There are some good interviews on the Bloomberg channel in this moment. You may not agree with all that is spoken but at least it is on an intelligent level without too much apparent bias. regards f9
The equilibrium which rests on three mutual enemies is more stable than bi-lateral confrontation. Look what happened in 30's. The world was doing just fine with three major players: UK/US vs. Hitler vs. Stalin. UK tricked Hitler into invading Soviets and watched the fight preparing to the inevitable stand off with the winner of the struggle. UK/US then patiently watched the Soviets bleed out because of their own incompetence - and the rest is the history. Never underestimate the most dangerous and lethal species that rules the Earth - White Old Money. Nothing and nobody (Russians and Chinese don't even come close, and the Muslim world is largely tribal) even comes close to their cunning and their skill in playing "The Game", after all, they had centuries to practice. The White Old Money made the Israel what it is today and will make sure it stays that way. Besides, I think the Iranians learned the lesson of WWII and Cold War, and they would rather keep Israel as a very close enemy. Eventually, with help from Russians and Chinese they become a larger power to contend with. I think the rest of the Arab leadership deals rather successfully with their own internal threats to power - they're pressing the fundamentalists hard but not to hard. After all, keeping the enemy of your enemy can be useful for squeezing the aid out of US. That's precisely the issue - they know they can't succeed military wise. Their armed forces are the joke. Recent events had shown that a fucked up military is a fucked up military,no matter how good the equipment is. Georgia followed the Iraq pattern - it was cooked and served on a platter in less than 48 hours basically. I think that's just a part of the show. There's no real threat there, so it's just going to follow in the tracks laid out by the rest of the smoke and mirror tricks - war on drugs, stopping the communism from spreading in Latin America, Noriega, Somali, etc.
Reality is an illusion. Nothing is what it seems. At the risk of repeating myself - never underestimate the cunning and ruthlessness of most dangerous species of all in the food chain: White Old Money. They ruled the earth for the past 200 years. I don't think it's going to change because of another silly S&L scandal.
R Do you feel that WOM (white old money) will be permitted to take control in asia as the balance of wealth shifts, or do you imagine that wealth will continue to be centred in US/Europe, regardless. regards f9
At the risk of sounding rhetorical, I will ask why do you think there is, or ever was a balance of wealth. The relationships in the world economy most closely resemble the game of tic-tac-toe. The game theory tells us if both parties (and for the sake of simplicity lets assume two parties involved) play rationally and don't make a mistake - the game will always end in a draw. For one side to win, one has to alter the rules of the game. Who writes the rules of the game? Who owns the magic printing press? Who controls the price of oil? Who's got the military that can destroy anybody's armed forces within a few days time? Most importantly - who controls the value of the US$? If I am who does all of the above and you can't really trade without first exchanging your slave labor manufactured crap for US$ - who really writes the rules of the game? *slave labor manufactured crap - refers pretty much to anything in Asia, including Japan, Taiwan and Korea - a bit more sophisticated crap made by a higher paid slaves. The question is - has anything really changed compared to 1700's, 1800's Different players, same game, same outcome. The road to the top of the food chain is evolutionary and not revolutionary. 1 yr is nothing compared to a couple of hundred years worth of evolution. Unless we are talking about an E.L.E. (Extinction Level Event), everything that's happening is evolutionary. Monkeys are still trying to catch up with us humans. May be not the best metaphor, but it is what it is.
Quote from romanus: At the risk of sounding rhetorical, I will ask why do you think there is, or ever was a balance of wealth. The relationships in the world economy most closely resemble the game of tic-tac-toe. ..................................................... R I must say that you approach the simple game of greed with a curious mindset. My question to you, which I thought seemed reasonable to a person of your intellect( as it left the keyboard) remains as yet, unanswered. And so I shall simply try again. "Do you feel that WOM (white old money) will be permitted to take control in asia from AOM ( Asian Old Men) as the balance of wealth shifts, or do you imagine that wealth will continue to be centred in US/Europe, regardless." Permit me to flesh this question out a little with some background. In this moment power in Asia is held firmly by AOM. Granted there are large dollar denominated reserves which means in simple terms that WOM and AOM appear to share the power, but this in it self represents a significant transfer if you care to look back 30-40 years. These dollar reserves will diminish along with the usefulness of US and it's dollar as time passes by. Before we get to the tabled question, ponder upon this thought if you will. Something is occurring as we speak that a few people (myself included) could see developing for the past several years. Westerners subscribe to the media-feed belief that non-Westerners are lead by evil greedy people, who covert power at all costs, whereas Westerners are lead by reasonable people always protected by the strength of their democracies and constitutions. In it's altruistic form "democracy" has something to do with selfless concern for others I believe. Westerners are reminded of this now silly flawed notion every 3, 4, or 5 years depending upon their country. A Constitution is a reverencial document of founding. Either you open your heart to it or you do not. The reality of these notions as applied by current Western govs lies precisely 180º to their original meanings. Right now, many good people (starting in US and UK, but spreading) have had their beliefs shattered into a million pieces. Their reward for living a good life is increasing debt servitude whilst they watch helplessly as a small bunch of crooks walk off with all the money in return for their immoral and illegal actions. Modern "Democracy" at work. OK so far? In this brave new commodities war we have entered, the terms of engagement are being written as they are being applied and so a little experimentation is required. Asia with it's billions of people holds one distinct advantage (well two actually). Firstly, these people represent wealth generation as they coerced from the paddy fields and farmlets with the trappings of middle class. This can happen relatively quickly because they are moving directly from feudal times into the 21st century. For them it is a copper-less, credit driven electronic world . The added benefit is that the option nuking a few of them is not a good look within the media (the other group of pawns in the great game.) US/Europe on the other hand have an aging tapped out middle class, who are by and large a bloody hinderance. They eat all the good grass and produce no milk in a manner of speaking. US must open it's borders to 103M Mexicans and to the riches of Canada and I am not including Canadians in this sentence ... sorry folks. Europe is in the same mess. Enough rambling and back to the question... WOM versus AOM So, do you think that the AOM will permit WOM to take control of the wealth in Asia, or do you imagine that wealth will continue to be centred in US/Europe, regardless. R, If you cannot focus upon this question then I despair, and I will be at a complete loss to continue. regard f9
See www.anglospherechallenge.com and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Geographical_Pivot_of_History about the Heartland and world resources. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Managerial_state Also lookup James Burnham, and his theories of how all enemies should be destroyed, not simply contained, and that any resource or means of culture, economy, intervention and military should be employed to do this. Also read insightful articles on www.aei.org ... RAND Corporation also have a lot of insight, research on these subjects - they have especially been looking into election theories and economy effects, social psychology and social control... It is all extremely interesting - highly sophisticated science, i.e pretty heavy reading... Then you will get the picture. Make sure you are within the "demographics" that Charles Murray writes about in The Bell Curve... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Bell_Curve and talks about on PBS Think Tank TV series with Ben Wattenberg... Read the transcripts with Murray on the site for Think Tank ... you will be amazed - truly. RAND, AEI, PNAC etc ... they are researching into how to "manage" - "surprise" - YOU GUYS... THAT is what you can call BIASED in some research institutions... all funded by the "elite" through scholarships, grants etc. finding out how to best "manage the herd"... LOL!