(08-24-2017, 09:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 09:20 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: The events of WW1 and WW2 made america into the premier great power in the world. However the political system and constitutional framework of our country dates from the 18th Century when we were a small frontier nation that did everything possible to keep imperial great powers away. The world wars however made america into an imperial power, in direct contradiction to the assumptions of constitutional framework. The WW2 generations tackled this and kicked this can down the road by having the defense commitments of an imperial great power but keeping the benign policies of a constitutional republic. The Selfishness of the boomer is due to their extreme desire to base america and the "american spirit" on the now outdated constitutional framework and the boomer assumption that imperial america is the outlier. Xers and Millies however want to continue the evolution of America into a real imperial power and into a real empire, which IS the logical conclusion of the world wars and the cold war and their effects on the evolution of our country. The extreme selfishness of the boomer is traced directly to the boomers desire to reestablish the old republican framework that existed before 1900. The boomer refuse to allow anyone younger than them to be at the helm because they know the younger generations support completing the conversion of America into an empire. This is in direct contradiction of the boomers love-affair with republics and their ideals of having a world without imperial nations.

There's nothing contradictory between our Constitutional framework and an American empire.  The Constitution only protects American citizens and, to a lesser extent, residents; that's in no way inconsistent with a maritime or overseas empire.  Britain had a constitutional government at home while ruling colonies overseas; why would an American empire need to do anything different?

I would agree that Presidents Clinton and, especially, Obama, and even Bush to some extent, seemed to want to extend privileges similar to those guaranteed in the constitution to the whole world.  Nothing in the Constitution requires that, though, and I think Trump, also a Boomer, recognizes that.  What more do you want?

(08-24-2017, 08:49 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 08:03 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 07:54 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   First of all what does Hillary Clinton, the personification of the
>   boomer establishment have to do with Xers and Millies opposition
>   to the boomer establishment.  

Because the Xers and Millies favored her over Trump.

One Boomer in a million may shout a bit.
Now and then, there's one with slight defects.
One perhaps whose truthfulness you doubt a bit,
But by and large we are a marvelous generation!

The Boomers imposed tyranny upon Xers and Millies and tyranny onto america in general. Look at the efficiency of Countries like China, and Russia, as well as other countries such as Vietnam, Iran, Turkey, even North Korea. These as well as historical examples such as the USSR, Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Maoist China, Imperial Germany, Napoleonic France as well as earlier examples such as the mongol empire, the Roman empire, The holy Roman empire, the original Caliphate, England From William The Conqueror to the glorious revolution I. Examples such as these are studied often by xers and Millies in their spare time. The boomer on the other hand subjected the young to tyranny by stunting their political development by forcing globalistic ideology derived from Pitt and Churchill and formulated by the likes of Christopher Hitchens and then the boomer rammed this decadence down the young's throats. That is why the young refers to the boomer as selfish, the boomer is such by suppressing the younger generations particular generational character. The Boomer then attempts to influence politics in such a way that when the next major international breakdown occurs which constitutes the crisis era and crisis war occurs; that it would be based around defending the boomers Churchillian doctrines. The Xer and Millie has no interest in Burke/Churchill values and admire that polities that I've outlined earlier in this paragraph.

The American system through the 1980s was much more efficient than the examples you mention; that is, after all, why we won the Cold War and Russia's Soviet empire did not.  A socialist economic system likewise relegated China to being an also ran.

I'll grant that was largely due to a Civic President - Reagan - and not to a Boomer.  But I'll also point out that was after a series of Civic Presidents, from Kennedy through Carter, had frittered away most of the advantages we had coming out of WWII.  Boomers have not done worse than that.

