Originally Posted by Ragnarök_62

> For example I reported getting something like 13 spam calls to the
> FCC. I got a form email saying they might do something. It's been
> a month and I'm still getting calls.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

> ISIS? A unique event in history? That seems a bit of a
> stretch. Even a successful takeover by them of the Levant or parts
> further south would not rise to the significance of, say,
> Communist takeovers of major countries in the first half of the
> 20th century. To me, it looks a lot more like a Spanish Civil War
> type of thing.

The takeover isn't what's unique in history. It's the rapid formation
of a society/nation by attracting tens of thousands of warriors from
100 countries around the world, caused by al-Assad and Putin. It's
been absolutely spectacular and breathtaking. If something like that
has occurred previously, it certainly hasn't been as quickly.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

> Oh, I dunno. I predicted the War in Ukraine, the election of
> Narendra Modi, and the rise of nationalism (though I got the
> politician wrong) in Japan, among other goodies, back in the
> spring of 2013. I don't think I'm doing too bad for an
> off-the-cuff stab at what I thought the next few years would look
> like, based on my understanding of current events and generational
> theory. YMMV.

I always like to point out that it's easy to get a million predictions
right - just make two million predictions.

I've posted thousands of articles with hundreds of analyses and
predictions, and they've all turned out to be true or are trending
true. None has been proven wrong.

Just a word about the types of predictions: Generational Dynamics
makes predictions based on generational trends, most of which were
identified by S&H. Chaos Theory tells you that there are a lot of
things you can't predict -- political things, like who will win an
election, when a war will start, and so forth -- so I would not have
ventured a Generational Dynamics prediction on any of those particular
issues. But I congratulate you for getting those predictions right,
and for having a good political intuition in those cases.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

The takeover isn't what's unique in history. It's the rapid formation
of a society/nation by attracting tens of thousands of warriors from
100 countries around the world, caused by al-Assad and Putin. It's
been absolutely spectacular and breathtaking. If something like that
has occurred previously, it certainly hasn't been as quickly.



I always like to point out that it's easy to get a million predictions
right - just make two million predictions.

I've posted thousands of articles with hundreds of analyses and
predictions, and they've all turned out to be true or are trending
true. None has been proven wrong.

Just a word about the types of predictions: Generational Dynamics
makes predictions based on generational trends, most of which were
identified by S&H. Chaos Theory tells you that there are a lot of
things you can't predict -- political things, like who will win an
election, when a war will start, and so forth -- so I would not have
ventured a Generational Dynamics prediction on any of those particular
issues. But I congratulate you for getting those predictions right,
and for having a good political intuition in those cases.

In that same manner that National Socialism and its Japanese cousin were an icebreaker for the USSR and the Chinese Communists, during the last 4T, Islamo-fascism may be the icebreaker for the SCO in the current 4T.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

> A few weeks back what could have been a massacre was thwarted at
> UC Merced. The perp was an ISIS inspired student (who hailed from
> right here in the tolllllllllllllllerant Bay Area). I thought to
> myself, that's interesting. So even here in Silicon Valley the
> toxic mentality is brewing.

> Today you probably heard about the massacre that was not thwarted,
> down in San Bernardino County (aka The Inland Empire down in
> SoCal). Well, one perp of what were apparently 3 was named. One
> Sayed Farook. Still too early to know if there was ISIS
> inspiration involved.

Until we get climate change under control, these things are going to
keep happening.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

The "vast empire" even if only restricted to the Arabian Peninsula, was mainly not Arabic-speaking. That is all. We're not actually disagreeing, I just feel that this particular part is misleading.

Jihad redirects intra societal conflict to external conflict. The vast majority of the vast empire was external. The unification happened before conquest began. I did assume that the people refered to as "Arabs" in the Medinan state spoke Arabic. I also assumed people referred to as Arabs who came to Medina to join Muhammed's movement also spoke Arabic. Perhaps they did not. In any case consider the term Arabic-speaking replaced by Arab.

Another feature of jihad is conversion to Islam, which adds new people (who as you point did mostly did NOT speak Arabic or were even Semitic) who become part of a virtual nation. But this was not possible until they had first been conquered, and to do that required a core group with sufficient military power to achieve initial conquest (e.g. conquest of Mecca in AD 630). At this early stage most of the movement were Arabs. Once the ball got rolling it was replicated over and over taking more and more territory and population until by the end of the 7th century a vast empire was created in which only a small minority was Muslim or Arab.

You're beginning to slip into sophistry. Conquest started within the Arab speaking regions.

*** 4-Dec-15 World View -- Russia and Turkey increasingly on a war footing

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Russia and Turkey exchange vitriolic accusations about ISIS oil sales
• Russia cancels Turkey gas pipeline, prepares for Bosporus closure
• Turkey's grievances against Russia, and the road to war
• San Bernardino mass shootings

****
**** Russia and Turkey exchange vitriolic accusations about ISIS oil sales
****


Turkey's evidence that Bashar al-Assad is supporting ISIS by buying ISIS oil (Anadolu)

Russia's president Vladimir Putin, who is not Muslim, invoked the name
of Allah to push up the threat level at Turkey even farther on
Thursday for shooting down
a
Russian warplane last week:

<QUOTE>"Only Allah knows why they did it. And I guess Allah
decided to punish the ruling clique in Turkey by stripping it of
its sanity. ...

