![]() |
Generational Dynamics World View - Printable Version +- Generational Theory Forum: The Fourth Turning Forum: A message board discussing generations and the Strauss Howe generational theory (http://generational-theory.com/forum) +-- Forum: Fourth Turning Forums (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-1.html) +--- Forum: Theories Of History (http://generational-theory.com/forum/forum-7.html) +--- Thread: Generational Dynamics World View (/thread-51.html) Pages:
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
182
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
229
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
|
RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-13-2019 ** 13-Dec-2019 World View: Carlos Gutierrez says that China is not an enemy As I've written in the past, people my age have wondered our whole lives how it was possible for Hitler to so thoroughly fool the British people and politicians that they were not a threat, with Winston Churchill being the major exception. Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain met with Hitler and famously announced that there would be "Peace in our time." This morning, George Bush's Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez was on CNBC to talk about the China trade deal, and he used the opportunity to criticize administration officials who are worried about war with China. Here's what he said (my transcription): Quote: I don't believe, as some people in this administration I wanted to quote this because the reasoning is so totally harebrained, but is typical of the reasoning among media and politicians today, many of whom majored in women's studies and sociology in college and have no clue what's going on in the world. Gutierrez is old enough to know better, but apparently he doesn't. Notice that Gutierrez is going a lot farther than even Neville Chamberlain did. Gutierrez made these points:
In other words, if China launches a military attack on the United States, then it's not China's fault. It's the fault of Navarro and Bannon and people in the Trump administration. And yet, for almost a century, the Soviet Union / Russia was called a strategic enemy by people like Gutierrez, and are still doing so today. And yet, we haven't had a war with Russia during that entire century. People like Gutierrez might say that we should simply shut down the US military, because we should never view anyone as an enemy, so there should never be another war, so who needs a military? Here's a memory from 1938: ![]()
-- 1930s / British Girls in the Third Reich - 'We Had the Time of Our Lives' http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/young-women-from-britain-in-1930s-nazi-germany-a-905617.html (Der Spiegel, 13-Jun-2013) RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-14-2019 ** 14-Dec-2019 World View: Impeachment and violence richard5za Wrote:> Changing the subject to Impeachment The Democrats haven't provided any credible reason for the impeachment saga, except that they claim that it's the only way to prevent Donald Trump from being reelected. The plan, insofar as there is an actual plan, is to use impeachment to weaken Trump support so that the Democrats will win. Whether that will work remains to be seen, but so far it appears to be backfiring. The situation is becoming increasingly dangerous for tribal reasons. You may not understand what the Democrats are doing, but since you live in South Africa, the tribal issues are something that you'll understand well. The Tea Party is the "tribe" that turned into the 63 million Trump supporters, and now the Democrats and the media have the same loathing and hatred for the Trump supporters that they've had for years for the Tea Partiers. For years, the Democrats and the mainstream media have expressed enormous loathing and hatred for the Tea Partiers, repeatedly inciting violence against them and using the epithet "teabaggers," which is as bad as the n-word. I still recall Anderson Cooper and Peter Bergen on CNN giggling and laughing with each other over calling them "teabaggers." The loathing and hatred was evident, as it was for many people on CNN and other mainstream media and Democrats. More recently, we have examples like Peter Strzok referring to "smelly Walmart Trump supporters," and we have the hag Maxine Waters inciting violence against Trump supporters by screaming that they should be confronted in restaurants and gas stations. The Democrats are encouraging the Fascist group Antifa to attack pro-Trump speakers with violence. This Democrats vs Tea Party loathing and hatred is competely indistinguishable from Shona vs Nbdele, Burmese vs Rohingya, Nazi vs Jew, English vs Scot, Han vs Uighur, Sunni vs Shia, and so forth. The only real question is how far the violence will be carried in America, and whether it will go as far as some of these other similar examples. Violence and threats of violence played a major role in impeachment hearings. The Democrats' star witness Gordon Sondland was forced to change his testimony after his businesses and family were being threatened with violence, riots and demonstrations, after Democrats led by Adam Schiff called on the rioters to threaten Sondland. Jonathan Turley's family was threatened with violence after he said that impeachment couldn't be justified on the current record. The mainstream media is fully on board with this incitement to violence. I wrote a few days ago how shocked I was. I'm probably the only person reading this post who actually watched all five days of the intelligence committee impeachment hearings, and what I saw was almost beyond belief in America. After hearing each day's testimony, I'd listen to the BBC, al-Jazeera, MS-NBC, and so forth, and their report on the day's testimony bore no resemblance to what actually happened. Every single witness was forced to admit under Republican cross-examination that they had no evidence whatsoever to support Adam Schiff's charges. Every single one of Schiff's witnesses was forced to back down. It was all made up. But then every single news report lied about it, saying something like "Today, Ambassador X gave explosive testimony that Trump withheld aid from Ukraine until Ukraine started investigating Joe and Hunter Biden." In fact, all the news reports used the same words, indicating that they were all reading the same press releases from Adam Schiff and the Democrats. By the way, for those who want to hear the other side about what's going on in the impeachment circus, I strongly recommend Hannity on Fox News Channel. This is the best source for understanding what's actually going on. It's now expected that there will be a trial in the Senate in January, and Trump will be acquitted, since there isn't even an accusation that he committed a crime. The question is: What will the Democrats do after that? This is a serious question. One Democrat senator, Al Green, said that the Democrats should just impeach Trump again and again, until he's convicted. The Democrats have experienced one extremely humiliating setback after another, after the Russia hoax, the Ukraine hoax, and the impeachment hoax. What will they do after Trump is acquitted? The Democrats have a great deal of pent-up hatred, and it might explode into violence, as it has in the other tribal examples I gave above. My father, who was a Greek immigrant, once told me that the violence in the US was so great in the 1930s that he thought that the country wouldn't survive. That could happen again. Even worse, what will the Democrats do if Trump is re-elected? They will be looking at four more years of Trump, and government control by the 63 million smelly, loathsome, hated Tea Partiers / Trump supporters. The Democrats have shown themselves to be angry, hysterical, and hormonal men and women, totally irrational and a completely out of control mob for the last three years. What will they do in the next four years? It's not pleasant to contemplate. However, let's remember that we're