Generational Dynamics World View

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-07-2017, 02:56 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: > You're extrapolating from month to month variations in rhetoric.
> As you yourself point out, that's not a valid approach.

Just to be clear, I've been saying the same thing for well over ten
years -- that Russia will be an ally and China will be an enemy of
both the US and Russia. If I reference current events, it's only to
show that current events are staying roughly on the predicted trend
line.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-07-2017, 04:58 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 02:56 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   You're extrapolating from month to month variations in rhetoric.
>   As you yourself point out, that's not a valid approach.

Just to be clear, I've been saying the same thing for well over ten
years -- that Russia will be an ally and China will be an enemy of
both the US and Russia.  If I reference current events, it's only to
show that current events are staying roughly on the predicted trend
line.

But the Sino-Russian Pact has been in place since 2001 with large-scale joint exercises between the Russian and Chinese militaries have been held routinely since 2005. This was the case ten years ago and is still the case today in 2017.

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-07-2017, 05:24 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 04:58 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 02:56 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   You're extrapolating from month to month variations in rhetoric.
>   As you yourself point out, that's not a valid approach.

Just to be clear, I've been saying the same thing for well over ten
years -- that Russia will be an ally and China will be an enemy of
both the US and Russia.  If I reference current events, it's only to
show that current events are staying roughly on the predicted trend
line.

But the Sino-Russian Pact has been in place since 2001 with large-scale joint exercises between the Russian and Chinese militaries have been held routinely since 2005. This was the case ten years ago and is still the case today in 2017.

So what?

How the Soviet Union and China Almost Started World War III


http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-...-iii-15152

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-07-2017, 05:35 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: So what?

How the Soviet Union and China Almost Started World War III


http://nationalinterest.org/feature/how-...-iii-15152

Note However that the world Geopolitical situation was very different in 1969 than it is today. Russia was MUCH stronger and more threatening to the outside world back then. Note that the 1969 crisis was the beginning of a Sino-US alliance that lasted until the fall of the USSR in 1991. Nations ally or fight against one another over resources and/or to secure geopolitical objectives.

On an entirely different note neither you or warren have replied to my post regarding the origins of western culture.

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-07-2017, 05:43 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > Note However that the world Geopolitical situation was very
> different in 1969 than it is today. Russia was MUCH stronger and
> more threatening to the outside world back then. Note that the
> 1969 crisis was the beginning of a Sino-US alliance that lasted
> until the fall of the USSR in 1991. Nations ally or fight against
> one another over resources and/or to secure geopolitical
> objectives.

In 2003, I was writing my first book on Generational Dynamics, and I
wrote extensive histories of China and Russia, going back centuries.
I didn't say so explicitly at that time, but it was clear to me that
Russia and China were each other's historic enemies and would continue
to be, and that a Russian (Orthodox Christian civilization)
generational crisis war would be against against China (Mongolians)
and Sunni Muslim countries (Islamic civilization), and not against
Europe (Western civilization).

Nothing that's happened in the last 50 years, or even the last 100
years, changes that. In particular, some silly Sino-Russian Pact is
as relevant as a teaspoon of water compared to a tsunami.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-07-2017, 05:58 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 05:43 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   Note However that the world Geopolitical situation was very
>   different in 1969 than it is today. Russia was MUCH stronger and
>   more threatening to the outside world back then. Note that the
>   1969 crisis was the beginning of a Sino-US alliance that lasted
>   until the fall of the USSR in 1991. Nations ally or fight against
>   one another over resources and/or to secure geopolitical
>   objectives.

In 2003, I was writing my first book on Generational Dynamics, and I
wrote extensive histories of China and Russia, going back centuries.
I didn't say so explicitly at that time, but it was clear to me that
Russia and China were each other's historic enemies and would continue
to be, and that a Russian (Orthodox Christian civilization)
generational crisis war would be against against China (Mongolians)
and Sunni Muslim countries (Islamic civilization), and not against
Europe (Western civilization).

Nothing that's happened in the last 50 years, or even the last 100
years, changes that.  In particular, some silly Sino-Russian Pact is
as relevant as a teaspoon of water compared to a tsunami.