We will not saber-rattle or take dangerous, hysterical actions.
But those who hope we will be content to [stop trade in] tomatoes
or constrain some construction work after they committed a war
crime by killing our men, are wrong -- we will remind them time
and again and they will regret it, time and again."<END QUOTE>

In his "state of the nation" speech on Thursday, he also repeated the
vitriolic personal accusations directed at Turkey's president Recep
Tayyip Erdogan, saying that Erdogan's son Necmettin Bilal Erdogan is a
terrorist sponsor supporting the so-called Islamic State (IS or ISIS
or ISIL or Daesh) by arranging for the purchase of large quantities of
oil from ISIS, on behalf of Turkey.

Unfortunately, nothing that comes from Putin or the Russians can be
believed. Russia lied about its invasion of Crimea, Russia lied about
invading east Ukraine, Russia lied after shooting down a passenger
plane over Ukraine, Russia lied about Syria's president al-Bashar
Assad's use of Sarin gas on his own people, Russia lied about the
purpose of its military intervention into Syria as being to attack
ISIS. So any "evidence" produced by the Russians that Turkey is
buying oil from ISIS is worthless.

In other words, Putin could swear on a stack of Orthodox Christian
bibles that the proof Russia is showing as evidence wasn't
Photoshopped, but he still can't be believed, and any evidence that
the Russians present about anything can be assumed to be worthless
dross.

Beyond that, accusations are flying.

Russia says that Turkey is supporting terrorism by buying oil from
ISIS. Turkey says that Russia is supporting terrorism by buying oil
from ISIS. Last week, the US and Germany both said that the al-Assad
regime is supporting terrorism by buying oil from ISIS. Also, Iraq's
Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) is being quoted as saying that the
ISIS trucks in the photos that Russia is producing as "evidence" are
not ISIS trucks at all, but are KRG trucks, transporting oil legally.

So maybe ISIS is selling oil to Turkey and/or to Russia and/or to
al-Assad, and eventually we'll know which of those if any is true, but
for now the important thing is the accusations themselves, the
growing, vitriolic war of words between these centuries-old mutually
hated enemies, and the possibility that these words could lead to
actual war. Breitbart and Daily Sabah (Ankara) and Independent (London) and Daily Sabah (London) and Anadolu (Ankara) and Jamestown

****
**** Russia cancels Turkey gas pipeline, prepares for Bosporus closure
****

Many analysts have pointed out that all the sanctions that Russia
imposed on Turkey -- food imports/exports, tourism restrictions,
etc. -- would hurt both economies, but were not sufficiently serious
to be significant. What would be REALLY significant, according to
several analysts, would be the cancellation of joint projects to build
gas pipelines that would carry Russian gas from the Caspian Sea to
Turkey and to the European Union. That would mean that Putin
REALLY wanted to hurt Turkey as much as possible.

Well, Russia on Thursday announced that further plans for the
TurkStream gas pipeline project have been canceled indefinitely.
Russia had begun work on the pipeline in May. In addition, Russia's
Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant project in southern Turkey was canceled.

Gas shipments from Russia to Turkey through the existing Blue Stream
trans-Black Sea gas pipeline will continue, for the time being.
However, Turkey is preparing to survive without any Russian
gas, if necessary.

Russia, meanwhile, is doing its own preparing to survive if
Turkey takes a much more drastic step in retaliation --
closing the Turkish straits (Bosporus and Dardanelles channels),
the waterways that connect the Black Sea to the Mediterranean
Sea.

As we reported a few days ago in "1-Dec-15 World View -- Putin's Syria intervention hobbled by weak Russian economy,"
Turkey is bound by the 1936 Montreux
Convention ao allow Russian commerce ships to pass freely through the
straits; only warships may be regulated. I wrote that if Turkey
closes the straits to Russia, that may be the trigger that launches a
war, and that's true. Nonetheless, Russia is making plans to bypass
the Bosporus if necessary.

Currently 32-35 million tonnes of Russian oil pass through the straits
each year. 8 million tonnes per year could be transported by rail.
It could also transport 13-15 million tonnes through the Baku
Azerbaijan - Tbilisi Georgia - Ceyhan Turkey - Odessa Ukraine - Brody
Ukraine pipeline. However, Russia does not have too many friends
along that pipeline's path, so there may be problems.