still headed for war with China. When a "regeneracy event" occurs, such as a major military setback or a major attack on American soil, then the entire country, both Democrats and Republicans, will put aside their political differences and unite behind the president, just as they did after the attack on Pearl Harbor and the Bataan Death March. ---- Related posts: *** 03-Dec-2019 World View: Civil war and impeachment hearings *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48678#p48678 *** 05-Dec-2019 World View: Second American Civil War *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48711#p48711 *** 05-Dec-2019 World View: Corey Booker turns on Democrats' racism *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48712#p48712 *** 06-Dec-2019 World View: Jonathan Turley on impeachment *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48725#p48725 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-14-2019 ** 14-Dec-2019 World View: North Korea makes new test as 12/31 deadline looms North Korea announced that it conducted another "crucial test" which "will be applied to further bolstering up the reliable strategic nuclear deterrent of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea." They didn't announce what was tested, but it's believed that it was an advanced rocket engine of a type that can be used in ballistic missiles. For the past two years, since the talks between Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump began with a "charm offensive," North Korea has not tested any nuclear weapons or ballistic missiles. However, it has made numerous tests of things like cruise missiles, which are a threat to South Korea and Japan. North Korea originally promised that it would denuclearize, in return for agreement by the US to end the UN and US sanctions. Kim Jong-un has used a variety of artifices to trick Trump into removing the sanctions unilaterally, but has not succeeded. These tricks worked with president George Bush in 2008, which was a major humiliation to the US. But Trump has refused to fall for them. Now, North Korea has set a deadline of the end of this year for the sanctions to be lifted. They have not said how they will retaliate, but it's believed that it would be a resumption of nuclear weapon and ballistic missile tests. John Xenakis is author of: "World View: War Between China and Japan: Why America Must Be Prepared" (Generational Theory Book Series, Book 2), June 2019. Paperback: 331 pages, over 200 source references, $13.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/1732738637/ ---- Sources: -- North Korea says it conducted test to bolster its “strategic nuclear deterrent” https://www.nknews.org/2019/12/north-korea-says-it-conducted-test-to-bolster-its-strategic-nuclear-deterrent/ (NK News, 14-Dec-2019) -- U.S. envoy to visit Seoul as deadline looms for stalled North Korea talks https://www.reuters.com/article/us-northkorea-usa-southkorea/us-envoy-to-visit-seoul-as-deadline-looms-for-stalled-north-korea-talks-idUSKBN1YH0QI (Reuters, 13-Dec-2019) ---- Related posts: *** 07-Dec-2019 World View: North Korea missile test *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48736#p48736 *** 07-Dec-2019 World View: North Korea ICBM test *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48733#p48733 *** 07-Dec-2019 World View: China - North Korea vassal relationship *** http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=5168&p=48735#p48735 15-Dec-19 World View -- US envoy visits S. Korea to prepare for North Korea 12/31 thr - John J. Xenakis - 12-14-2019 *** 15-Dec-19 World View -- US envoy visits S. Korea to prepare for North Korea 12/31 threat This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** North Korea announces new 'crucial test' to bolster its 'nuclear deterrent' **** ![]() A public TV screen Monday in Tokyo shows North Korea's Sohae long-range rocket launch site (AP) North Korea on Saturday announced that it conducted another "crucial test" which "will be applied to further bolstering up the reliable strategic nuclear deterrent of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea." This was the second test in the space of a week. The North Koreans didn't announce the nature of the tests, but it's believed that they were tests of an advanced rocket engine of a type that can be used in ballistic missiles. North Korea has in recent weeks become increasingly belligerent, conducting a series of short-range missile tests and using increasingly belligerent language. The North Koreans have set a deadline of the end of the year for the US to agree to the removal of some or all of the US or UN sanctions unilaterally, without any serious denuclearization steps by the North Koreans. Not surprisingly, North Korea's rhetoric toward Japan has been especially hostile. Japan's prime minister Shinzo Abe responded to a recent missile test by saying, "North Korea’s repeated launches of ballistic missiles are a serious defiance to not only our country but also the international community." North Korea's state media responded by denouncing Japan's prime minister Abe as "an underwit," "the most stupid man ever known in history," and a "perfect imbecile." On the other hand, Donald Trump last week once again referred to Kim Jong-un as "rocket man," saying that "he likes sending rockets up," but "in the meantime, we still have peace." A North Korean official said, "This naturally indicates that Trump is an old man bereft of patience. As he is such a heedless and erratic old man, the time when we can not but call him a 'dotard' again may come." **** **** US envoy Stephen Biegun arrives in South Korea on Sunday **** U.S. special envoy for North Korea Stephen Biegun will arrive in Seoul on Sunday to meet with South Korean officials and devise a joint US-South Korea strategy for responding to North Korea's end of year threat. For the past two years, since the talks between North Korea's child dictator Kim Jong-un and Donald Trump began with a "charm offensive," North Korea has not tested any nuclear weapons or long-range ballistic missiles. However, it has made numerous tests of things like short-range missiles, which are a threat to South Korea and Japan. North Korea originally promised that it would denuclearize, in return for agreement by the US to end the UN and US sanctions. Kim Jong-un has used a variety of artifices to trick Trump into removing the sanctions unilaterally, but has not succeeded. These tricks worked with president George Bush in 2008, which was a major humiliation to the US. But Trump has refused to fall for them. Now, North Korea has set a deadline of the end of this year for the sanctions to be lifted. After two years of charm offensive, but being unable to get the sanctions lifted, the North Koreans now say that they have "nothing to lose" in taking "a new path." They have not said what the new path is, but it's believed that it would be a resumption of nuclear weapon and ballistic missile tests. It seems likely that the "new path" will be devised to take advantage of scheduled elections in America and South Korea, in November and April respectively, to apply maximum political pressure on Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in. For example, the North Koreans might simply threaten to begin nuclear weapons testing again unless some or all of the sanctions are lifted. According to reports, US envoy Stephen Biegun will discuss with South Korean officials a strategy to get the US-North Korea talks started again, in order to avoid a new regional crisis. According to one South Korean official, "In any case, Biegun would try to give an impression that they won’t be manipulated by the North Koreans, while making clear that they want to keep talking." **** **** China's confused response to the North Korean threat **** Normally, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) takes a highly contemptuous anti-American position on almost any subject, but that's not the case with the current situation. The Chinese