Your argument that Russia will be an ally and china an enemy is based solely on the fact that we had an alliance with Russia during WW2 and fought Japan During WW2. And that where it flounders russia has been an enemy ever since the end of WW2 and China would never take up "the fallen standard" left by imperial japan, because the old Japanese empire is regarded in China the much same way that we in the west regard Nazi Germany today. A Chinese admiring for example, Hirohito and Tojo would be like a Jew today admiring hitler. The pan-asianism that became popular in Japan prior to and during WW2 never really caught on in China because it was associated with japanese imperialism and aggression. After the war the Chinese did embrace Maoism but that collapsed in the cultural revolution, that country has been essentially a traditional autocracy since then.

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-07-2017, 06:23 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > Your argument that Russia will be an ally and china an enemy is
> based solely on the fact that we had an alliance with Russia
> during WW2 and fought Japan During WW2. And that where it
> flounders russia has been an enemy ever since the end of WW2 and
> China would never take up "the fallen standard" left by imperial
> japan, because the old Japanese empire is regarded in China the
> much same way that we in the west regard Nazi Germany today. A
> Chinese admiring for example, Hirohito and Tojo would be like a
> Jew today admiring hitler. The pan-asianism that became popular in
> Japan prior to and during WW2 never really caught on in China
> because it was associated with japanese imperialism and
> aggression. After the war the Chinese did embrace Maoism but that
> collapsed in the cultural revolution, that country has been
> essentially a traditional autocracy since then.

Once again, did you even read the comment you're responding to?

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-07-2017, 08:36 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 06:23 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: >   Your argument that Russia will be an ally and china an enemy is
>   based solely on the fact that we had an alliance with Russia
>   during WW2 and fought Japan During WW2. And that where it
>   flounders russia has been an enemy ever since the end of WW2 and
>   China would never take up "the fallen standard" left by imperial
>   japan, because the old Japanese empire is regarded in China the
>   much same way that we in the west regard Nazi Germany today. A
>   Chinese admiring for example, Hirohito and Tojo would be like a
>   Jew today admiring hitler. The pan-asianism that became popular in
>   Japan prior to and during WW2 never really caught on in China
>   because it was associated with japanese imperialism and
>   aggression. After the war the Chinese did embrace Maoism but that
>   collapsed in the cultural revolution, that country has been
>   essentially a traditional autocracy since then.

Once again, did you even read the comment you're responding to?

If a large-scale world war begins in a theater that does not directly threaten the west, say if war begins in Central Asia and India and spreads from there: Why would the west side with Russians and Iranians against the Sunnis and the Chinese. We actually have a military alliance with most of the Sunni countries and have extensive economic and diplomatic links with the Chinese. Regarding a Russian/Iranian/Indian alliance, assuming that even forms which is not guaranteed in my opinion; we only have friendly relations with India and have no such links with Russia/Iran. Our interests are currently not aligned with generational dynamics' proposed final alliance system and so far don't show much sign of moving in that direction.

[Warren Dew]

(07-07-2017, 03:10 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 11:33 AM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: As you say, China borders Russia, and a war with China would endanger
Russia more than the US.  I agree, though those Chinese missiles are
specifically designed to be as destructive as possible to the US.
However, those missiles are also a danger to Europe, so no one is
safe.

But the Majority of the Chinese buildup is of "carrier killer" missiles such as the DF-15, DF-21 and DF-26. These missiles can also be converted in to land-based attack missiles in the case of a war against a land based enemy. The very fact that these missile were constructed means the PLA is following an attrition/open battle based military doctrine. This is because the Current base ports of the US carriers are beyond the range of these missiles. In a sneak attack the carriers could simply be taken out at port by regular ICBMs, that carrier based tech and tech to counter carriers is being constructed indicates that the Chinese doctrine is of winning an open battle not a sneak attack battle. Europe is beyond range of most of these systems except the ICBMs, and Chinese-European relations are quite good actually.

The missiles reflect a regional strategy on the part of China:  China wants to be able to break any blockade that the US attempts to enforce.  There's potential for conflict there, but there's potential for conflict almost everywhere.

[John J. Xenakis]

*** 8-Jul-17 World View -- China and India have military confrontation over Bhutan's Doklam plateau

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• China and India have military confrontation over Bhutan's Doklam plateau
  
• Border tensions grow between China and India
  

****
**** China and India have military confrontation over Bhutan's Doklam plateau
****


Chinese soldier confronts Indian soldier at border crossing (AFP)

The military standoff on the border between Chinese and Indian troops
at the border between China and Bhutan is no nearer resolution than it
was last month,
and is becoming
increasing serious, as China hardens its position and makes vitriolic
threats targeting both India and Bhutan, the tiny nation between China
and India.