A potentially more serious problem for Russia is that essential
supplies of armaments and munitions are transiting through the
Bosporus and the Dardanelles to Russian troops and Russian allies in
Syria; this supply mission could be seriously affected if Turkey
curtails sea transit trough the Straits. BBC and Jamestown and Tass (Moscow) (Trans)

****
**** Turkey's grievances against Russia, and the road to war
****

Vladimir Putin has claimed that Russia "did not threaten Turkey in any
way," prior to shooting down Russia's Su-24 bomber. But from Turkey's
point of view, that's far from true, and it's worthwhile listing some
of Turkey's grievances against Russia, prior to the shootdown:

• As soon as Russia started massive military intervention into
  Syria, Russia claimed that they were targeting ISIS. In fact they
  were often targeting ethnic Turkmens, who are Syrians of Turkish
  descent, descended from groups who began moving from Central Asia into
  present-day Syria in the tenth century. Recall that Russia invaded
  and occupied Ukraine, annexing Crimea, using the excuse that they were
  protecting ethnic Russians, so by Russia's own logic, Turkey is fully
  justified in protecting Turkmens.
  
• Russian troops in Crimea treated ethnic Tatars brutally, and
  continue to do so. Once again, Tatars are Turkish relations from
  Central Asia, and by Russia's own logic, Turkey is fully justified in
  protecting them.
  
• According to Turkey, Russian bombers in Syria have violated
  Turkish airspace many times, and have ignored repeated warnings and
  demands to stop doing so.

I've seen and heard several analysts refer to Russia and Turkey as
"friends" who are now at a temporary impasse. Nothing could be
further from the truth.

As I wrote in "25-Nov-15 World View -- Turkey shoots down Russian warplane, evoking memories of many Crimean wars"
, the Russian population and Turkish population
have a deep mutual hatred of each other that goes back many centuries,
through many bloody generational crisis wars.

Sometimes countries that fight generational crisis wars are able to
move past the hatreds that led to previous war and become friends.
For example, this appears to have happened to America and Japan after
World War II, also deep hatreds still exist between the Japanese and
Chinese.

Russia and Turkey were never going to become friends. As I've been
writing for years, Generational Dynamics predicts that the Mideast is
headed for a major, bloody sectarian crisis war, pitting Sunnis versus
Shias, and that America would be allied with Russia, Iran and the
Shias. Russia and Turkey have appeared to be friends, but that would
have to change.

It's truly amazing how quickly things have changed. In less that a
month, any veneer of friendship between the two countries has been
wiped away, and we're seeing a trend of bitter, vitriolic words,
backed by punitive actions that worsen almost every day. A week ago,
I wrote "26-Nov-15 World View -- Russia and Turkey move closer to the brink of war,"
and that's
even more true today. It's not a question of "if"; it's a question of
"how soon?"

In this generational Crisis era, these two countries are only going to
become even more nationalistic and xenophobic than they already are.
This is clear a path to war -- not a new war, but a revival of an old
war that has already been going on for centuries. Generational Dynamics: History of Islam versus Orthodox Christianity (2003)

****
**** San Bernardino mass shootings
****

With regard to the San Bernardino mass shootings: Until we get climate
change under control, these things are going to keep happening.
The Federalist


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Russia, Turkey, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan,
Islamic State / of Iraq and Syria/Sham/the Levant, IS, ISIS, ISIL, Daesh,
Ukraine, Crimea, Syria, Turkmens, Black Sea, Crimea,
TurkStream pipeline, Akkuyu Nuclear Power Plant,
the Turkish straits, Bosporus and Dardanelles channels,
San Bernardino

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

Thanks for the change with the Turkmen, John.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

Thanks for the change with the Turkmen, John.

You're welcome.

And I assume that the Bahrain article was "venomous" enough for you?

John X and other boomers and Wilsonians in general going back to the now long gone progressive and missionary generations refuse to acknowledge the true aspects of human nature and the role of AMBITION in the course of human events. On this forum this is most evident in John's "5T" theory. The 5T concept is not generational theory but wilsonian ideological dogma masquerading as an interpretation of generational theory. John X and other boomers must try to claim that after a full-scale war has run its course that the combatants support always reconciliation for at 50 to 60 years, even though this does not match historical events (WW1 and WW2 were only one generation apart and this is only the most prominent example). This is because to acknowledge that bloody large-scale conflicts can occur within living memory of the last such conflict and can be spawned by events during the previous outbreak of violence. To acknowledge that fact would mean acknowledging "that side" of human nature, something wilsonians cannot to because to do so would eliminate the wilsonian projects raison d'tre. Because the current elite is largely composed of wilsonians they tend to rely on silent, boomers and carefully hand-picked xers to run things, because they know that Most xers and millies simply would laugh at the wilsonians attempt to "domesticate" humanity. As a result policy is based on "policing" and what "should be done" rather than on what "could be done" This is not an argument against simply liberalism or conservatism, although a large segment of my arguments lean right-wing rather than left. Regarding the current elections it seems that based on the current field of candidates, our country would be better off if a republican wins in 2016 than if a democrat does.

