Originally Posted by MordecaiK

The lessons of WWII are not the lessons we were taught in Cold War history books, Eric. The US is actually in a stronger position in a world war if it allows other belligerents to kill each other for a few years before intervening. Waiting until the end of the two world wars was the way the US won both those wars. China understands this fact very well, which is why China is determined to be the last Great Power entering any world war. China loves it when the US and Russia exhaust themselves with proxy wars and interventions. It makes things so much easier for them. They may not even need to be involved if the US and Russia damage each other enough. Remember how the Netherlands became the dominant actor in the 17th Century by default after France, Sweden, Denmark, Spain and Austria exhausted themselves in the Thirty Years War.

Excellent perspective and I hope that the US continues to enter new world Wars last.

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

Does your astrology tell us who our opponent is likely to be in the 2020s? And the likely outcome of such a war?

So far as I can tell, Russia seems to be likely to start or be involved in a war that starts in Dec.2020 or Jan 2021. There are several other possibilities that I have written down. But this will not directly involve the USA yet, because the USA war cycle is very reliable. The year 2025 is the most likely for the USA to get involved in conflicts in Asia that have been going on since 2020-21. Usually the USA comes out ahead during 4Ts, the climax of which is represented by the return of the outer invisible planets to their birth places. The harmonious aspect between all three planets would tend to indicate a fortunate outcome, and avoidance of total disaster.

Watch this video for the explanation of the USA war cycle.
https://youtu.be/WAoeW5fXJYU

The lessons of WWII are not the lessons we were taught in Cold War history books, Eric. The US is actually in a stronger position in a world war if it allows other belligerents to kill each other for a few years before intervening. Waiting until the end of the two world wars was the way the US won both those wars. China understands this fact very well, which is why China is determined to be the last Great Power entering any world war. China loves it when the US and Russia exhaust themselves with proxy wars and interventions. It makes things so much easier for them. They may not even need to be involved if the US and Russia damage each other enough. Remember how the Netherlands became the dominant actor in the 17th Century by default after France, Sweden, Denmark, Spain and Austria exhausted themselves in the Thirty Years War.

Yes, I've explained before that this will happen again. If we get involved in a major war, it will be about 4 years after it starts, and it will be resolved in our favor in about 3 years. Apart from what has already been set in motion with the last Jupiter return in 2013-2014, and 2001, there won't be further interventions until 2025. That's my prediction, whatever I might say about what could happen as a result of electing one candidate or another.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

So far as I can tell, Russia seems to be likely to start or be involved in a war that starts in Dec.2020 or Jan 2021. There are several other possibilities that I have written down. But this will not directly involve the USA yet, because the USA war cycle is very reliable. The year 2025 is the most likely for the USA to get involved in conflicts in Asia that have been going on since 2020-21. Usually the USA comes out ahead during 4Ts, the climax of which is represented by the return of the outer invisible planets to their birth places. The harmonious aspect between all three planets would tend to indicate a fortunate outcome, and avoidance of total disaster.

Watch this video for the explanation of the USA war cycle.
https://youtu.be/WAoeW5fXJYU


Yes, I've explained before that this will happen again. If we get involved in a major war, it will be about 4 years after it starts, and it will be resolved in our favor in about 3 years. Apart from what has already been set in motion with the last Jupiter return in 2013-2014, and 2001, there won't be further interventions until 2025. That's my prediction, whatever I might say about what could happen as a result of electing one candidate or another.

You are probably correct about us repeating our age old mistake of waiting too long to get into wars. It worked out somewhat OK in WW1. In WW2 we nearly lost in 1941 - 42 and only because we coddled the USSR (a deal with the Devil) did we pull that one out. WW3? The problem with WW3 is, the WW3 equivalent of Pearl Harbor is a surprise WMD 1st strike. We may not be able to garner the type of response we pulled off in 1942, this time around. Better start learning Mandarin and Russian if all the idiots of various stripes and their votes, cause us to enter this one too late.

