Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 06, 2019

China Considers Protecting Its Ships From ... U.S. Piracy

Will China join the U.S. led 'coalition' to escort ships through the Strait of Hormuz?

It sounds unlikely but this Reuters piece claims that China is thinking about it:

China might escort ships in Gulf under U.S. proposal: envoy:

China might escort Chinese commercial vessels in Gulf waters under a U.S. proposal for a maritime coalition to secure oil shipping lanes following attacks on tankers, its envoy to the United Arab Emirates said on Tuesday.

“If there happens to be a very unsafe situation we will consider having our navy escort our commercial vessels,” Ambassador Ni Jian told Reuters in Abu Dhabi.

“We are studying the U.S. proposal on Gulf escort arrangements,” China’s embassy later said in a text message.
...
President Donald Trump said in a June 24 tweet that China, Japan and other countries “should be protecting their own ships” in the Gulf region, where the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet is based in Bahrain.

It was not clear if Washington had made an official request to Beijing, which has had to tread softly in the Middle East due to its close energy ties with both Iran and Saudi Arabia.

So far it is only Britain which will go with the U.S. plans. France, Germany and other 'allies' rejected U.S. request to join the mission.

Reuters seems to misunderstand what the Chinese ambassador really said.

The message is in two parts: "we will consider having our navy escort our commercial vessels" and "We are studying the U.S. proposal on Gulf escort arrangements." The Chinese embassy made no connection between the two statements.

It is not in China's interest to join the anti-Iran 'coalition' the U.S. wants to build. But it is in China's interest to protect its commercial ships. But it is not Iran that might endanger them. It is also in China's interest to study the plans the U.S. has. If only to counter them when necessary.

China continues to buy Iranian oil. The New York Times just made big, hostile weekend splash about it:

China and other countries are receiving oil shipments from a larger number of Iranian tankers than was previously known, defying sanctions imposed by the United States to choke off Tehran’s main source of income, an investigation by The New York Times has found.
...
The Trump administration is starting to intensify sanctions enforcement to try to end the exports to China, which continues to be the largest buyer of Iranian oil. On July 22, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced sanctions against Zhuhai Zhenrong, a Chinese state-owned enterprise, and its top executive, Li Youmin, for “violating U.S. restrictions on Iran’s oil sector.”
...
“While I’m glad the administration sanctioned an initial round of Chinese actors, it must step up strong enforcement to deter Chinese and other foreign actors from violating U.S. sanctions against Iran,” said Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida. “The Iranian regime has blatantly shipped millions of barrels of oil to China.”

To really tighten the screws on China, the Trump administration would need to punish the People’s Bank of China or other Chinese banks that engage in transactions with the Central Bank of Iran, Mr. Nephew said. The United States could also penalize the energy giant Sinopec, which, like Zhuhai Zhenrong, also imports oil from Iran.

China is unlikely to stop buying preferentially priced oil from Iran at least as long as the current trade war with the U.S. continues to intensify. It is also unlikely to join the U.S. 'coalition'. But it will protect its commercial interest - i.e. its ships that haul goods between Iran and China.

China fears that the U.S. 'coalition' will confront its ships for breaking unilateral U.S. sanctions. The British did just that with the Iranian tanker they pirated at Gibraltar. There is also a historic precedence that demonstrates the necessity to protect Chinese ships against such U.S. schemes:

It is remembered much better in China than it is in the United States, that in 1993 the PRC was the most conspicuous victim of principled US piracy in the matter of the shipping vessel Yinhe.

bigger
The US Navy confronted the Yinhe and forced it to interrupt its voyage and remain at sea for 20 days, until China agreed to proceed to a Saudi port for its 628 containers to be searched for chemical weapons precursors allegedly destined for Iran. Fortunately for China—and to the considerable embarrassment of the United States—the containers were found to contain nothing other than paint.

The United States declined to apologize because it had acted in “good faith”, which is apparently another name for “bad intelligence” (though some redfaced US officials privately accused the PRC of conducting a “sting” solely for the purpose of wrongfooting the United States). For its part, the PRC accused the United States of acting like a “self-styled world cop” and the Yinhe became something of a symbol for US double standards whenever the subject of “freedom of navigation” comes up.

For additional interesting details of the Yinhe story see here.

China will not allow a repeat of such action. It knows that the U.S. is increasingly hostile towards it and that it has to prepare for a larger conflict. It assumes that the current trade war is just the start of a much larger military-industrial game plan. As described by Peter Lee:

Decoupling the US economy from China, squeezing China related expectations out of the market, and shifting to a war with China footing insulates the US military from economic and political pressures to pursue a more moderate course in East Asia.

I expect IndoPACOM to agitate for an aggressive program--via its allies in the Philippine military--to confront the PRC over its artificial islands, especially Mischief Reef, in the South China Sea.

These facilities are a major affront to IndoPACOM's manhood and must be removed. And that means war, or something close to it.

Remember, as IndoPACOM jefe Admiral Davidson put it: "China controls the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war."

He's not making these statements to signal American surrender, folks. IndoPACOM is China hawk HQ.
...
Between the global economic slowdown and the regional military buildup, I guesstimate the cost of taking on the PRC at a trillion dollars over the next decade.