(08-26-2017, 02:41 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 09:57 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 09:20 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: The events of WW1 and WW2 made america into the premier great power in the world. However the political system and constitutional framework of our country dates from the 18th Century when we were a small frontier nation that did everything possible to keep imperial great powers away. The world wars however made america into an imperial power, in direct contradiction to the assumptions of constitutional framework. The WW2 generations tackled this and kicked this can down the road by having the defense commitments of an imperial great power but keeping the benign policies of a constitutional republic. The Selfishness of the boomer is due to their extreme desire to base america and the "american spirit" on the now outdated constitutional framework and the boomer assumption that imperial america is the outlier. Xers and Millies however want to continue the evolution of America into a real imperial power and into a real empire, which IS the logical conclusion of the world wars and the cold war and their effects on the evolution of our country. The extreme selfishness of the boomer is traced directly to the boomers desire to reestablish the old republican framework that existed before 1900. The boomer refuse to allow anyone younger than them to be at the helm because they know the younger generations support completing the conversion of America into an empire. This is in direct contradiction of the boomers love-affair with republics and their ideals of having a world without imperial nations.

There's nothing contradictory between our Constitutional framework and an American empire.  The Constitution only protects American citizens and, to a lesser extent, residents; that's in no way inconsistent with a maritime or overseas empire.  Britain had a constitutional government at home while ruling colonies overseas; why would an American empire need to do anything different?

I would agree that Presidents Clinton and, especially, Obama, and even Bush to some extent, seemed to want to extend privileges similar to those guaranteed in the constitution to the whole world.  Nothing in the Constitution requires that, though, and I think Trump, also a Boomer, recognizes that.  What more do you want?

(08-24-2017, 08:49 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 08:03 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-24-2017, 07:54 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   First of all what does Hillary Clinton, the personification of the
>   boomer establishment have to do with Xers and Millies opposition
>   to the boomer establishment.  

Because the Xers and Millies favored her over Trump.

One Boomer in a million may shout a bit.
Now and then, there's one with slight defects.
One perhaps whose truthfulness you doubt a bit,
But by and large we are a marvelous generation!

The Boomers imposed tyranny upon Xers and Millies and tyranny onto america in general. Look at the efficiency of Countries like China, and Russia, as well as other countries such as Vietnam, Iran, Turkey, even North Korea. These as well as historical examples such as the USSR, Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan, Maoist China, Imperial Germany, Napoleonic France as well as earlier examples such as the mongol empire, the Roman empire, The holy Roman empire, the original Caliphate, England From William The Conqueror to the glorious revolution I. Examples such as these are studied often by xers and Millies in their spare time. The boomer on the other hand subjected the young to tyranny by stunting their political development by forcing globalistic ideology derived from Pitt and Churchill and formulated by the likes of Christopher Hitchens and then the boomer rammed this decadence down the young's throats. That is why the young refers to the boomer as selfish, the boomer is such by suppressing the younger generations particular generational character. The Boomer then attempts to influence politics in such a way that when the next major international breakdown occurs which constitutes the crisis era and crisis war occurs; that it would be based around defending the boomers Churchillian doctrines. The Xer and Millie has no interest in Burke/Churchill values and admire that polities that I've outlined earlier in this paragraph.

The American system through the 1980s was much more efficient than the examples you mention; that is, after all, why we won the Cold War and Russia's Soviet empire did not.  A socialist economic system likewise relegated China to being an also ran.

I'll grant that was largely due to a Civic President - Reagan - and not to a Boomer.  But I'll also point out that was after a series of Civic Presidents, from Kennedy through Carter, had frittered away most of the advantages we had coming out of WWII.  Boomers have not done worse than that.

But reagan-bush left America in an extremely strong position by 1992, even stronger than in the 1950s in some ways. That strong position was thrown away systematically by the boomers until now in 2017 we're in a weak position only comparable in this saeculum to the mid-to-late 1970's (which was when the boomers demanded and got control of the political and cultural lexicon; reagan was the GI''s taking it back after the blunders of ford and Carter (who were both essentially puppets of the boomers)).