Originally Posted by XYMOX_4AD_84

You are probably correct about us repeating our age old mistake of waiting too long to get into wars. It worked out somewhat OK in WW1. In WW2 we nearly lost in 1941 - 42 and only because we coddled the USSR (a deal with the Devil) did we pull that one out. WW3? The problem with WW3 is, the WW3 equivalent of Pearl Harbor is a surprise WMD 1st strike. We may not be able to garner the type of response we pulled off in 1942, this time around. Better start learning Mandarin and Russian if all the idiots of various stripes and their votes, cause us to enter this one too late.

Mordecai has a good idea that when we come in late, we turn the tide to victory and come out better than the other combatants for not having been in the war so long. The good advice on the other hand is not so much getting into wars early, but preventing them in the first place. We err often on the side of intervention, as in Iraq and Vietnam. But right before WWII we erred on the side of isolation. Had we stood up to Hitler and Tojo early by shoring up our allies, the Axis would not have found it so easy to invade and start the war. Hitler may have done it anyway, but he would not have "almost won," as you say, in 1941-42, making WWII shorter in duration. Recently we erred in not shoring up the Free Syrian rebels with aid, thus opening a chaotic proxy civil war that threatens to become a world war.

And we would err the same way in letting Putin walk right in to today's NATO countries. We should not allow the freedom attained in the former Soviet sphere in 1989 and the 1990s to once again fall under the thumb of the oligarchic Russian bear. That would be regression as bad or worse than the regression to trickle-down free-market fundamentalism that the USA has undergone in the age of Reagan, Bush, Scalia and Mitch McConnell. When and IF Russia learns the better way, that it is just one country among many potentially-free nations, then who's sphere of influence is who's won't matter in the least; it will just be nations living and fusing together in the global village without all the great-power nonsense of the past.

Obviously, if a war starts at the end of 2020, as the planets indicate it might, then it won't be a WMD 1st strike if it drags on into the mid-2020s, with the US intervening to bring it to a conclusion. It will still be a conventional war. Any nuclear war is suicidal madness. It's better not to predict it or discuss it as a viable possibility. Unless, of course, you fall in line with too much of Gen X cynicism as expressed in 3T rock "music," and succumb to terrible pessimism, or else to fundamentalist last-days apocalyptic thinking. I say, think optimistically that humans can do well. There's no other way to think, if we would enjoy and prosper. Everyone can do it, regardless of generation.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Mordecai has a good idea that when we come in late, we turn the tide to victory and come out better than the other combatants for not having been in the war so long. The good advice on the other hand is not so much getting into wars early, but preventing them in the first place. We err often on the side of intervention, as in Iraq and Vietnam. But right before WWII we erred on the side of isolation. Had we stood up to Hitler and Tojo early by shoring up our allies, the Axis would not have found it so easy to invade and start the war. Hitler may have done it anyway, but he would not have "almost won," as you say, in 1941-42, making WWII shorter in duration. Recently we erred in not shoring up the Free Syrian rebels with aid, thus opening a chaotic proxy civil war that threatens to become a world war.

And we would err the same way in letting Putin walk right in to today's NATO countries. We should not allow the freedom attained in the former Soviet sphere in 1989 and the 1990s to once again fall under the thumb of the oligarchic Russian bear. That would be regression as bad or worse than the regression to trickle-down free-market fundamentalism that the USA has undergone in the age of Reagan, Bush, Scalia and Mitch McConnell. When and IF Russia learns the better way, that it is just one country among many potentially-free nations, then who's sphere of influence is who's won't matter in the least; it will just be nations living and fusing together in the global village without all the great-power nonsense of the past.

