the North Koreans have absolutely no intention of agreeing
to denuclearization, and that will have to become clear
at some point. Furthermore, with xenophobia and nationalism
at historic highs in both China and North Korea, any action
might produce a hostile reaction.

It's well to remember that we've only had these negotiations because
of a remarkable coincidence: Just as things were heating up to a boil
in January, it was time for, of all things, the Olympics games in
Seoul. This permitted the North to continue nuclear and ballistic
missile development, while putting on a charm offensive that lasted
several months. The charm offensive is now completely derailed.

For those who would like a thin reed of hope to grasp onto, let me
offer one. In my article "12-Feb-18 World View -- What was Kim Yo-jong thinking as she returned to North Korea from the Olympics?"
, I speculated that
Kim Jong-un's sister, Kim Yo-jong, might have been so overtaken with
the vibrancy and high standard of living of South Korean society,
compared to the deadliness and near starvation as a constant in the
North, she might have taken it upon herself to convince her brother to
give up his nuclear program, for the good of the North Korean people.
In that article, I described how Soviet leader Boris Yeltsin had
decided to give up Communism after visiting the United States in
September, 1989.

I wrote that article in February, and since that time dozens
of top North Korean leaders have visited the South, and have
seen for themselves how the NK people have suffered enormously
under Communism. Trump himself has frequently pointed out
to the North Koreans that they could have a great future if
they give up their nuclear program.

So the thin reed of hope that I'm offering is that Kim Jong-un and his
generals take the same lesson that Yeltsin took, and decide that, for
the good of the North Korean people, it would be best to give up not
only the nuclear program, but Communism. Something like that would be
truly historic, but don't hold your breath waiting for it. Reuters and The Hill and Fox News

Related Articles:

• Sec of State Pompeo visits North Korea amid reports that sanctions will be softened (06-Jul-2018)
  
  
• After the Kim-Trump summit, US and N. Korea plan denuclearization details (14-Jun-2018)
  
  
• North Korea suffers diplomatic defeat as Trump cancels summit (25-May-2018)
  
  
• North Korea's negotiating position collapses, along with Mount Mantap (27-Apr-2018)
  
  
• What was Kim Yo-jong thinking as she returned to North Korea from the Olympics? (12-Feb-2018)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un, Mike Pompeo,
Punggye-ri nuclear test site, Mount Mantap,
China, Xi Jinping, Japan, Pearl Harbor,
Kim Yo-jong, Russia, Boris Yeltsin

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail
Contribute to Generational Dynamics via PayPal

John J. Xenakis
100 Memorial Drive Apt 8-13A
Cambridge, MA 02142
Phone: 617-864-0010
E-mail: john@GenerationalDynamics.com
Web site: http://www.GenerationalDynamics.com
Forum: http://www.gdxforum.com/forum
Subscribe to World View: http://generationaldynamics.com/subscribe

What an idiotic analysis. North Korea is not a threat to America because North Korea is communist, North Korea is a threat to America because it is pointing Nuclear Missiles at the US. Stop with this Regime Change Nonsense, the objective if there is a war ought to be annihilation of North Korea, land and people.