are as unhappy with the North Koreans as they are with the Americans. For centuries, Korea has had a vassal or tributary relationship with China. This means that Korea paid China a great deal of money, usually gold and slaves, in return for guarantees of defense from outsiders (i.e., Japan). Although China does not directly govern the vassal, China expects the vassal to do as it's told, and will not hesitate to punish a vassal that disobeys. North Korea today pays tribute to China not in the form of gold and slaves, but in the form of massive amounts of coal and "workers," both of which are also used to provide financial aid to North Korea. Relations between China and North Korea took a hostile turn in October 2006, when North Korea began testing nuclear weapons. The vassal North Korea did not do as it was told, and China punished its vassal by agreeing to United Nations sanctions targeting North Korea. However, China cannot punish North Korea too severely. If China tries to starve North Korea, the result could be a massive refugee flow from North Korea, across the Yalu River, into northeast China, which would be an economic disaster for China. The reason that China does not want North Korea testing nuclear weapons is simply because such tests provide the US with an excuse to increase its military presence in the area. The Chinese were particularly infuriated in 2016 when North Korean tests provoked South Korea to reverse a previous policy and agree to deploy the Terminal High Altitude Air Defense (THAAD), supplied by the United States military, to protect itself from North Korean missile attacks. The THAAD does not do a very good job at protecting South Korea from North Korean short-range missiles. But what the THAAD system does, through its sophisticated long-range "over the horizon" radar capabilities, is provide early warning to the American military of a missile attack from China. What China would like is for America to reduce its military presence in the region, which a North Korean missile test would certainly make less likely. Therefore, the Chinese are very unhappy with North Korea's threats. What the Chinese say they would like is for the North Koreans, the South Koreans and the US to talk, and for everything to settle down, so that American forces can start withdrawing from the region. That's a nice Chinese dream, but it's very unlikely to occur. John Xenakis is author of: "World View: War Between China and Japan: Why America Must Be Prepared" (Generational Theory Book Series, Book 2), June 2019, Paperback: 331 pages, with over 200 source references, $13.99 https://www.amazon.com/dp/1732738637/ Sources:
Related Articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, North Korea, Kim Jong-un, South Korea, Moon Jae-in, Japan, Shinzo Abe, Stephen Biegun, China, Chinese Communist Party, CCP, Terminal High Altitude Air Defense, THAAD 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-15-2019 ** 15-Dec-2019 World View: Uniting the country Quote:> The Democrats have shown themselves to be angry, hysterical, and Guest Wrote:> What if the 2020 election goes ahead and there is no war with First off, we're not going to war with Iran. Iran is becoming more and more pro-Western and pro-American every day, as the old geezers who survived the 1979 civil war die off, and the younger generations embrace the West. As I said in the article, for the last ten years the Democrats have been increasingly willing to incite violence against the 63 million smelly, loathsome, hated Tea Partiers / Trump supporters. I expect this use of violence to increase, especially if Democrats have to face the horror of another four years with the same 63 million smelly, loathsome, hated Tea Partiers / Trump supporters in control. So I expect the incidents and intensity of violence to continue to increase. The violence won't go too far for an ironic reason: The people with the guns are Tea Partiers, who are Second Amendment supporters. However, as I've said many times, there is absolutely no sign whatsoever that this is leading to a civil war. Maybe if the Tea Partiers managed to control the presidency for another 20 years we might get to that point, but we're nowhere near it now. A Democratic presidential victory in 2024 would bring the worst of the violence to an end at that time. Most of all, a "regeneracy event," such as a Chinese missile attack on the United States or even on Taiwan or Japan, would cause the population, both Republicans and Democrats, to put aside their political differences and unite behind the president. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-15-2019 ** 15-Dec-2019 World View: Chaos Theory and World War FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> Apparently, the US and USSR actually WEREN'T truly existential I agree, but that didn't stop the two sides from THINKING that they were mutual existential threats. FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> As you've said, the REALLY REAL existential threat to China is That's an interesting way of looking at, and it seems to be valid. FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> So, how do we decide that there will be war between antagonists, Now you've REALLY hit on something extremely complicated that I've been writing on the edges of, but never fully developed. I love dangling prepositions. Don't you? Anyway, I'll start with one of my favorite examples, that I mention frequently: The 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. Arguably, everybody already "knew" that a war between Israel and Lebanon would be coming some day, but didn't know when. Various diplomatic steps were being taken all the time -- by the Lebanese, the Israelis, the United Nations, the United States, Russia, and other interested parties to prevent such a war, or at least to postpone it as long as possible. However, as it turned out, all those massive diplomatic steps were 100% USELESS. Here's what happened on or around July 12, 2006:
So all that multi-national diplomacy was for nothing, because of a chaotic event that could not be predicted: That Israel's government went into a state of total panic. So, that brings us back to your question: Can you speed up or delay an inevitable war? If it's a war triggered by a chaotic event during a generational Crisis era, then the answer is NO. There's no action that you can take that will either cause or prevent such a war, or that will speed up or delay such a war. This takes us to the concepts of Chaos Theory. You cannot predict, cause, delay or speed up a chaotic event. The iconic example is that if a butterfly flaps its wings in China, then it will trigger a chain of events that could cause a hurricane in North America. So you might say, "Gee, it would be fun to take a trip to Beijing, and while I'm there I'll get a butterfly to flap its wings and cause a hurricane in North America." Obviously that won't work, because there's more to the iconic example. A butterfly flapping its wings in China will almost certainly have no effect at all, but it MIGHT cause a hurricane in North America, or it MIGHT prevent a hurricane from occurring that otherwise would have occurred, or it MIGHT speed up or delay such a hurricane. It's impossible to predict. So all those diplomatic efforts to prevent a war between Israel and Hezbollah might actually have CAUSED the war. For example, maybe it was because of all those diplomatic efforts that both Israel's military and Hezbollah's militia were patrolling on opposite sides of the border on July 12, 2006, resulting in the abduction and the war. Maybe if there hadn't been any diplomatic efforts, there wouldn't have been a war at all. It's impossible to say, one way or the other. However, there's another important side to all this: Preparation. You can't take steps to cause, prevent, speed up or delay a chaotic event that triggers a war, but if you know that the war is inevitable, then you can prepare for the war, and you can try to prevent your enemy