*** 5-Dec-15 World View -- Violence feared in Venezuela after probable Socialist loss on Sunday

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• Venezuela likely to end 16 years of Socialist parliamentary government on Sunday
• Venezuelans fear violence or political chaos if Socialists lose

****
**** Venezuela likely to end 16 years of Socialist parliamentary government on Sunday
****


People walk past a billboard with Venezuela’s United Socialist Party (PSUV) logo and an image of “Chávez’s Eyes” in Caracas (Reuters)

Nicolás Maduro, the Socialist president of Venezuela and successor to
the Sainted Socialist God, the dead Hugo Chávez, is expected to lose
his majority in the National Assembly in elections on Sunday. This
will be the first time in 16 years that the ruling United Socialist
Party have not been in power.

Oil is the main export of Venezuela and provides most of the country's
foreign currency. Venezuela should be one of the richest countries in
the world, with the world's largest proven oil reserves controlled by
nationalized Venezuelan oil companies. For years Chávez, and then
Maduro, took advantage of high international oil prices to buy votes
by creating huge socialist spending programs, with large welfare
payments and heavily subsidized and price controlled food, gasoline,
and other goods.

However, the price of oil has plunged by 60%, and the economy is a
wreck, with severe shortages, and inflation running over 30% per
month. The government-run oil companies are drenched in corruption.
Shoppers have been breaking into supermarkets to see scarce consumer
staples including milk, rice, flour, ketchup, diapers, and toilet
paper. Crime and violence are becoming rampant. And the fall into
hell has been rapid -- 75% of Venezuelan homes now live in poverty,
compared to 27% just two years ago.

Although the Socialists' vote-buying programs have made them wildly
popular in past years, the Socialists' supporters have been turned off
by the governments almost unbelievable stupidity and incompetence.

Opinion polls indicate almost certain victory by the opposition
parties. The opposition coalition, the Democratic Unity Roundtable,
leads the ruling United Socialist Party and its allies by as much as
35 percentage points. Maduro’s own popularity has been hovering
around 20 percent. Miami Herald and The Atlantic

****
**** Venezuelans fear violence or political chaos if Socialists lose
****

It's a recurring theme in history that many leaders are willing to use
torture, violence and even violence to stay in power. We've seen this
in recent times with Syria's Bashar al-Assad, Russia's Vladimir Putin,
and Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, and in the last century in Germany's
Adolf Hitler and Russia's Josef Stalin.

So many people are fearing the worst -- that Maduro will join the
ranks of al-Assad, Putin, Mugabe, Stalin and Hitler, and use violence
to stay in power if he loses his parliamentary majority in Sunday's
election.

Maduro has signaled that he wouldn't hesitate to use violence if his
wishes weren't followed:

<QUOTE>"Imagine if they dominated the National Assembly. I
wouldn't allow it, I swear, I wouldn't let my hands be tied by
anyone. I'd take to the street with the people."<END QUOTE>

Last month, Maduro said he was activating an "anti-coup plan" in case
he lost the elections. "This revolution will not be betrayed nor
surrendered," he said, warning that rightist forces at home and abroad
(i.e., Americans) are planning a "counter-revolutionary coup."

Maduro has already exhibited his willingness to use abuse and violence
during the campaign. Opposition figures have been jailed, and one was
gunned down in the street. Non-government controlled news agencies,
including foreign news agencies, are being severely restricted.

If the Socialists lose on Sunday, Maduro will still be president, and
will still have the army, security forces and all state institutions
under his control. Maduro will simply find ways to bypass the
National Assembly, to ignore any laws it passes, or to bring
retaliation and retribution to any legislator he doesn't like.

Still, the opposition is excited by the possibility of having a
majority, although the size of the majority will dictate what they're
able to do. With a simple majority, the opposition can pass amnesty
laws to try to free incarcerated politicians, embarrass the government
with investigations, and wield budget approval; with a three-fifths
majority, it could theoretically fire ministers after a censure vote.

According to one opposition leader:

<QUOTE>"If the result is close, the government could be
tempted to sort of barricade the new National Assembly, to use the
control it has over the Supreme Court, the state prosecutor, the
ombudsman's office, to try to block it off."<END QUOTE>

Despite the vast lead the opposition has in opinion polls, Maduro
still has control of the polling places and vote-counting processes,
and so Maduro could still win on Sunday. Reuters and Fox News and Guardian (London)


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, Nicolás Maduro, Hugo Chávez,
United Socialist Party, PSUV

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

f a society/nation by attracting tens of thousands of warriors from
100 countries around the world, caused by al-Assad and Putin. It's
been absolutely spectacular and breathtaking. If something like that
has occurred previously, it certainly hasn't been as quickly.

I don't know, John, you could just as easily pin a fair share of the blame on Bush, for invading, and Obama, for pulling out so soon after. Or, most of all, on the people actually in ISIS or supporting it.

I always like to point out that it's easy to get a million predictions
right - just make two million predictions

I don't make millions of predictions, mostly just the one post and the one underneath it, which I have been linking to periodically for two years, now. But, uh, not claiming to see the future, so not worried about proving my bona fides in that regard. Did you read it?

