Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on May 6, 2014
On the Warpath towards WW III
Ever since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the generation that lived through the Cold War era generally assumed that the risk of a major nuclear war had all but disappeared. However, the current Ukrainian crisis has reminded us all that as long as there are still thousands of nuclear warheads in the hands of world powers, the risk of nuclear Armageddon will always be with us.
The Ukrainian conflict is just the most recent of a number of potential flashpoints in the world, that could lead to a major war between Russia and the United States. In recent weeks, there have been numerous articles blaming one side or the other for the Ukrainian crisis. Some criticize the Americans and its NATO allies, claiming they orchestrated a coup d’état to oust the Yanukovych government; while others demonize the Russians, saying that Putin is trying to reconstitute the glory days of the Soviet Union. None of this propaganda – let’s call it what it is – is helpful. It only serves to entrench the positions on both sides, making the crisis even more dangerous. Journalists on both sides claim to be “telling the truth”, when the real truth is that we simply have a competition going on here between two powerful, aggressive nations, led by amoral governments pursuing their own agendas of hegemony.
Let’s take a look at some of the rhetoric coming from the two sides of the dispute:
Russian perspective
The pro-Russian propaganda claims that the American government overthrew the democratically elected government in Ukraine, and installed a puppet regime to do its bidding. Some go so far as to say that the snipers that killed over 100 protesters in the Maidan (Independence Square in Kiev), were Ukrainian criminals hired by the Americans for this purpose. But people who hold these views either don’t know or choose to forget Ukraine’s recent history.
Yanukovych has never been an overly popular politician in Ukraine. This stems back to the 2004 election when he was initially elected as president; however, the Ukrainian Supreme Court ruled that there had been widespread voting fraud and voter intimidation during the election. This precipitated the Orange Revolution, where thousands of Ukrainians demonstrated in Kiev’s Independence Square and in other centers across the country, protesting the ballot box fraud. Apparently, Yanukovych spent $600 million on his election campaign, with half of these funds coming from various Russian sources. The Russians also supplied political consultants for his campaign in an attempt to ensure Yanukovych’s victory. In the end, the Ukrainian court nullified the results of the initial election and ordered a new runoff vote, which was won by the opposition leader, Viktor Yushchenko. Therefore, this election certainly served to alienate Yanukovych from most of the pro-European Ukrainians. This wedge was driven even deeper when after Yanukovych was finally elected, by a narrow margin, as president in 2010, he quickly brought political charges against his main opponent, Yulia Tymoshenko. Yulia was very popular with the Ukrainian people because of the prominent role she had played in the Orange Revolution. She was often affectionately referred to as the “Ukrainian Joan of Arc”. So her subsequent seven-year sentence for embezzlement and abuse of power, in October 2011, did not exactly further endear Yanukovych to the Ukrainian electorate. The trial was viewed by many countries around the world as being politically motivated. It seems that the final nail in the coffin for Yanukovych’s presidency was his refusal to sign the association agreement with the European Union in November 2013. Instead, under pressure from the Kremlin, he opted to accept a $15 billion loan from the Russians. My point is that even if you believe that the Americans orchestrated a coup to oust Yanukovych, he had already lost the confidence of the Ukrainian people. From the time the protesters entered the Maidan in Kiev in January of this year, Yanukovych’s days as president were already numbered. As well, there is no question that the Russians also had their fingers in the pie. So to be honest, both sides share some of the blame for the current situation.
The question of who the snipers were that killed more than 100 protesters in the Maidan, in January 2014, may never be answered. The speculation ranges from mercenaries hired by the Americans to Russian special forces, or even pro-Maidan supporters trying to stir up anger against Yanukovych’s government. We will probably never know the truth, given the fact that no one is going to openly admit to the murder of 100 unarmed protesters.
American perspective
The pro-American propaganda paints Putin and the Russian Duma as an aggressive expansionist group, bent on recreating the former Soviet empire. The Russian invasion and annexation of Crimea is claimed to be an incursion into the sovereign territory of another nation, in direct violation of international law. The Western nations also claim that the referendum held in Crimea, on the question of joining Russia, is illegitimate because it was held on short notice during the military occupation of the peninsula by Russian forces.