from preparing. So China's military is preparing for war by heavily subsidizing Huawei and TikTok, and both are wildly successful at collecting massive amounts of information to be stored in China's massive big data social database. This will give China the information it needs to bribe or threaten any Western politician or soldier at any time, or to take complete control of foreign networks at time of war. Trump is preparing for war by increasing the defense budget. Trump is using the trade dispute as a means to cripple the Chinese military's supply chain, in order to weaken it. Trump is also blocking use of Huawei in the networks of America and its allies. None of these steps will prevent a war. In fact, as I've pointed out many times, the US established an embargo on oil and gasoline exports to Japan on August 1, 1941, and on December 7, Japan bombed Pearl Harbor. A lot of people have said (and I've said) that the US embargo resulted in the Pearl Harbor bombing, but in fact it's far from clear whether the Pearl Harbor bombing would have occurred anyway. So will Trump's US-China trade sanctions cause a war with China? I happen to believe not. I still expect the war to be triggered by some trivial event, the equivalent of the abduction of two soldiers, occurring in Kashmir, the Mideast, the South China Sea, Central Asia, or anywhere else. This brings us back to the statement by Carlos Gutierrez that I was criticizing on Friday, the implication that by merely calling China a strategic threat, then you will cause a war with China. As I've said, there is no way to cause, prevent, speed up or delay an inevitable war with China, least of all by calling China a strategic threat. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 12-15-2019 The Israel-Hezbollah war wasn't triggered by a chaotic event, though. Abduction of two Israeli soldiers could certainly trigger a war, but there isn't any credible circumstance where abduction of the two Israeli soldiers would prevent the war, when it would otherwise be triggered by lack of an abduction. To take an historical example, the policy of Appeasement by Chamberlain before WWII most certainly delayed the Europe wide portion of WWII. Some argue that the delay was critical to rearmament efforts. Actions to delay or accelerate a crisis war are just as possible as efforts to prepare for them. However, insofar as crisis wars are not entirely predictable, these efforts may be ineffective. For example, if the crisis war involving China ends up being a civil war, any preparations for war with the US will be largely useless. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-15-2019 ** 15-Dec-2019 World View: Israel-Hezbollah war (12-15-2019, 12:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > The Israel-Hezbollah war wasn't triggered by a chaotic event, The abduction wasn't the chaotic event. The panic was the chaotic event. It's similar to the 1929 stock market panic, which was also a chaotic event. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 12-15-2019 So now you're saying the abduction was unconnected to the war? RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-15-2019 ** 15-Dec-2019 World View: Chaotic panic (12-15-2019, 03:58 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > So now you're saying the abduction was unconnected to the Everything is connected to everything else, but that's not the point. I always like to point to the example that no one knows what caused the 1929 stock market panic to occur on October 28, instead of a few months earlier or later. It was unexpected. It just happened on October 28. The Israeli government panic and invasion of Lebanon on July 12, 2006, was also unexpected. Why did it occur on that day? Was it because of the abduction? It's certainly reasonable to assume so. But here are some questions that are left unanswered:
Did the 1929 panic have to occur at all? I believe so. Did the 2006 Israeli panic have to occur at all? I think so, but I can't prove it. Some things are just "in the air," and are going to happen one way or another. (12-15-2019, 12:45 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > To take an historical example, the policy of Appeasement by Germany's invasion of Poland was not a panic event like Israel's invasion of Lebanon, so the same reasoning doesn't apply. Or maybe it was a panic event, in which case Chamberlain's achievement may have had no effect at all. Whether something is a chaotic event has to be proven. Sometimes this can be done with computer models, by running the model with different inputs, and finding whether tiny changes to the inputs produce huge changes in the results. It's hard to do such a test with things like a military invasion. The invasion of Poland was not the start of WW II. At that time, WW II had already been going on for several years. I count the beginning of WW II as 1937, when a Japanese soldier had to pee and got lost in the woods, and his commander assumed that he had been abducted by the Chinese, triggering the China-Japan war and quickly leading to the rape of Nanking. That's a good example of a chaotic event triggering a war. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-15-2019 ** 15-Dec-2019 World View: Karma Tom Mazanec Wrote:> John, I refer you to a great technothriller writer I follow and China is unique in world history in that they've never done a good thing for any other country except to exploit good deeds by other countries. Whether it's the United Nations, WTO, the climate conference, the law of the sea, the BRI, or anything else, the world reaches out to China to help them and to make them a welcome part of the world community, and they take advantage of that help and kindness to exploit others and harm others. They even continue to claim that they're an "underdeveloped nation," which makes me want to vomit. They constantly demand that everyone else obey international law, but they claim that no international law or international contract that they've signed applies to them. The United States and other Western countries -- and in fact all other countries -- do lots of good deeds to help people in other countries. But not China. I've studied China, and I've written a book on China. I'm not aware of any good that China has ever done for someone else except to exploit them. Even Putin sometimes tries to help other people. But not China. Not ever. This is because of the Chinese view that they're the Master Race and everyone else is a barbarian. America is kinder to rattlesnakes and desert rats than China is to people of any other nation. The American population is diverse ethnically, religiously and nationally. The American people see themselves as the same as people anywhere else in the world, except that we're lucky enough to live in the greatest and most exceptional country of the world. But the CCP don't see any point in being kind or helpful to anyone else because all other people are barbarians and worth less than desert rats. More and more, China appears to me to be pure evil. I'm not a religious person, but I do believe in Karma or Karuma (the Japanese word for Karma) or Kismet or comeuppance. China is headed for its own self-destruction, and will take as much of the rest of the world with it as it can. 16-Dec-19 World View -- Why we can never prevail in Afghanistan - John J. Xenakis - 12-16-2019 *** 16-Dec-19 World View -- Why we can never prevail in Afghanistan This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** 'Afghan Papers' reveal we sent 175,000 soldiers into Afghanistan without 'foggiest notion' what we were doing **** ![]() Arlington National Cemetary’s Section 60 is where most of the casualties from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are buried. (Getty) The Washington Post has published a trove of thousands of "Afghanistan papers" that it has obtained from the Dept. of Defense under the Freedom of Information Act. The paper is declaring these to be of historic importance, and is