Just a word about the types of predictions: Generational Dynamics
makes predictions based on generational trends, most of which were
identified by S&H. Chaos Theory tells you that there are a lot of
things you can't predict -- political things, like who will win an
election, when a war will start, and so forth -- so I would not have
ventured a Generational Dynamics prediction on any of those particular
issues. But I congratulate you for getting those predictions right,
and for having a good political intuition in those cases.

Cheers. Much to be said for common sense, historical background knowledge, and a plausible narrative, which generational theory helps with, tremendously.

And I assume that the Bahrain article was "venomous" enough for you

Consistency is always nice, but I'm less interested in seeing you apportion a "fair" share of the blame, and more wondering how you can be so outraged about the doings of Putin, Assad, and Iran in particular and yet be convinced that we are going to be working hand and glove with them in the near future.

Not seeing the equivalent to Nazi Germany that would tie the FDR-and-Stalin analogy together, here.

Originally Posted by JordanGoodspeed

> Consistency is always nice, but I'm less interested in seeing you
> apportion a "fair" share of the blame, and more wondering how you
> can be so outraged about the doings of Putin, Assad, and Iran in
> particular and yet be convinced that we are going to be working
> hand and glove with them in the near future. Not seeing the
> equivalent to Nazi Germany that would tie the FDR-and-Stalin
> analogy together, here.

I've answered this question several times, and I don't really have
anything new to add. When America is "forced to choose" sides, the
chosen side will be the Russia/Shia side, for the reasons I've given
repeatedly. I understand that you disagree with that conclusion, and
question the logic and modeling that led to that conclusion. In that
case, nothing that follows from that conclusion will make sense to
you, so there's nowhere to go in this discussion.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I've answered this question several times, and I don't really have
anything new to add. When America is "forced to choose" sides, the
chosen side will be the Russia/Shia side, for the reasons I've given
repeatedly. I understand that you disagree with that conclusion, and
question the logic and modeling that led to that conclusion. In that
case, nothing that follows from that conclusion will make sense to
you, so there's nowhere to go in this discussion.

The only way we would be allied with the Shia is if the Sunni states are all taken over by radical Islamists. Our treaty obligations are with the Sunni side.

Boomers need to stop trying to realize their idiotic dream of trying to "domesticate" the human condition. It is a mockery of true human nature and the warrior-spirit. Globalism is the antithesis of freedom. Boomers obsession with "human rights" and "helping the little guy" is hurting America at home and abroad.

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

> The only way we would be allied with the Shia is if the Sunni
> states are all taken over by radical Islamists. Our treaty
> obligations are with the Sunni side.

It's true that there are plenty of issues, such as Turkey being
part of Nato, and the US having a naval base on Bahrain.
And all those issues will be bitterly debated as things progress.

The "forced to choose" concept is related to S&H's Regeneracy.
A Regeneracy event (such as the bombing of Pearl Harbor) is not
just another political event, like someone winning an election
or some nation imposing a trade sanction on another nation.

A Regeneracy event changes everything. What was true yesterday is no
longer true today. Yesterday, you were carping over whether climate
change causes terrorism. Today, you're in a state of shock, wondering
if you're facing a disaster. Yesterday, the political parties and
generations had no common ground. Today they're united behind a
common enemy. Yesterday, you were worried about treaty obligations.
Today, you're worried about your country's survival.

So if you're "forced to choose" between a country you have
a treaty with, versus a country that's going to help you survive,
then the treaty goes under the bus, along with all the old people.

One can't easily predict exact scenarios, but it's quite possible that
Sunni Islamists will become dominant on the Gulf. ISIS might moderate
its behavior just enough to merge with the Salafists in Saudi Arabia,
for example. Pakistan and the Saudis are close, so in a war, India
will be at war with the Saudis -- and the Chinese. When Russia is
"forced to choose," it will choose India and Iran. I could go on and
on, but those treaties will be like your hated Boomers -- just old
things to be thrown in the garbage.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

It's true that there are plenty of issues, such as Turkey being
part of Nato, and the US having a naval base on Bahrain.
And all those issues will be bitterly debated as things progress.

The "forced to choose" concept is related to S&H's Regeneracy.
A Regeneracy event (such as the bombing of Pearl Harbor) is not
just another political event, like someone winning an election
or some nation imposing a trade sanction on another nation.

A Regeneracy event changes everything. What was true yesterday is no
longer true today. Yesterday, you were carping over whether climate
change causes terrorism. Today, you're in a state of shock, wondering
if you're facing a disaster. Yesterday, the political parties and
generations had no common ground. Today they're united behind a
common enemy. Yesterday, you were worried about treaty obligations.
Today, you're worried about your country's survival.

So if you're "forced to choose" between a country you have
a treaty with, versus a country that's going to help you survive,
then the treaty goes under the bus, along with all the old people.

One can't easily predict exact scenarios, but it's quite possible that
Sunni Islamists will become dominant on the Gulf. ISIS might moderate
its behavior just enough to merge with the Salafists in Saudi Arabia,
for example. Pakistan and the Saudis are close, so in a war, India
will be at war with the Saudis -- and the Chinese. When Russia is
"forced to choose," it will choose India and Iran. I could go on and
on, but those treaties will be like your hated Boomers -- just old
things to be thrown in the garbage.