• UAE reacts furiously to Qatar's restoring diplomatic relations with Iran
  
• As Hajj approaches, Iran and Qatar remain in dispute with Saudi Arabia
  

• Kuwait expels Iran's diplomats as Saudi Arabia softens Qatar demands (23-Jul-2017)
  
  
• Egypt calls Qatar an 'enemy state' (30-Jun-2016)
  
  
• Gulf Arab states have major split over Egypt and Iran (06-Mar-2014)
  
  
• Arab League holds annual meeting among bitter splits (26-Mar-2014)
  

• Saudi Arabia's Grand Mosque, site of huge construction accident, has links to 9/11 (12-Sep-2015)
  
  
• After Hajj stampede disaster, Muslims debate the 'Will of Allah' (27-Sep-2015)
  
  
• Mideast trends: Sunni-Shia countries align along predicted lines (16-Jan-2016)
  
  
• Increasingly hostile Iran-Saudi relations affect this year's Hajj (27-May-2016)
  

(08-26-2017, 10:11 AM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > Xenakis, Any External Crisis war (at least under boomer
> leadership) would not be a uniting crisis like WW2 was for the
> US. Instead an large-scale war under boomer leadership would be
> similar to how WW1 was handled by Russia. The Only exception is if
> the war unexpectedly turns out to be a relative walkover for the
> US where we win almost every battle. In all other scenarios the
> boomer leaders would eventually be hunted down and killed and
> replaced be Xers and Millies by force. Xers and Millies hated
> serving under inept boomer leadership during afghanistan and
> Iraq. They are NOT going to give boomers another chance after the
> boomers display of gross incompetence in Iraq. Trump may be an
> exception as commander in chief because Trump is well known to
> have opposed the handling of the Iraq war.

> Also the boomer mainstreams delusional lies that a north Korean
> nuclear arsenal was inevitable and that "strategic Patience" was
> the best option available can be laid bare simply by watching
> clips of political/strategic analysis by pundits as far back as
> the 1990s. Here is Trump talking about what should be done about
> North Korea all the way in 1998 or 1999. The Boomer establishment
> chose to sit on their ass because they characteristically want
> someone else to do it.

> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-1WE-ivtO4

> Please reply to both paragraphs.

(08-27-2017, 05:45 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-26-2017, 10:11 AM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   Xenakis, Any External Crisis war (at least under boomer
>   leadership) would not be a uniting crisis like WW2 was for the
>   US. Instead an large-scale war under boomer leadership would be
>   similar to how WW1 was handled by Russia. The Only exception is if
>   the war unexpectedly turns out to be a relative walkover for the
>   US where we win almost every battle. In all other scenarios the
>   boomer leaders would eventually be hunted down and killed and
>   replaced be Xers and Millies by force. Xers and Millies hated
>   serving under inept boomer leadership during afghanistan and
>   Iraq. They are NOT going to give boomers another chance after the
>   boomers display of gross incompetence in Iraq. Trump may be an
>   exception as commander in chief because Trump is well known to
>   have opposed the handling of the Iraq war.

>   Also the boomer mainstreams delusional lies that a north Korean
>   nuclear arsenal was inevitable and that "strategic Patience" was
>   the best option available can be laid bare simply by watching
>   clips of political/strategic analysis by pundits as far back as
>   the 1990s. Here is Trump talking about what should be done about
>   North Korea all the way in 1998 or 1999. The Boomer establishment
>   chose to sit on their ass because they characteristically want
>   someone else to do it.

>   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1-1WE-ivtO4

>   Please reply to both paragraphs.

It continues to astonish me that after 10+ years in this forum, you
still have no idea of the difference between Unraveling and Crisis
eras.  Have you even read The Fourth Turning?  Either way, you should
read and reread it about 5-10 times, until you understand what the
different eras mean, and what the Regeneracy is.

As for your claim that if, say, a nuclear missile from China or North
Korea landed on Los Angeles that Xers and Millies would be shooting at
Boomer leaders, that's a completely moronic conclusion.

In the 1990s, we only went to war in Iraq because Saddam had already
invaded Kuwait, and we only got into the Bosnian war because of the
Srebrenica genocide.

There's no way, in a generational Unraveling era in the 1990s, that
we're going to invade a foreign country because they MIGHT have
nuclear weapons in 20 years.  Wishing for it is like wishing that
2+2=3, which is what all your claims are equivalent to.

Let me make this clear: An invasion of North Korea in the 1990s was
mathematically impossible, as proven by generational theory, as
impossible as 2+2 equaling 3.  The fact is that 2+2=4, then and now.

