Generational Dynamics World View

[John J. Xenakis]

(02-25-2017, 07:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > So we're agreed that the systems "whose only purpose is to destroy
> American cities" are irrelevant here, cognate only to American
> systems "whose only purpose is to destroy Chinese and Russian
> cities"?

LOL! No, I definitely don't agree with anything like that.

You took my statement that "every country is always "planning war" in
the sense of preparing to defend itself in case of war," and you
morphed it into, "every country is ONLY planning to defend itself in
case of war," and then you drew conclusions from your morphed
statement.

When Hitler went on an agressive program to increase the size of his
air force, it was not because he was afraid of an invasion by Britain
or France. It was because he planned to invade Britain and France
preemptively.

Here's an interesting page that describes how Churchill saw
this coming:

http://www.spiegel.de/international/euro...259-4.html

Today, China is developing multiple weapons systems whose only
purpose is to attack American cities, military bases and aircraft
carriers. This is not because China fears a preemptive attack
by the US. It's because China is planning a preemptive attack
on the US.

Furthermore, China is not building artificial islands and military
bases in the South China Sea because China fears a preemptive
attack by Vietnam and the Philippines. It's because China is
planning a preemptive attack on Vietnam and the Philippines --
as well as Japan, Taiwan and India. These attacks would all take
place at the time and place of China's choosing.

Amusingly, the thing that's really screwing up China's plans is
ballistic missiles development by the North Koreans. First, a random
attack by NK could screw up China's timetable. Second, and more
important, NK's actions are giving the US an excuse to implement
missile defense systems, which China hates. A THAAD system in South
Korea would not be able to defend against ICBMs from China targeting
the US, but THAAD's sophisticated radar systems would give the US
early warning to defend against them. China really hates that.

(02-25-2017, 07:16 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > What I'm saying is that a weak communist government could have
> come to power in France, which would then have acted as a Soviet
> puppet.

That view is contradicted by the page linked above. Churchill's view
was that historically, in the case of a European war, Britain always
aligned itself with the second-strongest power. So Britain could have
aligned itself with Germany only if Germany were weaker than France.

The scenario where Russia and France align themselves with the
intention of invading Germany strikes me as very far-fetched. I'm not
saying it's impossible, but I don't see how Russia would align itself
with a weak France. I don't believe Russia would have aligned itself
with France unless France were strong -- stronger than Germany.

(02-26-2017, 09:00 AM)Warren Dew Wrote: > So if Russia abandons Iran for cooperation with Turkey and other
> Sunni states, what does that do to your alignment theory?

Currently, Russia is supposedly allied with Syria, Turkey, Iran,
Israel, Egypt, and others to a greater or lesser extent. These
political alignments can change on a day to day basis, and have
little influence on the decisions to be made when Russia
is "forced to choose" sides when faced with an existential crisis
in the form of a generational crisis war that threatens the
country and its way of life.