Although Putin probably does hold some nostalgia for the days of Soviet greatness, one must put themselves in the shoes of the Russians in order to understand their actions in Georgia and now Crimea. In the days of the Soviet Union, the countries of Eastern Europe provided a large buffer zone between Western forces and Russian territory. However, this buffer disappeared with the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991. Over the past couple of decades, Western control and influence in Europe has gradually crept eastward, as more East European nations have joined the European Union. The people of Eastern Europe had lived impoverished lives compared to the Western Europeans during the Soviet era; so their desire to join the European Union is understandable. They were simply looking for a better life with more economic opportunities. If the movement eastward of Western influence had only been economic in nature, the current crisis may never have arisen. However, the West was foolish enough to include NATO membership as part of the EU package. Under the NATO accord, member states are obligated to defend any NATO member that is attacked. So it should come as no surprise to anyone that this eastward expansion of NATO has only served to upset the Russians. Furthermore, the Americans have placed military bases in Romania and Bulgaria and plan to put missile defense systems in the Czech Republic and Poland. How do you think the US would respond, if the Russians were building military bases in Mexico or the Caribbean? The only countries on Russia’s western border that are not yet part of NATO are Ukraine and Belarus. So the Russians feel like they are being backed into a corner. As a result, Putin has drawn his own red line with the Ukraine, and unlike Obama, he is clearly ready to back it up with military force.
Although the invasion of Crimea by Russia is technically speaking a violation of international law, the Russians view the situation differently because of the peninsula’s history. Crimea first came under Russian control when it was conquered by Catherine the Great in 1783. Apart from brief periods of occupation during the Crimean war (1853-1856) and World War II, it remained within the Russian sphere of influence until the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991. In 1954, Khrushchev transferred Crimea to the Ukrainian SSR which was then part of the Soviet Union. Therefore, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, Crimea became part of an independent Ukraine. So from the Russian perspective, invading Crimea was simply reclaiming territory that they had controlled for centuries. I am not condoning their annexation of Crimea, but rather just trying to understand the Russian point of view.
Russia’s primary motivation for holding a referendum, after their invasion of Crimea, was to try to justify their actions in the eyes of the world. The ethnic mix in Crimea today is 60% Russian, 25% Ukrainian, and 15% Tatar. So if the Russians had simply held an honest referendum on the question of joining Russia, they probably would have won the vote and this may have added some credibility to their position. However, the Russians behaved like most totalitarian regimes. Such regimes are so paranoid about dissident voices, that they always feel compelled to stack the numbers in their favour. The March 16 referendum was flawed in several respects. First of all, dissenters were prevented from expressing their opinions because the referendum question did not give them the option to maintain the status quo. Secondly, the referendum was held within two weeks of the Russian invasion. This was certainly not sufficient time for any kind of reasonable debate to take place. Finally, given the ethnic composition of Crimea, the referendum results were clearly rigged. The official result was 96.8% in favour of joining Russia with a voter turnout of 83.1%. If you take a close look at the math, it is easy to determine that even if all the Russians in Crimea voted yes in the referendum, you would still need the support of 88.5% of the Ukrainian and Tatar voters in order to achieve these results. Let’s not forget some of the relatively recent experiences of Ukrainians and Tatars with Russia. In 1932-1933 Stalin starved to death 8 million Ukrainians in the Holodomor (this means “to kill by hunger” in Ukrainian). Their only crime was that they chose to resist the forced liquidation of their private farms under the Soviet collectivization program. In 1944, Stalin accused the Crimean Tatars of being Nazi collaborators and deported over 200,000 Tatars to Siberia. Over the next three years, 110,000 of the deported Tatars died from starvation and disease. Consequently, I don’t believe for a second that many Ukrainians or Tatars in Crimea voted to join Russia!