Obviously, if a war starts at the end of 2020, as the planets indicate it might, then it won't be a WMD 1st strike if it drags on into the mid-2020s, with the US intervening to bring it to a conclusion. It will still be a conventional war. Any nuclear war is suicidal madness. It's better not to predict it or discuss it as a viable possibility. Unless, of course, you fall in line with too much of Gen X cynicism as expressed in 3T rock "music," and succumb to terrible pessimism, or else to fundamentalist last-days apocalyptic thinking. I say, think optimistically that humans can do well. There's no other way to think, if we would enjoy and prosper. Everyone can do it, regardless of generation.

My prediction is that all nations will never live together peacefully in a global village , unless human nature is altered. I will leave notes for my grandchildren to check on this.

Originally Posted by radind

My prediction is that all nations will never live together peacefully in a global village , unless human nature is altered. I will leave notes for my grandchildren to check on this.

OK, I imagine your grandchildren will agree with you. Conflicts will continue until we become more spiritual. But we have already come a long way. Western and Central Europe, America and the anglosphere live in peace, almost entirely, and are free. That was not the case centuries or even decades ago. Progress is possible. As I keep saying, we have already gone beyond the notion that a nation can achieve hegemony today. The USA and the Rubios of the country are deceived to believe otherwise. There will be no New American Century. And if and when Russia gets better leadership, it will realize that dominating a sphere of influence is meaningless. The rest of Europe is not in a sphere of influence. It is just nations living and trading together and even fusing together.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

OK, I imagine your grandchildren will agree with you. Conflicts will continue until we become more spiritual. But we have already come a long way. Western and Central Europe, America and the anglosphere live in peace, almost entirely, and are free. That was not the case centuries or even decades ago. Progress is possible. As I keep saying, we have already gone beyond the notion that a nation can achieve hegemony today. The USA and the Rubios of the country are deceived to believe otherwise. There will be no New American Century. And if and when Russia gets better leadership, it will realize that dominating a sphere of influence is meaningless. The rest of Europe is not in a sphere of influence. It is just nations living and trading together and even fusing together.

The issue is not hegemony. The near term question is whether or not Russia shows some restraint. In the long term I expect both China and India to grow economically. There is really no way to know, but based on past history, I would expect at one of these countries to initiate a war. I agree that hegemony is not achievable, but that has not prevented irrational acts in the past.

Originally Posted by radind

The issue is not hegemony. The near term question is whether or not Russia shows some restraint. In the long term I expect both China and India to grow economically. There is really no way to know, but based on past history, I would expect at one of these countries to initiate a war. I agree that hegemony is not achievable, but that has not prevented irrational acts in the past.

Maybe, but it would be out of character historically for either one of them to start a war outside of what they consider their territory.

Eric's naive attitude is the spiritual equivalent of Whiggism.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Western and Central Europe, America and the anglosphere live in peace, almost entirely, and are free.

Only because of American military hegemony.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

So far as I can tell, Russia seems to be likely to start or be involved in a war that starts in Dec.2020 or Jan 2021. There are several other possibilities that I have written down. But this will not directly involve the USA yet, because the USA war cycle is very reliable. The year 2025 is the most likely for the USA to get involved in conflicts in Asia that have been going on since 2020-21. Usually the USA comes out ahead during 4Ts, the climax of which is represented by the return of the outer invisible planets to their birth places. The harmonious aspect between all three planets would tend to indicate a fortunate outcome, and avoidance of total disaster.

Watch this video for the explanation of the USA war cycle.
https://youtu.be/WAoeW5fXJYU


Yes, I've explained before that this will happen again. If we get involved in a major war, it will be about 4 years after it starts, and it will be resolved in our favor in about 3 years. Apart from what has already been set in motion with the last Jupiter return in 2013-2014, and 2001, there won't be further interventions until 2025. That's my prediction, whatever I might say about what could happen as a result of electing one candidate or another.

So you reckon the US will stay out of any war between Saudi Arabia and Turkey and the Syrian regime. A situation that is rapidly heating up to the boiling point. See http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/74...yria-sunni-war

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

Maybe, but it would be out of character historically for either one of them to start a war outside of what they consider their territory.