The other thing is that you constantly claim to speak for all Millies
and Xers.  Does this board have a poll capability?  If it does, why
don't you launch a poll and see how many of the Millies and Xers on
this board believe your nonsense.

The Unraveling Era ended, and the Crisis Era began, in 2003, but we're
still in what Matt Ignal dubbed the "post-unraveling" era, which is
the time in the Crisis era before the Regeneracy occurs.  During that
period, there's still a major reluctance on the part of the public --
all generations -- to initiate a war, although it has happened in
Iraq, Afghanistan and Syria.

If you take your poll, find out how many people on this board think
we're going to have a war with China.  Almost everyone in all
generations is in denial about this, and I doubt that the people on
this board are any different, even though it's clearly a typical
outcome predicted by the Fourth Turning, so the people on this
board should theoretically be different, though they aren't.

As you know, I've been through this before.  Since 2003, I was talking
about a real estate bubble and approaching financial crisis.  I was
mocked and ridiculed in this forum by the likes of Sean Love and Mike
Alexander, but as with everything else, Generational Dynamics has
turned out to be completely right.  It wasn't until 2009 that the
idiotic mainstream economists even admitted that there had been a real
estate bubble.  "Oh yeah, of course there was a real estate bubble.
Everyone knew that.  But that was years ago, and of course nothing
like that will ever be allowed to happen again!"

In fact, you don't need generational theory any more to see that a
major financial crisis and world war are coming.  It's as plain as the
nose on your face for anyone who reads the world news, as I do,
instead of spending all waking hours thinking about impeaching Trump.
In my opinion, all the nonsense about Russian meddling or racism
charges are by people who are in total denial about what's coming, and
are looking for anything, anything, anything, so that they don't have
to think about what's really going on in the world.

You're in complete denial as well, because you think by taking
military action now, a full-scale war could be avoided.  That's
complete denial and wishful thinking.  In a generational Crisis era,
that kind of military action that you propose would actually trigger
the world war, not prevent it.

So I hope this answers your questions until you post the next bizarre
rant.

• Violence between Buddhists and Muslims in Myanmar/Burma escalates dramatically
  
• Rise of the Arakan Rohingya Salvation Army (ARSA) militant insurgency
  

• Devastating UN report on Burma shows scale of ghastly atrocities by Buddhists targeting Muslim Rohingyas (04-Feb-2017)
  
  
• UN: Burma (Myanmar) committing 'ethnic cleansing' of Rohingyas (29-Nov-2016)
  
  
• Meiktila, Burma, violence has echoes of Kristallnacht (05-Apr-2013)
  
  
• Generational history of Burma (Myanmar) (26-Sep-2007)
  

• China and India announce pullback agreement on Doklam Plateau
  
• Many unanswered questions about the China-India Doklam agreement
  
• North Korea launches ballistic missile into Japan's airspace
  

• What did China concede? India's statement was about
  "disengagement," and India has pulled back its troops, but China
  apparently has not. In fact, China continues to claim that the region
  that it's illegally trying to annex is its "sovereign territory."
  
  
• Is China ending its road-building work? Is its earth-moving
  equipment being withdrawn? Unnamed Indian officials have reportedly
  said they have, but all that China's spokesman said was "In light of
  the changes on the ground, China will accordingly make necessary
  adjustments and deployment."
  
  
• Even if China has ended its road-building work, will they simply
  start again next week or next month?

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that
they had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on
Bhutan's Doklam Plateau. 

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: > China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
> had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
> Doklam Plateau.

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
> paranoia about China.

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: >   China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
>   had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
>   Doklam Plateau.  

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
>   paranoia about China.  

Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

(08-29-2017, 12:45 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: > Actually paranoia about China probably is irrational. As long as
> they can sell cheap plastic shit to the US and then use those
> dollars to buy oil they need us more than we them. The DPRK and Al
> Qaeda are different animals entirely.

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: >   China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
>   had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
>   Doklam Plateau.  

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
>   paranoia about China.  

Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

(08-29-2017, 01:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: >   China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
>   had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
>   Doklam Plateau.  

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
>   paranoia about China.  

Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

If you think North Korea doesn't have nuclear missiles yet, your irrationality there is in your complacency, not paranoia.  Even the perpetually behind the curve US intelligence services have finally admitted that the tests from a year ago were of missile mountable warheads.

(08-29-2017, 01:16 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:45 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: >   Actually paranoia about China probably is irrational.  As long as
>   they can sell cheap plastic shit to the US and then use those
>   dollars to buy oil they need us more than we them. The DPRK and Al
>   Qaeda are different animals entirely.  

Hmmmm.  Let me see.  China is an international criminal, annexing
regions in the South China Sea in proven violation of international
law, threatening the US for simple freedom of navigation trips,
claiming that the artificial islands are for tourists, and then
loading them up with missiles, warplanes, radars, and so forth,
threatening the Philippines and Vietnam for fishing in their own
historical fishing waters, threatening Japan in the East China Sea,
threatening Bhutan on Doklam Plateau, threatening India in Kashmir,
and building dozens or hundreds of nuclear ballistic missiles whose
only purpose is to target American cities, bases and aircraft carriers
-- and paranoia about China is irrational, according to you.

But al-Qaeda and North Korea have no nuclear missiles at present, and
paranoia about them is NOT irrational, according to you.

Yeah, that makes sense.  Peace in our time.  It really is all
mathematics, you know.

(08-29-2017, 01:38 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:16 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:45 PM)Kinser79 Wrote: >   Actually paranoia about China probably is irrational.  As long as
>   they can sell cheap plastic shit to the US and then use those
>   dollars to buy oil they need us more than we them. The DPRK and Al
>   Qaeda are different animals entirely.  

Hmmmm.  Let me see.  China is an international criminal, annexing
regions in the South China Sea in proven violation of international
law, threatening the US for simple freedom of navigation trips,
claiming that the artificial islands are for tourists, and then
loading them up with missiles, warplanes, radars, and so forth,
threatening the Philippines and Vietnam for fishing in their own
historical fishing waters, threatening Japan in the East China Sea,
threatening Bhutan on Doklam Plateau, threatening India in Kashmir,
and building dozens or hundreds of nuclear ballistic missiles whose
only purpose is to target American cities, bases and aircraft carriers
-- and paranoia about China is irrational, according to you.

But al-Qaeda and North Korea have no nuclear missiles at present, and
paranoia about them is NOT irrational, according to you.

Yeah, that makes sense.  Peace in our time.  It really is all
mathematics, you know.

And those missiles have been there since the early 1980s. North Korea however is developing nuclear capability exponentially, and note unlike with China and Russia, the US is technically still at war with North Korea and the North Korean leadership is far more irrational. For these reasons the North Korean arsenal or the scenario of Al-Qaeda getting nukes is regarded by the US government with More concern than with the Status of The Russian or Chinese Nuclear arsenals.

(08-29-2017, 01:35 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: >   China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
>   had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
>   Doklam Plateau.  

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
>   paranoia about China.  

Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

If you think North Korea doesn't have nuclear missiles yet, your irrationality there is in your complacency, not paranoia.  Even the perpetually behind the curve US intelligence services have finally admitted that the tests from a year ago were of missile mountable warheads.

Fine.  North Korea has ten nuclear missiles, while China has hundreds.
And yet, you live in a bubble where your state of denial is so great,
that NK's ten missiles bother you and Kinser, but China's hundreds of
missiles don't.  I guess you think that China has only nice missiles,
while NK has nasty missiles.  Peace in our time.

It's really amazing.  People my age have wondered our whole lives how
Hitler could have so thoroughtly fooled everyone in Britain except
Churchill, and now we know why.  That mystery has finally been solved
for me, as I see it unfold again.  It's truly astonishing.

(08-29-2017, 01:57 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:35 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-28-2017, 10:02 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: >   China and India made surprising announcements on Monday that they
>   had agreed to pull back troops to reduce tension on Bhutan's
>   Doklam Plateau.  

(08-29-2017, 08:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   Surprising to you, maybe, but only because of your irrational
>   paranoia about China.  

Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

If you think North Korea doesn't have nuclear missiles yet, your irrationality there is in your complacency, not paranoia.  Even the perpetually behind the curve US intelligence services have finally admitted that the tests from a year ago were of missile mountable warheads.

Fine.  North Korea has ten nuclear missiles, while China has hundreds.
And yet, you live in a bubble where your state of denial is so great,
that NK's ten missiles bother you and Kinser, but China's hundreds of
missiles don't.  I guess you think that China has only nice missiles,
while NK has nasty missiles.  Peace in our time.

It's really amazing.  People my age have wondered our whole lives how
Hitler could have so thoroughtly fooled everyone in Britain except
Churchill, and now we know why.  That mystery has finally been solved
for me, as I see it unfold again.  It's truly astonishing.

China has Hundreds of Missiles, But the US has thousands. Regarding North Korea, new assessments have indicated that they may have 60 or More Warheads now. The leadership factor is also important: North Korea's leadership is Much more irrational, especially since Kim-Jong-Un took power earlier this decade; while Both Xi jinping and Putin are much more Rational and strategically adept as leaders as well as the rest of China and Russia leaderships. Thus any increased aggression from China or Russia can be taken as a sign of whether US government is handling its security interests properly or Not. As long the Boomers refuse to permit the expansion of The military-industrial Complex back to the levels intended by the GIs who built this system, until then the Problem would not improve from that direction.

(08-29-2017, 02:06 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:57 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:35 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 01:23 PM)Warren Dew Wrote:

(08-29-2017, 12:09 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: Lol!  Yeah, like my "irrational paranoia" about North Korea and
al-Qaeda.  Go figure.

If you think North Korea doesn't have nuclear missiles yet, your irrationality there is in your complacency, not paranoia.  Even the perpetually behind the curve US intelligence services have finally admitted that the tests from a year ago were of missile mountable warheads.

Fine.  North Korea has ten nuclear missiles, while China has hundreds.
And yet, you live in a bubble where your state of denial is so great,
that NK's ten missiles bother you and Kinser, but China's hundreds of
missiles don't.  I guess you think that China has only nice missiles,
while NK has nasty missiles.  Peace in our time.

It's really amazing.  People my age have wondered our whole lives how
Hitler could have so thoroughtly fooled everyone in Britain except
Churchill, and now we know why.  That mystery has finally been solved
for me, as I see it unfold again.  It's truly astonishing.

China has Hundreds of Missiles, But the US has thousands. Regarding North Korea, new assessments have indicated that they may have 60 or More Warheads now. The leadership factor is also important: North Korea's leadership is Much more irrational, especially since Kim-Jong-Un took power earlier this decade; while Both Xi jinping and Putin are much more Rational and strategically adept as leaders as well as the rest of China and Russia leaderships. Thus any increased aggression from China or Russia can be taken as a sign of whether US government is handling its security interests properly or Not. As long the Boomers refuse to permit the expansion of The military-industrial Complex back to the levels intended by the GIs who built this system, until then the Problem would not improve from that direction.

Right.  Russia and China have been acting soooooooooooo rationally.
Doing what Hitler did and illegally invading and annexing other
people's regions.

(08-28-2017, 11:12 AM)X_4AD_84 Wrote: Why Russia now hates the Democrats, the Clintons and Obamas, is not merely because that faction represent "Western Decadence" contra Duginism. Another reason Russia hates them is because they have finally awakened to the Single Clenched Fist and looming resurgence of the East Bloc. We can see this in the vast changes in nuclear and military posture which occurred mid this decade. Now these changes may been too little too late but nonetheless we had seemingly once and for all abandoned, rightfully, the sad and naive notions of "The Peace Dividend" and "The West / US Won the Cold War." No, we were merely deceived by The Shape Shifting Beast. We did not win the Cold War. In any case, The Beast started to get up and dance at the start of this decade. Obama reacted appropriately, and we were situated to continue. NATO would have been bolstered and we would have readopted the Contra Iron Curtain strategy of the Cold War. The SCO would have none of this. They knew our own Western factions aligned with Duginism were the answer. We (the collective "we") blundered into electing them. And now here we are. Blundering our way into being defeated and possibly conquered by East Bloc 2.0.