The only conclusion that can be drawn after examining the Russian and American perspectives is that both sides bear responsibility for the current East-West confrontation. Both America and Russia try to demonize one another and claim the moral high ground; but there is nothing moral about either of these governments. It is said that “actions speak louder than words” and here are some of these governments recent actions:
America
• The 2003 US invasion of Iraq was an unprovoked attack on a sovereign nation; a blatant violation of international law. Weapons of mass destruction were never found. The war was primarily about controlling the flow of Iraqi oil.
• The Iraq war resulted in 125,000 civilian casualties (a conservative estimate), and the US has left the country in a state of anarchy.
• During the Iraq war, the US military tortured prisoners of war held in the Abu Ghraib prison in Baghdad. The torture included physical and sexual abuse, sodomy, rape, and murder. This was a direct violation of the Geneva Convention on the humane treatment of prisoners of war.
• The US government has killed an estimated 4700 people in drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia in the last 10 years. Although estimates vary, perhaps as many as 20% of these deaths have been innocent people including children. Since when did it become acceptable to murder innocent children in order to kill one or two suspected “bad guys”? This is not the behavior of a civilized nation, but rather the law of the jungle.
Unfortunately, the Russians’ record is no better.
Russia
• Since Putin first took office in Russia in 2000, he has progressively increased restrictions on freedom of the press. His methods have ranged from revoking broadcasting licenses to arresting and torturing journalists.
• At least 17 Russian journalists have been assassinated in Russia since 2000, because of the stories they were investigating. The Russian Security Service (FSB) is suspected of committing these murders; but of course there is no proof.
• Putin has the bad habit of assassinating or imprisoning anyone who has the audacity to criticize him. I guess he just has a hard time getting his former KGB habits out of his system. Here is just a short list of his victims:
Mikhail Khodorkovsky – In 2003, Khodorkovsky was the owner of the Yukos Oil Company and the richest man in Russia. In February of that year, Putin summoned Russia’s most prominent businessmen to a meeting to discuss the state of business in Russia. During the meeting, Khodorkovsky made the mistake of confronting Putin on the issue of state corruption in the Russian business world. Several months later Khodorkovsky was arrested and convicted on trumped up charges of fraud and tax evasion. He spent the next 10 years in various Russian prisons. His oil company was broken up and various parts were sold to state owned companies.
Alexander Litvinenko – This ex-KGB/FSB agent fled to the West in 2000 and was granted asylum in London, England. He wrote a couple of books about his days in the Russian Secret Service in which he was very critical of Putin. He accused Putin of responsibility for the murder of a Russian journalist, Anna Politkovskaya, in October 2006. One month later, Litvinenko was poisoned with polonium-210 during a meeting with Andrei Lugovoy, a former KGB operative. Litvinenko died three weeks later in a London hospital, but a few days before his death he dictated a statement accusing Putin of ordering his death. The subsequent British police investigation concluded that Litvinenko’s murder was a “state-sponsored assassination orchestrated by Russian security services”.
Pussy Riot Rock Band – On February 21, 2012, several members of the female punk rock group, Pussy Riot, put on a performance in a Moscow Christian Orthodox Church. They filmed the performance and then posted it online as a music video. Their music supports feminism, LGBT rights, and is critical of the dictatorial behavior of Vladimir Putin. Three members of the group were arrested and charged with hooliganism. For their crime of “free speech”, they were sentenced to two years in prison.
The war drums are beating louder as the Ukrainian crisis continues to escalate in the eastern part of the country. The Russians claim to be defending the rights of Russian Ukrainians, as Russian troops infiltrate the major eastern cities; and the Americans claim to be defending the Ukrainians’ freedom and right to self-determination, as they support the interim Ukrainian government in Kiev.
So there you have it. Two of the world’s most powerful nations, who are today completely bereft of any moral authority and scarily in control of over 90% of the world’s nuclear warheads. Both governments are ratcheting up the rhetoric. Many people believe that there will never be a nuclear war because no sane country would start a war that might risk their own annihilation. But that begs the question, how sane are either of these countries? Like most dictators, Vladimir Putin is a paranoid personality with an innate mistrust of other people; and the US government, in their arrogance, still believes that they are Ronald Reagan’s “shining city upon a hill”, with God on their side. What do you think the odds are that this will end well?