Chinese troops and construction workers have been constructing a road
through Tibet. On June 16, a column of Chinese troops accompanied by
construction vehicles and road-building equipment began moving south
into the Doklam plateau, which is territory of the nation of Bhutan.
Bhutan's army attempted to block the Chinese troops from entering
Bhutan's territory, but the Chinese troops overran the Bhutan troops.
Bhutan invoked a treaty with India and asked for help. India sent in
its own troops, leading to a standoff with hundreds of troops on each
side, with the potential of bring thousands more troops if the
standoff escalates.

According to reports, the soldiers on each side are still unarmed, and
the Chinese and Indian troops reportedly clashed by “jostling”:
bumping chests, without punching or kicking, in order to force the
other side backwards.

China claims the Doklam plateau is Chinese territory, and points to
an 1892 treaty signed by China and colonial Britain. However, Bhutan
was not party to that treaty.

At this point we have to point out, as an aside, that China is an
international criminal, annexing the territories of other countries in
the South China Sea, and building illegal military bases, in violation
of international law as determined by a 2016 ruling by the United
Nations Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in the Hague, which
declared China's activities in the South China Sea to be illegal.
China has used extortion and military force to invade and annex
regions from other Central and Southeast Asian countries, including
Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia. China has even
arrested, beaten, kidnapped and tortured its own citizens, peaceful
pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong. So China's reference to an
1892 treaty should simply be viewed with reference to China's past
history, and treated most likely a hoax or lie or misrepresentation by
self-justifying thugs. In fact, several analyses show that China's
claims are invalid.

China is reduced to threatening both India and Bhutan with military
violence. China is also trying to encourage some kind of
"independence movement" in Bhutan, to sever all ties with India, and
to put their faith in China.

China is also claiming that India has no right defend Bhutan.
In fact, India was asked by Bhutan to send in troops to stop
the Chinese. China likes to use its vast military complex
to intimidate smaller neighbors, including Philippines, Vietnam,
and some Central Asian countries. They would have succeeded in
invading and annexing this region of Bhutan in the same way,
if India had not come to Bhutan's aid.

Both India's prime minister Narendra Modi and China's president Xi
Jinping attended the G20 summit in Hamburg, and that would have been a
good place for Modi and Xi to have a meeting and try to resolve the
situation diplomatically. However, China rejected the meeting because
"the atmosphere is not right," presumably meaning that China wants to
want for some kind of military victory. Global Times (Beijing) and India Times and Perspective (India) and Bhutan News Service (1-Jan-2013)

Related Articles

• As Narendra Modi visits Washington, China threatens India after border clash (28-Jun-2017)
  
  
• Nepal turns to China as border tensions with India increase (08-Nov-2015)
  
  
• China tests new long-range missile in Tibet, near India border (01-Aug-2012)
  

****
**** Border tensions grow between China and India
****

No shots have been fired in military standoff so far, but China is
demanding the India withdraw its troops unconditionally, which India
is refusing to do. India and China had a major border war in this
region in 1962, and China has been reminding India that India lost
that war, and will lose the next one. India is preparing its own
troop buildup in the region, and so this could break out into a major
new border war at any time.

The dispute goes beyond China's attempt to annex Bhutan's Doklam
plateau. The plateau, also known as Donglang in Chinese, lies at the
junction of India, Bhutan, and China, near the northeastern Indian
state of Sikkim. Doklam is strategically important due to its
adjacency to the Siliguri Corridor, the so-called “chicken’s neck”
connecting India’s seven northeastern states to its mainland. China
is claiming much of these region as well, which would remove the only
overland route between India and its northeastern states.

It's believed by many analysts in India that China is planning for war
with India, and wants to annex these strategic regions belonging to
India and Bhutan in order to gain a military advantage, in
anticipation of that war. By using this kind of "salami slicing"
technique, China gains control of larger and larger regions, one piece
at a time. Chinese thugs have already done that in the South China
Sea, where they annexed one region after another, always lying about
their intentions, until now they have military control of most of it.

From the point of view of Generational Dynamics, China is preparing
for war with the U.S., India, Russia, and several of its other
neighbors.