The problem is the Sunni states are US allies. While Russia is allied with Iran, its alliance with India has largely lost its relevance since the cold war. The Sunni states, especially Jordan and Egypt are fighting against ISIS. An Islamist Offensive both in the middle east or a terrorist offensive against the west would drive the Sunni states closer to the west, not away from it. Also the middle east is Both Russia and Europe's problem much more than it is for us.

Also as for Hating boomers: Xers and Millies largely oppose boomer policies because the limiting effects in terms of options that those polices entail. A hypothetical example suppose there is another 9/11 type attack on the west. Under boomer leadership certain options are basically forbidden for ideological. The option for example of Mass extrajudicial executions of terrorist sympathizers would likely be forbidden by boomers, that option would be "grayed out" (left unavailable) under boomer leadership. Same with the nuclear bombardment of enemy cities and population centers in retaliation for attacks or potential attacks without regards to the Geneva convention, this option would again likely be "greyed out" for anything except in the case of an attack from Russia or China. Even in that contingency boomer leadership would focus on primarily military strategic value targets in a war. For that reason ambitious Xers and Millies see boomer leadership as having spent the past generation taking away the younger generations rights as citizens. As we seen after 9/11 when silent and boomer leaders refused to launch nuclear strikes against muslim cities and population centers. And refused a ground campaign in order to secure the middle east and north Africa and turn those regions into a giant "march territory". Many Xers and Millies would have supported such an endeavour had it been attempted. It also would have provided an impetuous to strengthen industry and strategic production. Boomers again governed selfishly when they bailed out the banks without the people's permission thus preventing a correction of the economy that would have forced up real wages especially for younger Americans, this is largely true in Europe as well. This is why large numbers of westerners are attracted to candidates like Trump and Carson, As well in europe; Le Pen and similar leaders. The Boomer mainstream hates Trump because he does not believe in human rights nor does he think that the weak and powerless should be protected by the strong, unlike what mainstream boomers believe.

Question for John Xenakis.

Do you see radical Islam spurring realignments in global politics? Could there be new alliances for fending off radical Islam?

Human Rights -- The Delusion of a generation.

Originally Posted by John J. Xenakis

I've answered this question several times, and I don't really have
anything new to add. When America is "forced to choose" sides, the
chosen side will be the Russia/Shia side, for the reasons I've given
repeatedly. I understand that you disagree with that conclusion, and
question the logic and modeling that led to that conclusion. In that
case, nothing that follows from that conclusion will make sense to
you, so there's nowhere to go in this discussion.

Fair enough. Like I said, I don't see the Sunni world capable of generating anything epochal enough to cause the realignment you're suggesting anytime soon. But who knows?

We can agree to disagree, then. Thanks, this was fun.

Boomers Won't allow reform because to do so would be to admit that the values of 1968 were a huge failure. Boomers again sacrifice their children' future in order preserve their idiotic ideals. Politicians in the US and Europe allow refugees even after events have proven the refugees cannot be trusted. Between their citizens and even national cohesion and survival; between these and a boomer's ideological dogma: they choose the later. Boomers in the US and especially in the EU are governing tyrannically. Boomer Neoliberals hate trump because his proposed policies would cause the crisis to be a military campaign for expansion, conquest, and colonization rather than the mainstreams preference for a final showdown between democratic and dictatorial nations. Trump stands in the way of the establishment boomers desire for a world were every country in the world is a democracy and were the "wolves" are tamed and coexist with the "sheep": The boomer ideologues dream is delusional and is based on a generation that had known only wealth and prosperity and their pretentious selfishness, these disgusting globalist ideologues never had to live in the real world.

*** 6-Dec-15 World View -- Israel bombs targets in Syria with Russia's tacit cooperation

This morning's key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

• NY Times Page One calls for laws to confiscate some gun owners' guns
• Israel bombs targets in Syria since Russia's military buildup
• Israel receives tacit approval from Russia for Syrian airstrikes

****
**** NY Times Page One calls for laws to confiscate some gun owners' guns
****


NY Times front page, 4-Dec-2015

As I've written several times, the National Rifle Association should
present an award to President Obama for his endless threats to impose
gun control, because each time he does so, sales of guns and
ammunition surge. Based on my conversations with gun owners, they do
this because:

• Generally speaking, gun owners are furious that President
  Obama is using the actions of terrorists and criminals to interfere in
  their personal lives, without making anyone safer.
  
• Gun owners are afraid that Obama might actually be successful, so
  they should get the guns and ammunition they need while they
  can.