Kali Yuga
33 Comments on "On the Warpath towards WW III"
Plantagenet on Tue, 6th May 2014 10:17 pm
Its too bad the moronic Obama administration has bumbled and stumbled into a new cold war with Russia. We were told not to worry about Obama’s lack of experience in the international arena, because he could learn on the job. Unfortunately, the learning curve has been very steep and there is no sign even now that he’s figured out what Putin is up to.
MKohnen on Tue, 6th May 2014 11:03 pm
This seems to be a fairly well balanced article. While I don’t necessarily agree with all it’s conclusions, I do recognize that to some extent I am one of Davy’s PPI’s. I can only evaluate international politics through the media. Though I try to balance the equation by reading the various MSM from divergent perspectives, I am well aware that the vast majority of it is propaganda, and I will probably never know anything even approaching the “real truth.”
That being said, who’s responsible for what really doesn’t matter. I fear we are headed for “the Big One”, since that is the only logical result of resource depletion. The US is telling its “fracking lie”, while Russia hides its real depletion rate, and China wrings its hands over the problem of a huge aging population and resource depletion. I would say that all these governments are better informed than any of us here, and they all know what’s just around the corner. Our international politics are nowhere near mature enough to handle this situation equitably, so all sides know war is inevitable. For years I have deluded myself into thinking that this wouldn’t happen; that our crisis would actually bring us together. I believe that the Ukrainian situation and the evolving South China Sea crisis proves my old thinking wrong.
Ergo, who cares who’s to blame. It won’t make my children’s future any brighter I’m afraid. And I really think we are in the opening salvos of “the Big One.”
Meld on Wed, 7th May 2014 1:29 am
well i certainly wont be fighting for my country when the time comes.
antiwarforever on Wed, 7th May 2014 3:10 am
The OP forgets one thing : the civilian casualties (in millions or dozens of millions) if an open war between the West (USA+CND+AUSTRALIA+Japan+EU) and lonely Russia happened. Of course nearly one billion people against 140 million, the forces are not balanced whatever one says of the ruse of Wladimir Putin . It would end up in the genocide of the Russian people . That is the sad truth, that no one on one side or the other wants to acknowledge.
q on Wed, 7th May 2014 3:51 am
antiwarforever – The forces are not balanced for conventional warfare so the war would turn into nuclear one. And forces are well balanced for it, it would end as complete disaster for both sides.
DC on Wed, 7th May 2014 4:19 am
“when the real truth is that we simply have a competition going on here between two powerful, aggressive nations, led by amoral governments pursuing their own agendas of hegemony.”
No, actually we dont. Not even close. Russia was busy hosting the olympics when the amerikans activated its right-sector militants and bused them en masse to Kiev(along with its CIA black op snipers). So whatever one thinks of Russia, there was no ‘aggressive nation pursuing its ‘hegemony’ despite this confused hacks assertions. At least on Russias end.
What a pos article. Anyone that thinks Mikhail Khodorkovsky is some kind of latter day neo-liberal Nelson Mandelaish hero needs to put down the kool-aid pitcher. And pussy riot?! Omg, I can believe this chump added them to his little list. Heaping praise on washingtons comical ‘Orange Revolution’ and Snow Tymoshenko White? In a land of corrupt zionist oligarchs, she fit right in. Crimea ‘invasion’ blah blah illegal blah blah international law blah blah. All u$ gov talking points.
Notice how this fool claims ‘only’ 125k dead in Iraq. The accepted number is over a million dead. Understating the dead by a factor of 8 then qualifying it by saying the estimate is ‘conservative’ doesn’t cut it. But of course, ‘Putin’ threw 3 tone-deaf uS state-dept funded NGO rabble rousers in the crowbar hotel for 2 years.(He had nothing to do with the sentencing) A million dead and 3 ME nations ruined in 12 years vs ‘Pussy riot’…well played!