comparing them to the "Pentagon Papers" that roiled federal politics in the 1970s. Starting in 2014, the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) undertook a project to interview hundreds of people, including politicians, analysts, and soldiers, who are Americans, Europeans and Afghans, in a "Lessons Learned" project in order to figure out why nothing has worked in Afghanistan. Presidents George Bush, Barack Obama, and now Donald Trump have all promised to bring the Afghan war to a satisfactory conclusion, defeating the Taliban, and making the country into a free market democracy. Even today, there are still truly idiotic "peace negotiations" going on in Doha, of all places, between US and Taliban negotiators, but not including Afghan government officials because the Taliban only want to negotiate with the US, but not with the Afghan government. Can you believe this? The project found that Bush, Obama and Trump have all done the same things. They tried to win the war by not repeating earlier mistakes, or the mistakes of their predecessors, but all this meant was that they made new mistakes. And then, we're all shocked, shocked, shocked to learn from the Afghanistan Papers that the three presidents lied to the American people, always hiding the setbacks, always claiming that progress was being made, always saying that the end is in sight. This is exasperating to me because I've written many times in the last ten years that the war in Afghanistan CANNOT be won, or even resolved in any meaningful way. And by that I didn't mean that the Nato forces just had to be a little more clever. I meant that it was literally impossible. Mathematically impossible. I've given the reasoning many times, and I'll repeat it again below. The reasoning is not that difficult, but the problem is that the so-called experts in Washington really don't have a clue. Long-time readers are aware that I learned this in 2006, when the Congressional Quarterly and the London Times conducted surveys of supposed Mideast experts and found that they were idiots. (See "Guess what? British politicians and journalists are just as ignorant as Americans" from January 2007) I was really shocked at that time to realize that I knew a lot more than the so-called Mideast experts in Washington knew. In a sense it isn't surprising, since I'm a Boomer and went to college at a time when colleges actually taught something. Since then, SAT scores have been falling, and college professors are left-wing idiots who teach the equivalent of women's studies and sociology. So it's not surprising that I know a lot more about analyzing Afghanistan than the Washington experts do. As I said, the reasoning in the analysis isn't that difficult, but it does contain some logical subleties that are beyond the mental capabilities of the so-called experts who graduated from Harvard or Princeton, where they leave with no clue about the real world. This "shocking" discovery from the Afghanistan Papers of the total ignorance and stupidity of the so-called experts in Washington is really amazing, when you think that there might be one or two people in the State Dept. or DoD that can figure out what's really going on. But my guess is that such people would be too threatening to the élite "experts" from Harvard or Princeton, and so the people who really know what's going on are given offices in the basement in the boiler room, where they won't bother the élites. Since 2001, more than 775,000 U.S. troops have deployed to Afghanistan, many repeatedly. Of those, 2,300 died there and 20,589 were wounded in action, according to Defense Department figures. The Washington Post article quotes Douglas Lute, a three-star Army general who served as the White House’s Afghan war czar during the Bush and Obama administrations. He says the following in 2015: <QUOTE>"We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan — we didn’t know what we were doing. What are we trying to do here? We didn’t have the foggiest notion of what we were undertaking. If the American people knew the magnitude of this dysfunction ... 2,400 lives lost. Who will say this was in vain?"<END QUOTE> See, this is what I mean. What the hell is going on here??? We're in Afghanistan fighting a war with hundreds of thousands of troops, and the Afghanistan "czar" for Bush and Obama says that "We didn't have the foggiest notion" of what we were doing? Do you understand the magnitude of this, Dear Reader? We send hundreds of thousands of troops do a war where the don't have the foggiest notion of what we're doing. It's so hideously unbelievable that it's almost hysterically funny. And if this is happening in Afghanistan, then it's also happening with American policy in the Mideast, in Africa, in Asia, and so forth. I realize that the regular readers of my Generational Dynamics articles are a lot more intelligent than the so-called experts in Washington. But if you happen to know one of the "experts" on Afghanistan, then please send him a copy of this article. He'll either learn about what's really going on in Afghanistan, or else he'll change his spam filter so that all future e-mail messages from you go into his spam folder. **** **** Why we can never prevail in Afghanistan **** The Iraq war was a political disaster for Bush until he adopted the "surge" strategy in 2007. Obama and the Democrats ridiculed this strategy until it worked, and successfully ejected AQI (al-Qaeda in Iraq) from Iraq. In 2009, Obama was faced with a potential political disaster in Afghanistan. He looked at the success of the "surge" strategy in Iraq, and decided that his surge strategy would be better than Bush's. So he adopted a surge strategy in Afghanistan. He would be even more successful in getting rid of the Taliban in Afghanistan than Bush was in getting rid of al-Qaeda in Iraq. As I wrote at the time, and have written many times since then, the "surge" strategy was 100% guaranteed to fail in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) was a foreign militia led by Jordanian terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and al-Zarqawi had to import fighters from Jordan and Saudi Arabia because the Iraqis refused to fight. (See "Iraqi Sunnis are turning against al-Qaeda in Iraq" from April, 2007) So the "surge" in Iraq worked because it had to eject a FOREIGN militia. But that's not true in Afghanistan. The Taliban are NOT foreign. They're radicalized Pashtuns, and Pashtuns are the dominant ethnic group IN AFGHANISTAN. So the "surge" can't eject the Taliban. And so, Dear Reader, you understand that, don't you? As a reader of Generational Dynamics articles, you're more intelligent than the experts in Washington for whom this concept that AQI was foreign while the Taliban are domestic is much too subtle for the Washington experts to understand. But that's only one of the reasons why the surge strategy would fail in Afghanistan with 100% certainty. Iraq's last generational crisis war was the Iran/Iraq war of the 1980s, where the major groups (Sunnis and Shias) were UNITED in fighting against Iran. So the Sunnis and Shias were also UNITED in ejecting al-Qaeda in Iraq. That's why the "surge" strategy worked in Iraq. Afghanistan is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The last generational crisis war was an extremely bloody, horrific civil war, in 1991-96. The war was a civil war, fought between the Pashtuns in southern Afghanistan versus the Northern Alliance of Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks in northern Afghanistan. The Taliban are radicalized Pashtuns, and when they need to import foreign fighters, then can import their cousins from the Pashtun tribes in Pakistan. Indeed, it's much worse than that. The ethnic groups in Afghanistan are COMPLETELY NON-UNITED and loathe each other. Pashtuns still have scores to settle with the Tajiks, Hazaras and Uzbeks that formed the Northern Alliance, especially the Shias. These opposing groups have fresh memories of the