Now, the New York Times, which never misses a chance to suck up to the
Obama administration, is going even farther than Obama by writing an
editorial that encourages the government to confiscate guns:

<QUOTE>"Certain kinds of weapons, like the slightly modified
combat rifles used in California, and certain kinds of ammunition,
must be outlawed for civilian ownership. It is possible to define
those guns in a clear and effective way and, yes, it would require
Americans who own those kinds of weapons to give them up for the
good of their fellow citizens."<END QUOTE>

What makes this editorial newsworthy is that it appears at the top of
page 1. The last time the NY Times had a page 1 editorial was on June
13, 1920, expressing disapproval of Warren G. Harding’s nomination as
the next Republican presidential candidate.

Obviously the NY Times editors don't care how many people buy guns,
just as the Black Lives Matter politicians don't care about black
lives and the feminists don't care about women. All of these
politicians swim in the worst political sewers, advocating ways to
make problems worse so that their organizations can get more money or
votes.

Nobody opposed to gun control, least of all gun owners, is going to
care what the NY Times thinks, so all this is going to do is sell a
lot more guns. I wonder if the NY Times editors own stock in gun
companies?

The Washington Post wrote its own editorial, "The folly of the New
York Times pleading for gun control on page 1," saying the following:

<QUOTE>"Republicans have relentlessly accused the "mainstream
media" (of which the Times is a flagship member) of advancing a
liberal agenda. What they often fail to recognize — or
deliberately ignore — is the separation of news and
opinion. They'll read a column, blog or editorial that is critical
of their policies and then angrily tell supporters that they can't
get a fair shake in straight news reports. Most of the time, their
complaints are unfounded or greatly exaggerated.

In this case, however, the Times has (at least temporarily)
knocked down a wall by placing an editorial in a spot normally
reserved for news. That does not mean the paper's political
reporters will suddenly abandon all sense of fairness as they
cover candidates who staunchly back gun rights. But it does give
those candidates new cause for suspicion — a cause they will
almost certainly exploit on the campaign trail."<END QUOTE>

You don't have to be a Republican to see pretty clearly that the NY
Times reporters are fawning lapdogs for President Obama, or that
Obama's political agenda is never separate from "news" on the NY Times
front page, so in that sense the new editorial isn't much different
than a NY Times "news" story. But the WaPost editors are right about
one thing: The NY Times has given Obama's opponents a new weapon on
the campaign trail -- a page one editorial urging the confiscation of
some gun owners' guns -- and they're going to point to this NY Times
editorial over and over.

And of course, that's just going to cause more people to buy guns,
which obviously is perfectly OK with all these liberals, because
they'll get more money for their organizations. NY Times and Washington Post and Politico

****
**** Israel bombs targets in Syria since Russia's military buildup
****

In a television interview on November 10, Israel's prime minister
Benjamin Netanyahu was asked whether Israel would intervene in Syria.
His reply:

<QUOTE>"I’m not sure how to intervene, but I’m sure of this:
First, if Syria fires on us, we fire back. Second, if Hezbollah
establishes a position on Golan Heights, we’ll take action against
that, as we have. Third, if Hezbollah wants to transfer weapons
through Syria, we’ll take action, as we have. Fourth, if we don’t
see it but it went through, we’ll take action on Syria on weapons
that we do see to degrade weapons caches that could be transferred
later."<END QUOTE>

In particular, Netanyahu has repeated his threat to use airstrikes to
take out any Syrian regime convoys traveling from Syria to Lebanon
that are suspected of carrying sophisticated weapons to Hezbollah.

A lot has happened in the four weeks since Netanyahu made that
statement. Turkey's warplanes shot down a Russian Su-24 bomber on
November 24, and Russia has responded savagely against Turkey, with
massive sanctions and by bombing every possible Turkish target in
Syria, especially Turkmen enclaves. In addition, Russia is
implementing a massive military buildup in Syria, with a sophisticated
S-400 air defense missile system that can "see" any Turkish, American
or Israeli planes, and destroy them if desired. ( "29-Nov-15 World View -- Russia's military buildup a game-changer in Syria"
)

However, Israel has continued to conduct numerous airstrikes on Syrian
regime targets within Syria.

• According to sources in the Syrian opposition, the Israeli Air
  Force (IAF) on November 21 attacked positions and personnel belonging
  to the Syrian regime and Hezbollah in the area of Qualamoun, on the
  Syria-Lebanon border. (Israel itself never acknowledges air strikes
  in Syria.)
  
• Similarly, the IAF attacked Syrian army and Hezbollah targets on
  November 24 in the same location, killing 13 Syrian troops and
  Hezbollah fighters.
  
• According to foreign news reports, the IAF on Friday, December 4,
  carried out several raids north of Damascus in Syria. The airstrikes
  were said to have targeted a four-truck Syrian army convoy, loaded
  with ballistic missiles, after they left a Syrian army base. The IAF
  also hit a gas supply, sparking massive explosions.

These Israeli airstrikes in Syria have received no known objections
from Russia, even though they're striking at Russia's ally, the regime
of Syria's president Bashar al-Assad, as well as al-Assad's ally,
Hezbollah.