Cloud9 on Wed, 7th May 2014 6:06 am
Russian bombers off the west coast, Russian subs of the east coast either one of these could turn the lights out in the United States for the next eight years. Then our populations would turn on each other and we would devolve into chaos. There will be no Normandy invasions. One tactical nuke would fry the entire force. Unless both sides agree to a proxy war, this spirals out of control in short order. This is a dangerous game.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 7th May 2014 6:34 am
Geez, here we go again with the Mak and Deec show. Mak is off today but Deec is stepping in. We see the verbal abuse of the US nation and in the same breath the glorification of the opposition as godly and angelic. These poor people were just throwing Olympics and US thugs came in a ruined their utopian brotherly neighborly existence. Deec, just more political ideologue propaganda that is old and stale. We know here how sticky the Puut Cabal is with slim and dirt. They are the best of the BAD. PuuT is the epitome of a blue eyed devil snake. I don’t even have to go into the inept and oligarch mafia from DC (Washington). They are a focus of many on this site in an endless routine of bad mouthing and bashing. This is rightly so but please Deec don’t make me nauseous with your glorifications of your ugly fat pimpled ass Poster Girls of Russia, China, and Iran and then in the next breath breakdown and bash the US, IMA, everything and all that is US from your view of the lowly poor smuk to the 1%er. They are all bad in your eyes and by extension I am bad in your eyes. I do not bash Canada. I did not bash your poster girls except as part of the global bashing I do. But when the Mak and Deec show comes on I find myself sucked into their dark perverse political propaganda ideologue thinking.
Anon on Wed, 7th May 2014 6:52 am
The US is suffering badly from baby boomer disease – too many stupid old farts who still think its 1992 or god help them 1962. Newsflash: Putin has already won this one.
Also, any yanks that think the aussies (or i’ll bet the brits) are keen for this fight have got another thing coming. To clusterfuck & lose two wars in a decade is embarrassing, to follow y’all into a third would be just silly.
eugene on Wed, 7th May 2014 8:48 am
There won’t be a nuclear war unless some idiot pushes the button and there are plenty of those around. And I see plenty who aren’t “stupid old farts”. My read is for the US to pick up it’s war mongering ditty bag and come home. But then what would we do with all those fast jets, massive ships and all the fat, high paying military industrial jobs.
paulo1 on Wed, 7th May 2014 8:52 am
re: “Also, any yanks that think the aussies (or i’ll bet the brits) are keen for this fight have got another thing coming.”
Ditto Canadians. Despite what Harper says, any real support beyond token handwringing and hollow pledges will see his ass marched out of Ottawa. It is why Chretien retained power longer than what was likely. He said no to Canadians going to Iraq…..Harper would have sent soldiers.
This will only help Trudeau and Mulcair. Harper is almost gone.
Paulo
Davey on Wed, 7th May 2014 9:01 am
The Inept DC cabal will push this as far as they can to bloody Puut’s nose then back off. O is a master of political bargaining. He will bargain with the devil. Witness how he sold out to the 1%ers dispite the rhetoric otherwise. The US is now in an interconnected global multipolar world by which it cannot push these issues in its self interest too far without the unintended consequences of pain returning home. The danger now is when will they stop pushing the issue. Will they be like a dog with a bone?
clueless on Wed, 7th May 2014 9:12 am
The US is as greedy as it could get, considering it has built it’s country’s wealth via the industry of war,whereas Russia is just trying to take hold of a “base” for security reasons, nothing more nothing less. If only US can content itself of whatever it already has, and accept the fact that it’s a collapsing super power, the better for world peace.
Boat on Wed, 7th May 2014 9:49 am
I don’t think our 17 trillion debt is a sign of wealth built on the industry of war. Seems to me the opposite. The Russians tried that model and how did it work for them.
For the rest of you that think we lost any war militarily is dead wrong. We follow our leaders but because of our freedom of speech traditions and decent reporting the US population finally finds out the merits of the engagements and shuts them down or funds them with much less complaint.