atrocities, torture, rape, beatings, dismemberments, mutilations, and so forth that the other side performed on their friends, wives and other family members, and they have no desire to be friends or to work together. They'd rather kill each other. In recent months, there's apparently been a new development. You still have the Pashtuns, who have been aligned with al-Qaeda, and other ethnic groups that loathe the Pashtuns are aligning with ISIS. This is the very early stages of a new civil war. Now go back and review what General Douglas Lute said in the quote above: That we sent 175,000 troops into Afghanistan without having "the foggiest notion" of what we were doing. It's this stuff about the Pashtuns and the civil war that the so-called Afghanistan experts don't have "the foggiest notion" about. And it's really not that complicated. You don't even have to know anything about generational theory to understand it. You understand it, don't you Dear Reader? That's because you're intelligent and well-informed. You can take satisfaction in the fact that you understand why there's been one failure after another in Afghanistan, but that the so-called experts in Washington are too stupid to understand. This is what Lute was talking about. So now we just have to sit back and watch these farcical peace talks take place in Doha between the US and the Taliban -- because the Taliban refuse to negotiate with the Afghan government!!!!! Hahahahahahahahaha. Sources:
Related Articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Afghanistan, Afghanistan Papers, Douglas Lute, Pashtuns, Taliban, Afghan civil war, Northern Alliance, Tajiks, Hazaras, Uzbeks, Iraq, Iran/Iraq war, Great Iraqi Revolution, Jordan, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaeda in Iraq, AQI, Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-16-2019 ** 16-Dec-2019 World View: Kismet FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> Quibble: If you believe in "Kismet/et al", then you're Totally disagree. Being religious has nothing to do with it. Here's an anecdote I heard a motivational speaker tell several decades ago: Quote: A man bought a plot of land that was really a mess. The point of this little anecdote is that it doesn't matter whether you're religious or not. You're still responsible for your own fate. You plant the seeds. If you plant weeds, you'll get weeds back. If you plant flowers, you'll get flowers. Plant a turnip, get a turnip, never any doubt. But if you go around screwing people, then one day someone will screw you back, and everyone else will be cheering him on. This is related to some things about Greek tragedy that I've written in the past. I've found that few non-Greeks really understand what tragedy is about. As a Greek I know that a sense of tragedy is in my bones. Tragedy as an art form was invented in ancient Greece, and three of four great tragic artists of all time were Aeschylus, Sophocles and Euripides of ancient Greece, with the fourth being Shakespeare. What tragedy does is to bring order out of seemingly random events. Many people misunderstand the deepest meanings of tragedy. If a child is killed in a random traffic accident, then it's a terrible event but it's not a tragedy in the classical sense, because of that randomness. The essence of classical tragedy is that the tragic event is not random. The tragic event is inevitable: it MUST occur, and the reason it must occur is because of the nature, the personality, the character of the protagonists. A true tragedy cannot be prevented, even by those who foresee it, because the forces bringing about the tragedy are too powerful for anyone to stop. Like the child killed in a random traffic accident, the protagonists of a true tragedy have a great future before them, and in the Greek view, perhaps even a heroic future. But the heroic future turns into disaster because the players in the true tragedy move step by step towards that disaster; and all of us on the outside can see it coming, because these particular players are uniquely capable of inflicting this disaster on one another. Today we're witnessing a tragedy in progress, where the protagonists are China, Japan and the US. We can see the play moving toward disaster, but we can't do anything to stop it (or delay it, or speed it up). It's a true tragedy that cannot be prevented, even though we can foresee it, because the forces bringing about the tragedy are too powerful for anyone to stop. The same is true of the individual and Kismet. A person creates his own fate, and the ending is inevitable. Whether you're religious or not is irrelevant. In the end, we all get what we deserve. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 12-16-2019 (12-15-2019, 06:23 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: Did the 1929 panic have to occur at all? I believe so. Did the 2006 Sure. The exact timing is random. That doesn't mean you can't do things that can speed it up or slow it down, like kidnap Israeli soldiers or sell off large blocks of stock. It's just that it's probabilistic, rather than deterministic, so you can't be sure that what you do will work; it probably won't, so it's hard to plan for. Quote:The invasion of Poland was not the start of WW II. At that time, WW Sure. That's why I said, "the Europe wide portion" of WWII. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - Warren Dew - 12-16-2019 (12-15-2019, 06:27 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: I'm not aware of any good that China has ever done for someone else I'm pretty sure Putin's Russia has not done anything to help other people beyond what China did to help North Korea in the Korean War. 17-Dec-19 World View -- India's Citizenship Bill riots evoke memories of the 1947 Par - John J. Xenakis - 12-16-2019 *** 17-Dec-19 World View -- India's Citizenship Bill riots evoke memories of the 1947 Partition War This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Riots spread across India along Hindu-Muslim fault line **** ![]() Students and police face off at Nadwa College in Lucknow (ANI) A proposed bill that appears to discriminate against Muslims has triggered demonstrations and riots in multiple cities across India, including college campuses in Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Lucknow, Chennai, Bangalore, Kolkata (Calcutta) and Mumbai (Bombay). The protests have been mostly peaceful, but there has been some violence, and there is viral video of people attacking peacefully protesting students and beating them. Six people have died in Delhi, about 200 were injured. The proposed Citizenship Amendment Bill (CAB) is complex. It allows refugees from three neighboring countries -- Bangladesh, Pakistan and Afghanistan -- to seek citizenship in India. But there's a requirement: The refugee seeking citizenship must not be Muslim. He or she may be Hindu, Christian, Jain, Parsi, Sikh or Buddhist, but not Muslim. The reason given for this restriction is that all three of these neighboring countries are "Muslim countries," with majority Muslim populations and Muslim governments. So the CAB is said to provide citizenship to harassed or persecuted religious minorities in the three Muslim countries. The explanation ignores the issue of the Sufis and Ahmadis in Pakistan, who are Muslim, but are still targeted and persecuted. According to prime minister Narendra Modi, Muslims from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan are not covered because they have no need of India's protection. He tweeted that the new law "does not affect any citizen of India of any religion." However, Modi is leader of the Hindu nationalist BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party), and activists are accusing Modi of discriminating against Muslims, and violating India's secular constitution. This is the second major Indian government decision this year that has triggered protests and complaints of discrimination against Muslims. In August, India revoked Article 370 of India's constitution. That article