I was watching the BBC today, and they were interviewing some
pro-Beijing Hong Kong citizens about China's new aircraft carrier.
These people were bubbling over with glee and enthusiasm, saying that
the aircraft carrier is one more thing making China the most powerful
nation in the world. The Chinese people are drunk with power, and are
looking forward to war, and eagerly anticipating war, which they
believe that they will win quickly against anyone in the world. In
fact, they'll end up bringing devastation and destruction to most of
the world, including themselves. BBC and India Times and Quartz and Australian Broadcasting and The Diplomat

Related Articles

• China repudiates its Hong Kong 'One Country, Two Systems' agreement with Britain (01-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China builds illegal surface-to-air missile sites in South China Sea (03-Jul-2017)
  
  
• China's 'thuggery' transforms Hong Kong's Umbrella Movement into independence movement (30-Aug-2016)
  

KEYS: Generational Dynamics, China, India, Bhutan, Doklam plateau,
International Tribunal for Law of the Sea,
Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Philippines,
Narendra Modi, Xi Jinping, Sikkim, Siliguri Corridor,
Chicken's neck, South China Sea

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

[Galen]

(07-04-2017, 01:28 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(07-04-2017, 12:37 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I'm pretty sure some of us boomers, including people like Trump and Tillerson, would be more than satisfied.

But not the boomer establishment which John X assumes would be guiding the country through the 4T. Establishment boomers would only be satisfied if the entire planet is democratized. Its ironic that establishment boomers claim to love democracy when they suppress the younger generations and claim that allowing Xers and Millies to rise through the ranks is somehow "against democracy" simply because the young would reject the boomer policies as contrary to our interests or even contrary to self-preservation and they block worldviews that contradict their dogma in the ballot box. The Boomer establishment has an extraordinary sense of entitlement and presumptuousness their attitude toward the american people (especially toward xers and millies) is essentially this: "YOU fight for MY values and MY preferences, you peons".

Yes, this sums up Boomers in general even though there are some notable exception.

[Warren Dew]

(07-07-2017, 04:58 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-07-2017, 02:56 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: >   You're extrapolating from month to month variations in rhetoric.
>   As you yourself point out, that's not a valid approach.

Just to be clear, I've been saying the same thing for well over ten
years -- that Russia will be an ally and China will be an enemy of
both the US and Russia.  If I reference current events, it's only to
show that current events are staying roughly on the predicted trend
line.

The problem is, when you cite the fact that the relationship with China appears to have cooled in the past few months as evidence for your theory, but fail to cite the fact that relationships with  China seemed to be going well a few months ago as evidence against your theory then, it looks like you're grasping at straws to find confirmation.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-07-2017, 05:58 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote: In 2003, I was writing my first book on Generational Dynamics, and I
wrote extensive histories of China and Russia, going back centuries.
I didn't say so explicitly at that time, but it was clear to me that
Russia and China were each other's historic enemies and would continue
to be, and that a Russian (Orthodox Christian civilization)
generational crisis war would be against against China (Mongolians)
and Sunni Muslim countries (Islamic civilization), and not against
Europe (Western civilization).

Nothing that's happened in the last 50 years, or even the last 100
years, changes that.  In particular, some silly Sino-Russian Pact is
as relevant as a teaspoon of water compared to a tsunami.

So all the observed historical events of the past century has no effect on the alignments of your proposed 4T war, even the previous 4T war and events that preceded that war including as far back as another large-scale world conflict that occured a generation before the previous 4T war. That your proposed clash of civilizations is inevitable as you claim it would develop and the alignments in it are set in stone and have been since the late 19th century and somehow only you have the wisdom of decyphering those alignments. LOL I'm sure the ottoman Turks were fighting for their connection with china during WW1, even though they were allied with germany and china was not even a participant in that war. Like Thailands participation in WW2 is not important even though they had the same student demonstrations that all other ww2 participating nations had in the 60s and 70s, nope Thailand's war is instead a war they were not even a participant in. The fact that Russia's participation in both WW1 and WW2  and the cold war were all directed against Central Europe, not the Islamic world. Even in cultural and secular matters you are delusional; you adopt the Marxist idea that religion was created as just a means to control the masses and atheism (in your case, christopher hitchens-style liberal atheism) is the truth. Even though numerous amounts of evidence of things that were previously mentioned only in religious texts have been uncovered in recent years and decades. Nope you are charlatan, a quack, motivated by an attempt to form a cultish following with you being the guru. While those developments that are relevant, the war on terror, the catching up of Russia and China militarily to the US, the formation of the sino-russian alliance and both powers alliance with iran. The fact that the threat from china and north korea is from a naval/land war in the west pacific that could potentially escalate to nuclear war, NOT a chinese/north korean invasion of CONUS. That militarily the current pecking order of the superpowers is US, then russia, then China, not johnX's fantasy pecking order of China, then russia, with the US being a distant third and being a very weak power. These are the facts.