The US doesn’t go in trying to win wars, if winning wars means killing off populations. We just try contain conflicts situations for the advancement of free trade. I will be the first to admit our leaders haven’t done a good job selection the correct methods in many circumstances. In the US our populations over a decade will influence leaders and will vote out those who make mistakes. It’s not a great process but still as good as any on earth for a large country.
Mark on Wed, 7th May 2014 10:16 am
“The US government has killed an estimated 4700 people in drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan, and Somalia in the last 10 years. Although estimates vary, perhaps as many as 20% of these deaths have been innocent people including children. Since when did it become acceptable to murder innocent children in order to kill one or two suspected “bad guys”? This is not the behavior of a civilized nation, but rather the law of the jungle.”
This is nothing compared to the carpet bombing of cities during WWII. In those instances the civilian deaths were probably like 99.9% of the casualties, and there were tens of thousands in a single bombing run. From that perspective, current warfare has come a long way.
I think it is highly unlikely that there will be a nuclear war between major powers. The leadership of these nations are not suicidal. The biggest danger is an accidental launch leading to nuclear war. The other danger is that two smaller third world countries with nukes could go at it and cause worldwide environmental damage and a nuclear winter.
So far nuclear weapons have been the biggest contributor to world peace since WWII. It is my opinion that without them keeping the peace we would have had several more world wars since 1945. No two powers each with thousands of nuclear warheads are stupid enough to outright invade the other one. Lets hope that record stays intact.
Makati1 on Wed, 7th May 2014 10:24 am
Boat, the $17,000,000,000,000.00+ debt has mostly funded the Military/Security complex. Especially since 2000. Without the Fed printing press, we could NOT fund the military AND everything else. The Annual deficit amounts to about $1,000,000,000,000.00 per year. Tax revenue is falling along with the sheeple incomes and jobs. That is why this cannot go on too many more years.
BTW: China moved an oil drilling rig into Vietnam’s waters near the Spratlys this weekend. Things are heating up in that zone also. Not to mention more Russian bombers off the California coast.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 7th May 2014 10:32 am
Plllease Clue, Russian are out for as much as they can get and they are out for a return to the pride they had when they were the “other” superpower. It is humorous to hear people on this board defend poor little Russia….Geeze they are monsters of politics just like what has become to the US of A.
Boat, there was a time when your portrayal was an educated liberal policy to peruse. Just like with the Native American situation these nice thoughts were there but look what happened to the NA. They were rapped, pillaged, and subjugated by a civilization that ended up rapping, pillaging, and destroying a beautiful continent in the name of progress. Sure if the American’s would not have done it some other civilization would have because that is Human nature. It is a shame we got fossil Fuels to do hyper rape but that is life.
Mark, you can pounce on the American killing machine all you want but that is just the normal for the world. Look at what China, Russia, Iran, Iraq, and a whole host of countries now and in the past have done. Again human nature. The drone thing sucks but we are talking fanatics over there bent on war. If the pressure would not be on them they would bring the war to the USA. Better to fight on their turf and not ours. Their primitive misguided pursuit of religious political ends has help create a global “big Bro” surveillance machine in response. The basterds deserve what they are getting and it is a shame for the innocents but it is the men of all societies who could care less about someone else’s innocents if it is in the name of their own self interests. The men of our species are good at justifying death, rape, and pillage. The problem is again having fossil fuels to hyper turbo charge this evil!
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 7th May 2014 10:46 am
Mak, we are still doing far better than the rest of the world and especially your adopted country that is near economic, social, and ecological collapse. Your poster girls China, Russia, and Iran are basket cases well on their way down the slippery slope of collapse.
Michael Stephenson on Wed, 7th May 2014 11:09 am
In what sense was Crimea “invaded” by Russia? Were landing craft sent across the Strait of Kerch? Or was it invaded by Paratrooper?
The Russian Troops stationed in Crimea had a mandate to be there, agreed by the elected Ukrianian government prior to the coup.
I see little evidence that Russian troops were occupying the Crimean streets prior to the referendum.
Please provide evidence of this invasion as I haven’t seen any so far myself.
There was some long since debunked footage of vehicles which turned out to be footage of vehicles in Russia, at the time.