made Kashmir, which is a Muslim majority province, a semi-autonomous state of India, allowing some level of self-government. Revoking Article 370 means that Kashmir no longer has a special status, and is now just another state in India, under full control of Delhi. To prevent riots, Kashmir has been on virtual lockdown for several months, with strick curfews and with limited phone and internet service. These two changes have something in common, at least in the eyes of the demonstrators. Revoking Article 370 means that, for the first time, Hindus will be able to buy property in Kashmir, and Muslims in Kashmir fears that in time Hindus will be in the majority. In the case of the new citizenship bill, some protesters have expressed the fear that an influx of Hindus from neighboring countries will cause some border area, especially in Assam in the northeast, to become Hindu majority in time. Actually, residents of Assam are protesting the citizenship bill for entirely different reasons. Assam is populated by some 70 different ethnic groups, and they fear that any influx of refugees, whether Hindu or Muslim, will mean that they will lose their ethnic character. Indigenous people in Assam speak Assamese and Bengali, and both groups for years have competed over jobs and resources. **** **** India's Citizenship Bill riots evoke memories of the 1947 Partition War **** India's previous two generational crisis wars were India's 1857 Rebellion, which pitted Hindu nationalists against British colonists, and then the 1947 Partition War, one of the bloodiest wars of the 20th century, pitting Hindus against Muslims, following the partitioning of the Indian subcontinent into India and Pakistan. Today, the survivors of the 1947 Partition War have almost all died off, leaving behind younger generations with no fear of repeating past disasters. Generational Dynamics predicts that there will be a new civil war between Muslims and Indians, or an external war with Pakistan, or both. The number and belligerence of riots and demonstrations in India have been growing and spreading across the country for several weeks. It remains to be seen whether these demonstrations will fizzle out, or whether they will continue to grow into a much large anti-government rebellion. Sources:
Related Articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, India, Citizenship Amendment Bill, CAB, Delhi, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal, Lucknow, Chennai, Bangalore, Kolkata, Calcutta, Mumbai, Bombay, Hindu, Christian, Jain, Parsi, Sikh, Buddhist, Muslim, Bangladesh, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Ahmadis, Sufis, Bharatiya Janata Party, BJP, Kashmir, Article 370, Partition War 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 RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-17-2019 ** 17-Dec-2019 World View: Trend Events vs Chaotic Events (12-16-2019, 09:59 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Sure. The exact timing is random. That doesn't mean you can't do FishbellykanakaDude Wrote:> A "war" is indeed a chaotic "event", in that "event" here means: You're both right that I haven't been rigorous in using the Chaos Theory terminology. In fact, I've tried several times in the past to give a rigorous definition of the relationship between Generational Dynamics and Chaos Theory, and although I have an intuitive understanding of the relationship, I've failed to explain it rigorously. So here's where I'll try again. For years, I've been using the phrase "chaotic event," and it's worked very well for me, even if it's not an official term of Chaos Theory. When I use the term, it means something that Generational Dynamics can't predict. When something can be predicted, it's called a "trend event," meaning that it must happen at some time. ("If something (some trend) can't go on forever, then it won't.") So we have trend events and chaotic events. To put it another way, in the last 15 years I've made thousands of Generational Dynamics predictions about hundreds of countries and regions throughout history. Those predictions have all come true or are trending true. None has been wrong. That's because I've avoided predicting things that can't be predicted, and that's what Chaos Theory tells me. There are some things that Chaos Theory tells me cannot be predicted by Generational Dynamics, and those are "chaotic events" or "chaotic timings." So how does Chaos Theory "tell me" that some major event cannot be predicted? The answer is to do an informal mental test of whether a "small event" or a "random event" can affect whether or not the event will occur. For example, I always describe election results as chaotic, and can't be predicted. There are a couple of informal mental tests that prove this. For example, a butterfly could flap its wings in China and cause a rainstorm in North America that affects election turnout, and therefore the outcome. Another example is that some girl could come forward at the last minute and make some sexual accusation of one of the candidates, and that could affect the election outcome. In fact, any random last-minute scandal of any kind could affect the election results. Another common mental test is whether the event is controlled by one person or a small group of people. The Israeli-Hezbollah war could be an example of this. The war was triggered by actions of a small group of people - the abduction, the decision to declare war. It's really a remarkable example. On July 11, 2006, there was no thought of war. On July 13, 2006, they were at war. So what happened on July 12, 2006? Could the same thing have happened a few days earlier? That's far from certain. Maybe on July 12 some Israeli politician was sick at home, and if he'd been in his office, then he would have stopped the war, so there wouldn't have been a war on some other day. On the other hand, we can safely predict that there will be a new Mideast war between Jews and Arabs, although we can't predict the exact time or the exact scenario. This prediction is driven powerful generational forces, and can't be derailed by a person being sick at home or a change in the weather. However, then there's a related concept called "the trigger." A new Mideast war may be 100% certain, and when it occurs we may be able to identify a trigger, and the trigger may be a random event that itself cannot be predicted. So the war is a trend event, but the trigger would be a chaotic event. The 1929 panic was a trend event -- it had to happen. But there's never been an identifiable trigger, so the panic itself is a chaotic event. Or perhaps I would say that the timing of the event is chaotic. In fact, a "panic" is, almost by definition, a chaotic event. One more thing: I disagree that a war can be predictably sped up or slowed down if the war is triggered by a panic. In fact, if you take some action with the intention of slowing down the rush to war, then it may backfire by causing a panic to occur earlier than otherwise. Of course, politicians and historians later may say that such an action slowed down the war, but that's only because the events already happened. If it had gone the other way, the historians may say, "That action was supposed to delay the war, but actually it sped it up because the action made the opponent panic." So I guess the above still isn't very rigorous. It's more a "stream of consciousness" kind of description. However, I want to emphasize again that my intuitive understanding of a "chaotic event" and "trend event" has served me very well for 15 years, even if I can't explain it rigorously. RE: Generational Dynamics World View - John J. Xenakis - 12-17-2019 ** 17-Dec-2019 World View: BBC interview with Taiwan's Foreign Minister In the last few hours, the BBC interviewed Joseph Wu, Taiwan's Foreign Minister. Wu said that the "one country, two systems" concept would never be acceptable to Taiwan because it's been a failure in Hong Kong. He said that the CCP is trapped by what's happening in Hong Kong.