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-08-2017, 09:56 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > The problem is, when you cite the fact that the relationship with
> China appears to have cooled in the past few months as evidence
> for your theory, but fail to cite the fact that relationships with
> China seemed to be going well a few months ago as evidence against
> your theory then, it looks like you're grasping at straws to
> grasping at straws to find confirmation.

You're the one who's grasping at straws. When the weatherman says
that today is going to be cooler, it doesn't mean he's saying that the
rest of the summer is going to be cooler. On many occasions I've
reported on some country's behavior and described it as
"counter-trend," with the implication that the behavior won't last
long. However, I do tend to favor stories that support the predicted
Generational Dynamics trends, for the obvious reason that I'm writing
about dozens (perhaps hundreds) of countries, and can't write about
everything. And if some country firmly changes direction in a way
that seems to be strongly counter-trend, then I'm not afraid to write
about it, and to analyze why it's happening. No trend goes in a
straight line.

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-08-2017, 10:13 AM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: > So all the observed historical events of the past century has no
> effect on the alignments of your proposed 4T war

No, that's not what I said in general. I was discussing a specific
case -- Russia and China. Obviously, alignments can change from one
crisis war to the next, as can be seen from US history. Each country
or society has to be analyzed individually.

[Cynic Hero '86]

JohnX; There is as typo in your last report about the china-india border where it says "india is preparing to attack india".

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-08-2017, 12:16 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote: JohnX; There is as typo in your last report about the china-india border where it says "india is preparing to attack india".

I can't find anything like that sequence of words anywhere.
Could you be more specific? Thanks.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-08-2017, 01:15 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-08-2017, 12:16 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: JohnX; There is as typo in your last report about the china-india border where it says "india is preparing to attack india".

I can't find anything like that sequence of words anywhere.
Could you be more specific?  Thanks.

The typo is on the third paragraph of the "Border tensions grow between China and India" article that you posted last night. It says that "It's believed by many analysts in India is planning for war with India" on that section.

[Cynic Hero '86]

(07-08-2017, 01:34 AM)Galen Wrote:

(07-04-2017, 01:28 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote:

(07-04-2017, 12:37 PM)Warren Dew Wrote: I'm pretty sure some of us boomers, including people like Trump and Tillerson, would be more than satisfied.

But not the boomer establishment which John X assumes would be guiding the country through the 4T. Establishment boomers would only be satisfied if the entire planet is democratized. Its ironic that establishment boomers claim to love democracy when they suppress the younger generations and claim that allowing Xers and Millies to rise through the ranks is somehow "against democracy" simply because the young would reject the boomer policies as contrary to our interests or even contrary to self-preservation and they block worldviews that contradict their dogma in the ballot box. The Boomer establishment has an extraordinary sense of entitlement and presumptuousness their attitude toward the american people (especially toward xers and millies) is essentially this: "YOU fight for MY values and MY preferences, you peons".

Yes, this sums up Boomers in general even though there are some notable exception.

The boomer establishment only cares about turning imposing their brand of mediocrity over the entire world. Even practical decision making has been discarded in favor of globalist "human rights". Because of selfish boombers we have the mindnumbingly incompetent TSA instead of making a decision that should have been made on september 12 2001; to profile muslims. Now old grannies are being searched for explosives at airports just because the selfish boomer can't bear to abandon their 1990s-era "open society".

[John J. Xenakis]

(07-08-2017, 01:24 PM)Cynic Hero 86 Wrote:

(07-08-2017, 01:15 PM)John J. Xenakis Wrote:

(07-08-2017, 12:16 PM)Cynic Hero Wrote: JohnX; There is as typo in your last report about the china-india border where it says "india is preparing to attack india".

I can't find anything like that sequence of words anywhere.
Could you be more specific?  Thanks.

The typo is on the third paragraph of the "Border tensions grow between China and India" article that you posted last night. It says that "It's believed by many analysts in India is planning for war with India" on that section.

OK, got it. Thanks for the correction.