J-Gav on Wed, 7th May 2014 11:48 am
Thing is, the collapse of any one of the countries yawl have mentioned above, no matter which came first, would have massively negative economic impacts on the others. This is what the lack of systemic resilience and redundancy in globalized trade has led us to. So many Plan Bs and Plan Cs begging to be elaborated.
Davey on Wed, 7th May 2014 1:25 pm
Listen to Gav folks he knows the skinny. As always good posting Gav!
Boat on Wed, 7th May 2014 1:30 pm
Makati1,
A couple years ago I went to the Treasury Dept and added up 25-30 years worth of interest on the debt and quickly came up with over 8 trillion. The site didn’t go back any farther than that but it would be fun to know how much interest we have paid since 1776. I bet it would eat up most of that 17 trillion. Every month another 20-30 billion in interest. tick tock.
However me being the optimist that I am see an easy way to fix.
450 billion every year in unpaid taxes. We could cut the military budget in 1/2 and still more than double the Chinese and Russians combined. Throw in a few missed hip, knee and organ replacements and bingo were paying down the debt in a substantial way. End Immigration and bingo were on a path of a slowly decreasing population. When industry creas for workers because we have almost no unemployment go to a flat tax and bingo we have 10’s of thousands of workers to be retrained that push inefficient paper that has no value. etc
GregT on Wed, 7th May 2014 2:11 pm
Boat,
If you add up unfunded liabilities, personal, municiple, state, and federal debt., the shadow banking industry, and Wall Street. Every single American would be millions in debt to the central banking cartels.
You would understand that, if you had of taken the the five or so hours to listen to, or watch, the two small presentations that I sent your way.
I would also recommend Albert Bartlett’s lecture on the exponential function, which was covered in part in Chris Martenson’s presentation on Energy, Economics, and the Environment.
Until you grasp the gravity of our situation, and understand the reality of the role played by the Zionist central banking cartels, there is absolutely no point in speculation.
There is no way out of this mess, that doesn’t involve poverty, extreme hardship, and a massive reduction in our populations.
GregT on Wed, 7th May 2014 2:31 pm
““The greatest shortcoming of the human race is our inability to understand the exponential function.”
Dr. Albert Bartlett, Professor Emeritus, Physics, University of Colorado, at Bolder
GregT on Wed, 7th May 2014 2:44 pm
“”I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies . . . If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] . . . will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered . . . The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.”
Thomas Jefferson — The Debate Over The Recharter Of The Bank Bill, (1809)
J-Gav on Wed, 7th May 2014 2:54 pm
Greg T – You have a point, as usual. But the poverty and extreme hardship you mention will probably not be evenly distributed. Those individuals)and communities where possible) that have taken or are taking steps toward preparation, will have a leg up as far as reducing the ‘extreme’ side of things is concerned. So life should still be worth living – to the hilt! just as it always has (or should have) been. That positive side, of course, assumes we’re not overwhelmed by climatic or nuclear or solar flare disasters which could be unmanageable …
GregT on Wed, 7th May 2014 3:21 pm
J-Gav,
I completely agree with you, as usual. My wife and I are well on our way in our plans towards a sustainable lifestyle.
IMHO, life was always worth living to the hilt. We don’t need 90 percent of the stuff that many people believe necessary. As a matter of fact, 90 percent of what we work for every day is not only completely unnecessary, it is only adding more complication and stress to our lives.
It is very difficult to get most people to understand this, as they have been indoctrinated and brainwashed into maintaining the status quo, since their childhoods.
A very good quote from these boards just yesterday;
“With the aid of fossil fuel, human civilization set out to conquer nature, to bend the laws of physics, to reach the stars, to conquer evil and to replace nature with a glossy plastic existence. It turned out badly for almost everybody, and the worst is yet to come.
In the end, those of us remaining will probably also be very glad to just return to our small plot of land and our gardens, content with that infinitely small but satisfying role to play in this amazing universe.”
Northwest Resident
J-Gav on Wed, 7th May 2014 4:21 pm
GregT – Good quote from Northwest (I had missed it). Seems a pretty sure bet that less bombast and more humility would make for more liveable communities, doesn’t it?