When asked about the CCP's stated plans to invade Taiwan and annex it, Wu said that they're trying to maintain the status quo, and keep the peace. In response to a question related to America's "desertion" of the Kurds in Syria, Wu said that Taiwan still considers America to be a reliable ally. Wu said that Taiwan needs more help from the United States: "What we are asking for actually, is quite simple. It's for the United States to provide defense articles for Taiwan, so that Taiwan is able to defend itself, and also to engage with Taiwan in military training or military co-operation so that Taiwan is much better equipped." RE: Generational Dynamics World View - pbrower2a - 12-18-2019 I'd like to see the Republic of China vanish... from the world's pariah list. It doesn't have a WMD program, and it isn't committing genocide. It has a functioning democracy; Freedom House rates it 1.0, which is far better than the 6.5 for China and Russia , let alone the 7.0 of North Korea, Syria, and Turkmenistan. (The USA has slipped from 1.0 to 1.5... thank you, President Trump!) If there is to be any unification of China, then let the norms of the Republic (not the People's Republic) be the model. Dictatorships foster stupidity - bad economic policies and contempt for the people. I can't understand what trouble the Falun Gang is. 19-Dec-19 World View -- Escalated bombing by Syria, Russia in Idlib sends tens of tho - John J. Xenakis - 12-18-2019 *** 19-Dec-19 World View -- Escalated bombing by Syria, Russia in Idlib sends tens of thousands to Turkey border This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com
**** **** Escalated bombing by Syria, Russia in Idlib sends tens of thousands to Turkey border **** ![]() Map of Syria showing areas of control by Syria, Turkey and Kurds (New Humanitarian) The United Nations is condemning the escalated bombing by Syrian and Russian warplanes of civilian targets in Syria's northwest province, Idlib. The bombing has substantially intensified since the beginning of November. Bashar al-Assad's warplanes are specially targeting hospitals, schools, residential neighborhoods and marketplaces in order to kill as many women and children as possible, whom he considers to be cockroaches to be exterminated. Al-Assad is using barrel bombs, which are large barrels filled with explosives, metal, and sometimes chlorine gas, ammonia and phosphorous. According to Turkey's media, about 110,000 civilians have been forced to leave their homes, as 12,000 of them are headed for Turkey's border, presumably with the intention of crossing. The numbers are staggering. A million Syrian refugees have come to Europe, mostly by crossing through Turkey. Turkey itself hosts 3.7 million Syrians who fled al-Assad's violence in the past. Idlib is home to 2.4 million residents, but they've been augmented by 1.1 million additional Syrians who arrived in Idlib to escape al-Assad's violence in earlier target sites like Aleppo, Ghouta and Daraa. Of the 3.5 million civilians in Idlib, it's estimated that about 70,000 of them are members of al-Qaeda linked al-Qaeda-linked Jabhat al-Nusra (al-Nusra Front) later renamed Jabhat Fateh al-Sham or JFS, and then renamed again to Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS). For two years, al-Assad has repeatedly said that he considers all 3.5 million residents of Idlib to be terrorists, and that he plans to take control of Idlib, presumably exterminating many or all of those 3.5 million "terrorists." This would create a huge humanitarian crisis, with hundreds of thousands more refugees pouring across the border into Turkey. Many of them would then go on to attempt to cross into Europe. With the sharp escalation in bombing of Idlib by Syrian and Russian warplanes since the beginning of November, it appears that a full scale assault is likely to begin soon. **** **** The complex ménage à trois relationship - Syria, Russia, Turkey - under stress **** Syria's Idlib province has been out of the news for several months now, since the world has been focused on the REALLY important stuff like Brexit and impeachment. But Syria's president Bashar al-Assad and his Russian puppetmaster Vladimir Putin have been using the time and their respective warplanes for increasing attacks on civilians in Idlib province, including missile attacks on markets, hospitals and schools. A full-scale attack on Idlib has been expected for a couple of years, but apparently al-Assad has been held back by Russia as part of the complex ménage à trois relationship connecting Syria, Russia and Turkey. Since the Syrian civil war began in 2011, the objective of Shia/Alawite Bashar al-Assad is the genocide and ethnic cleansing of all his Sunni Arab political enemies. His father Hafez al-Assad, fought an extremely vicious and bloody ethnic civil war with that ethnic group in the 1980s, and now al-Assad wants to finish the job with his own "final solution." (See "1-Dec-18 World View -- Evidence grows of Assad's 'final solution', extermination of Arab Sunnis in Syria" ) So al-Assad's objective in Idlib is to do the same kinds of things that he's previously done in in other regions like Aleppo, Ghouta and Daraa, where he used barrel bombs on hospitals, schools, marketplaces and residential neighborhoods, along with chlorine gas and Sarin gas, in order to clean out and exterminate the three million Sunni Arabs in Idlib, whom he considers worse than cockroaches. Russia's objective is to keep control of its two military bases in Syria -- the Tartus naval base and Hmeimim airbase. Russia lost all its Mediterranean military bases in the 1990s when the Soviet Union collapsed, and now Russia desperately want to keep these two in Syria. Russia's president Vladimir Putin obtained control of these two military bases in 2015 in return for saving al-Assad from defeat in 2015, when his army was close to collapse. Russia also wants to remain friendly with Turkey, because Putin wants to pull Turkey away from Europe and Nato. So Putin has held al-Assad back from an all-out attack on Idlib, because that would send millions of refugees across the border into Turkey. Turkey's objective is to prevent a humanitarian disaster in Idlib that would send those millions of refugees across the border. Turkey is already hosting 3.6 million refugees that fled al-Assad's previous violence in other regions. Furthermore, in eastern Syria, Turkey is well on its way to setting up a buffer zone in northern Syria along the border with Turkey. Turkey would like to expel all Kurds from that buffer zone, and replace them with some two million Syrian refugees that Turkey is currently hosting. **** **** Assad threatens Turkey **** So now, getting back to al-Assad, he has frequently stated the intention of exterminating what he views are three million cockroaches in Idlib province, and doesn't care about any humanitarian disaster. In August, al-Assad visited the Syrian army troops in Idlib, and accused Turkey's president Recep Tayyip Erdogan of being a thief, backed by his American master, who steals wheat, petroleum, factories and land from Syria. He again made clear his intention of winning "the Battle of Idlib": <QUOTE>"What Syria has gone through during these nine years can be likened to the chapters of a play prepared and directed and executed by one side, but in each chapter it would have a different main character or actor, and the main actor of the current stage is Erdogan, who was the most successful in being a pawn in the hands of his American master and in being a thief who steals wheat, petroleum, and factories, and now he is trying to steal land. ... The Idlib front is very important, particularly since it was an advanced outpost for them, while the battle was in the east, which aimed at scattering the army, which is why we have always said that the conclusion of the battle in Idlib is the basis for ending chaos and terrorism across Syria."<END QUOTE> This suggests that al-Assad's planned assault on Idlib could end up being a conflict between Syria and Turkey. Vladimir Putin, the third member of the ménage à trois, will have to figure out how to prevent a war from breaking out if Russia is to maintain its influence with both. Sources:
Related Articles:
KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Syria, Kurds, Bashar al-Assad, Alawites, Russia, Vladimir Putin, Tartus naval base, Hmeimim airbase, Aleppo, Ghouta, Daraa, Idlib, Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, HTS, Liberation of the Levant Organization, Jabhat Fateh al-Sham, JFS, Front for the Conquest of Syria, Jabhat al-Nusra, al-Nusra Front 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 |