China has historically had a very different idea of it's territory than just areas inhabited by Chinese. Through all of it's dynasties, China has claimed vast areas in Central Asia inhabited by non-Chinese. And backed up those claims with military force at a time when technology and infrastructure were a lot poorer than they are now. And when China DIDN"T expand, China was occupied by "barbarians" (non-Chinese speakers), be they Xiongnu, Xianpei, Jurched, Mongol or Manchu. And most recently, partially by Europeans and briefly, Japanese. So where China sees a need for it's control to extend may not correspond to where Westerners (or even Russians) think China's control should extend. Especially since China needs access to more raw materials than it can produce for itself if China is to attain an American standard of living. And Chinese people are not willing to settle for anything less.

Originally Posted by radind

The issue is not hegemony. The near term question is whether or not Russia shows some restraint. In the long term I expect both China and India to grow economically. There is really no way to know, but based on past history, I would expect at one of these countries to initiate a war. I agree that hegemony is not achievable, but that has not prevented irrational acts in the past.

With the size of it's population and economy, China certainly has the best chance of being the hegemon of the next world saeculum. China has been the world's largest economy for most of the period from 220 BC to 1800 AD. though China has had some "bad centuries" at different times.

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

With the size of it's population and economy, China certainly has the best chance of being the hegemon of the next world saeculum. China has been the world's largest economy for most of the period from 220 BC to 1800 AD. though China has had some "bad centuries" at different times.

Don't forget that India also had a large economy before 1800 AD

Originally Posted by radind

Don't forget that India also had a large economy before 1800 AD

India had a religious issue that was it's downfall. Muslim rule of Hindus, which finally doomed the Muhgal Empire (giving the British their opening) when Aurangzeb went jihadist and tried to force Hindus into Islam. Prior to the Mughals, no ruler came close to unifying all of India after Ashoka in the 3rd Century BC.
And India still has a religious problem. The ruling Bharatiya Janata Party is backed by the VIshva Hindi Parishad and it's youth militant arm the Bhajrang Dal (brown shorts) which has gone so far as to force Indian Christians to convert to Hinduism. And India, for all it's Hindu militancy is 20% Muslim (making Islam the nation with the second largest Muslim population in the world) even after Pakistan and Bangladesh seceded from India. Both secessionary states are over 100 million people, making them potential international forces to be reckoned with. All of which gives India a lot less freedom of action than China.

China becoming more aggressive?

China Deploys Missiles on Disputed South China Sea Island


http://www.wsj.com/articles/china-de...od=djem10point
… “China has positioned surface-to-air missiles on a disputed island in the South China Sea, a U.S. official said Tuesday, one of the most aggressive military steps so far by Beijing in a burgeoning standoff with Washington involving warplanes, naval destroyers and increasingly frequent public warnings.”…

Originally Posted by MordecaiK

So you reckon the US will stay out of any war between Saudi Arabia and Turkey and the Syrian regime. A situation that is rapidly heating up to the boiling point. See http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/74...yria-sunni-war

I don't think the USA will send troops to fight in the Syrian civil war, no. But if it does, I suppose it could be an offshoot of the 2013-14 Jupiter Return.

This is a disturbing article with no good news for us.

Ruthless and Sober in Syria


https://www.stratfor.com/weekly/ruth..._campaign=Link


… "Washington can continue to underestimate Russia at its own peril. Russia has indeed poured resources into a maddeningly inconclusive conflict, but so has the United States and so will others who cannot be tempted away from the geopolitical proxy battleground complicated by the presence of jihadists. The problem is that the layers to Russia's strategy tend to be too dense for the Western eye. For Russia, the Syrian battleground is not about propping up an ally through reckless spending, nor is it simply about pursuing an alternative strategy to defeat the Islamic State. Syria is a land of opportunity for Russia. This is the arena where self-control, patience and a careful identification and exploitation of its opponents’ strengths and weaknesses will enable Russia to reset its competition with the West.”…