GregT on Wed, 7th May 2014 6:00 pm
Yes J-Gav,
Humility would also go a long way towards a sustainable relationship with our one and only home. The planet Earth.
Our sense of self-importance, is leading us to a dead end.
Makati1 on Wed, 7th May 2014 8:54 pm
Food for thought:
http://search.yahoo.com/search?ei=UTF-8&fr=crmas&p=zero+hedge
“Guest Post: False East/West Paradigm Hides The Rise Of Global Currency”
“…It is widely expected that as sanctions snowball between Russia and the U.S. that the dollar will end up on the chopping block. China has asserted its support for Russia in opposition to NATO interference in Ukraine. The stage has been set. I have warned for quite some time that the development of East/West tensions would be used as a cover for a collapse of the dollar system. I have warned that among the American media this collapse would be blamed on an Eastern dump of foreign exchange reserves and treasuries, resulting in a global domino-effect ending U.S. world reserve status. In turn, the international community would be conditioned to see this as the mere bumbling of a spoiled America gone power-mad, rather than the result of a covert program of economic destabilization. This might lead to all-out war or a fiscal firestorm that leaves much of the world crippled and desperate for aid….”
Davy, Hermann, MO on Wed, 7th May 2014 9:21 pm
Might happen Mak with Russia and China in such bad shape economically. It is what counties in dire straights have done in the past when faced with tremendous internal problems. The last sentence: “leaves much of the world crippled and desperate.” This will be especially true for China when she cannot import enough food and when Russia has no money to buy needed goods for a narrow resource driven economy.
Bloomer on Thu, 8th May 2014 9:44 pm
One of the most balance account of the current tensions in the Ukraine that I have read. I am on the side of peace which seems to be the last place that the US, Russian and Europe want to go. In the middle of all this is the Ukrainian people who are stuck in the middle of a power struggle between East and West.
Davy, Hermann, MO on Fri, 9th May 2014 6:55 am
Bloomer isn’t balance, peace, and reason refreshing over extremism, propaganda, and self-interest. I do believe the 3 powers mentioned are not war mongers like we have seen in history. All these countries are sophisticated. The problem lies with the self-interest, the competing ideologies, and brinkmanship. There is also the problem with this whole issue of “red line in the sand”. A further problem is a lack of respect for the complex interconnected nature of the global system. These actions have consequences and unintended consequences both of which can push systematic risk. Our current human system is by nature non-resilient, non-sustainable, and overly efficient with corresponding brittle supply distribution. All systems have a limit to disequilibrium. All our local systems directly rely on and are supported by this global system. This is never so true as with food, energy, production, and infrastructure maintenance. These are the basic and primary to all our local functioning. Let me repeat that all of us depend on the global even the aboriginals in the deep jungle depend on the global BAU to manage the man-poisons (WMD,NUK,Chem). The problem I am seeing as the system approaches it break point, as is apparent we are near now, it destabilizes. This is especially true now with so many vital aspects of the global system being repressed from normal cycling for example the financial system or over-population. In a normal ecosystem such structures cycle within the bigger cycle to avoid a severe destabilization that the system as a whole cannot recovered from. We humans are using technology, cheap energy, and complexity to repress negative elements in the system. These elements are not being allowed to stabilize through cycling. We are doing this because of the all-important pursuit of growth. This is understandable because society is in a fight with entropy and chaos. Growth, complexity, and energy intensity are needed to fight this. So how does this relate to the Ukraine? Well what I described above is on the line in the Ukraine. You have nodes of importance that cannot be breached without the whole system crashing and destroying much of the global world’s infrastructure and by extension population density. Europe and the US are powerhouses in the world economy and Russia is the biggest energy supplier. You have Ukraine in the middle with such a large population, land mass, a critical food producer, and key energy distribution node. Ukraine is big and positioned correctly to break the system to a lower level of equilibrium which will mean much less energy intensity, complexity, and carrying capacity i.e. bottleneck and die off.