Times of Israel (10-Nov) and Jerusalem Post (24-Nov) and Times of Israel(29-Nov) and Times of Israel(4-Dec)

****
**** Israel receives tacit approval from Russia for Syrian airstrikes
****

Last week, a Russian warplane entered Israeli airspace but, unlike a
similar situation in Turkey, the warplane was not shot down.

Israel’s defense minister, Moshe Ya’alon, said that after the November
24 shootdown of Russia's warplane by Turkey, Israeli prime minister,
Benjamin Netanyahu met with the Russia's president, Vladimir Putin,
and agreed to open a channel for coordination between them "to prevent
misunderstandings." According to Ya’alon, "The jet penetrated about a
mile into our territory. We established radio contact with it and it
immediately returned to Syrian airspace."

Ya’alon added a comment that sounded fairly snarky, following the
incident in Turkey:

<QUOTE>"Russian planes don’t intend to attack us and
therefore there is no need to automatically, even if there is some
kind of mistake, shoot them down. ...

Just as we don’t interfere with their operations and we don’t get
involved, as a policy, in what is happening in Syria, they also
don’t interfere with us flying and acting in accordance with our
interests."<END QUOTE>

This is somewhat surprising, especially after a senior IDF officer
said on Friday:

<QUOTE>In our worst nightmares, we never dreamed we would
have the S-400 system in our backyard with Syria, or that there
would be cruise missiles here,” the member of the General Staff
told Israeli defense correspondents at a briefing this week, the
Walla website reported.

[But, the IDF] does not currently view the S-400 as a threat to
Israel."<END QUOTE>

Nonetheless, Ya’alon's statement indicates that airstrikes that Israel
has made in the last couple of weeks, with targets belonging to
Syria's al-Assad regime and Hezbollah, have the tacit approval of
Russia, by agreement, at least for the time being.

According to Debka's subscriber-only newsletter (sent to me by a
subscriber), Israel and Russia have a secret deal:

<QUOTE>"In a weird quirk of the Syrian conflict, all foreign
air traffic flying over Syria has been suspended excepting over
its eastern edge, but for Russian and Israeli warplanes. The US,
Britain, France and Turkey initially discontinued their air
strikes when Russia posted the fearsome S-400 anti-air missile
system Syria in the wake of the downing of its warplane by Turkey.

This week, some Western air strikes were resumed, but only after
circling around to strike from the east.

Even Bashar Assad takes care to consult the Russians before
ordering aerial missions.

DEBKA Weekly's military sources report that Israel received the
personal go-ahead from President Vladimir Putin to carry out air
strikes over Syria without fear of interference by Russian
missiles or jets."<END QUOTE>

I like to reference Debka's newsletter, which is written from Israel's
point of view, because they have military and intelligence sources
that provide valuable insights. However, it's not unusual for them to
get things wrong.

With that caution, the Debka newsletter also says that Barack Obama
and Vladimir Putin also have a secret deal about handling Syria and
Iraq:

<QUOTE>"Presidents Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin reached a
quiet agreement in November to split up between the US and Russia
the northern Syrian-Iraqi front against the Islamic State. ... The
two halves are populated almost entirely by Kurds and hinge
heavily on their coveted fighting prowess.

Divided by the Euphrates, the two leaders assigned all Kurdish
areas in Syria and Iraq east of the river valley to the US and the
Kurdish districts to the west, to Russia.

Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan will be more apoplectic than ever
over this secret deal, which undoubtedly boosts Kurdish separatist
aspirations, especially in Syria. ... Russian sponsorship of the
Kurds will no double promote the merger of the three Kurdish
enclaves into a single national entity."<END QUOTE>

Assuming that these reports are true, then Russia is pretty much
running the show in Syria and Iraq, Israel and the United States are
going along, as is Iran, and Turkey is being shut out.

Long-time readers will recall that I've been writing for years that
Generational Dynamics predicts that Iran, Russia and India will be
American allies in the next world war, with enemies that include
China, Pakistan and the Sunni Muslim countries. (See for example "9-Nov-15 World View -- Political crisis in Iran grows over nuclear agreement"
) Step by step, week by
week, that prediction is coming true. Guardian (London, 29-Nov) and Times of Israel (4-Dec) and Times of Israel (4-Dec) and Al Monitor (2-Dec) and Al Monitor (2-Dec) and Debka


KEYS: Generational Dynamics, NY Times, Warren G Harding,
Israel, Syria, Russia, Benjamin Netanyahu, Vladimir Putin,
Lebanon, Hezbollah, Turkey, S-400, Israel Air Force, IAF,
Bashar al-Assad, Moshe Ya’alon, Britain, France

Permanent web link to this article
Receive daily World View columns by e-mail

Originally Posted by Cynic Hero '86

The boomer ideologues dream is delusional and is based on a generation that had known only wealth and prosperity and their pretentious selfishness, these disgusting globalist ideologues never had to live in the real world.

States the problem clearly.

You think the Boomers are bad now, you should have been around when they were taking certain recreational pharmaceuticals back in the sixties and seventies. I don't think Eric the Obtuse ever stopped which is why is appears that his contact with reality is sporadic at best.