But like they say, War with China: one trillion dollars. Postponing the loss of US hegemony in the Pacific: priceless.

This U.S. - China confrontation will be with us for at least the next decade. In such a scenario it makes no sense for China to make nice by joining a U.S. 'coalition' that is hostile to its Iranian friends. What it can, and should be ready to do, is to protect its ships from U.S. piracy.

Posted by b on August 6, 2019 at 19:09 UTC | Permalink

Comments
next page »

Yes, China needs to protect Their ships mainly from Amerika and it's puppets in the ME.

Posted by: jo6pac | Aug 6 2019 19:45 utc | 1

China also can use the Caspian via a Russian or Kazakhstan route.

Posted by: Nick | Aug 6 2019 19:46 utc | 2

Here Iran Kazakhstan China Economic corridor From China Ningbo harbor to Caspian port
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dzwMNfRdbfM

Posted by: Nick | Aug 6 2019 19:48 utc | 3

Made about a half-dozen comments about this and related developments at the week-in-review open thread, the most important was Rouhani telling one and all that if Iran's ships can't transit the Strait of Gibraltar, then no British ship will pass through Hormuz. I also linked to the piece by Peter Lee. If China decides to protect its tankers carrying Iranian crude from being preyed on by anglophone pirates, the stage will be set for what the China Hawks desire--military confrontation with China. And in case you missed it, Hudson's essay on US energy policy ties right in with what's playing out globally.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 19:53 utc | 4

if Russia and China are smart, they will use the US call for international protection for shipping in the Persian gulf as an excuse to insert naval forces permanently into the gulf. This would all but negate US/Israeli warplans vs. Iran.

Posted by: paul | Aug 6 2019 20:01 utc | 5

I wish China would make some statements that make it clear they will not participate in the illegal blockade of Iran, which is an unprovoked act of war according to international law. They should make it clear that US sanctions have no bearing on who they trade with and point out that the US is not the worlds police and that they are willing to do whatever it takes to support their sovereignty and ability to transit the seas unmolested. This would maybe wake up some of the US/UK public to how crazy and dangerous our sanctions and aggression towards Iran are.

Posted by: Jason | Aug 6 2019 20:01 utc | 6

Nick, is this the same waterway used for trade with China in the days of Alexander the Great?

Posted by: AriusArmenian | Aug 6 2019 20:06 utc | 7

Many militaries have their own version of the V-1 German "Buzz Bomb." Here's Iran's version.

Here's Putin's statement related to the Outlaw US Empire's unilateral withdrawal from the INF Treaty which he closes with the following thin hope:

"Despite the recent developments, Russia still hopes that common sense prevails, and that our US colleagues and their allies have a sense of responsibility toward their people and the entire international community. It is our belief that the actions taken by the United States that brought about the dismantlement of the Treaty on the Elimination of Intermediate-Range and Shorter-Range Missiles will inevitably devalue and shatter the foundations of the global security architecture, including the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty and the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

"This scenario could signal a new start for an unfettered arms race. In order to avoid chaos with no rules, restrictions or laws, we need to once more weigh up all the dangerous consequences and launch a serious and meaningful dialogue free from any ambiguity.

"Russia considers that it is necessary to revive without delay meaningful talks on ensuring strategic stability and security. We are ready to engage in these efforts."

IMO, until the Neocons and their Neoliberal allies are ousted from all Anglophone governments, no "meaningful talks" will be undertaken.

Oh, and Iran has boosted the range of its missiles to include London.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 20:17 utc | 8

Michael Hudson says ..."The only attempts to restrict oil imports are the new Cold War trade sanctions to isolate Russia, Iran and Venezuela."... As you see today in the news that is being played out, Bolton pressuring Maduro, Pompeo lashing out at Iran, Trump tackling Russia. News headlines daily, no? These carpetbagger scum bags are up against more sophisticated and armed adversaries now and are looking tired of the game. Meanwhile, all the opposition players are gaining momentum, and can feel the drunken bum in decline, and can be contained. A small fry having fun watching the fight.

Posted by: Taffyboy | Aug 6 2019 20:22 utc | 9

thanks b.. clearly reuters is wrong and your interpretation is correct... china has to address the bully in some way... this will be part of it...

this rubio is a real jackass.. " violating U.S. sanctions against Iran,” said Senator Marco Rubio, Republican of Florida. “The Iranian regime has blatantly shipped millions of barrels of oil to China.”

what makes this jackass think us sanctions are international?? international lawlessness is what the usa does 24/7... this is one more example where idiots in the usa think their local agenda is applied to the rest of the planet without question... that is part of the reason why the usa is such an exceptionally idiotic nation...

Posted by: james | Aug 6 2019 20:25 utc | 10

@9 taffyboy... the usa didn't get their installed puppet, so it is on to the next ramp up in conflict when the usa bully doesn't get its way... too bad bribery and everything else the usa excels at, didn't work...

Posted by: james | Aug 6 2019 20:26 utc | 11

Re: karlofi 8

Although the nuclear confrontation between the US and the USSR/Russia never really ended, IMO the nuclear arms race was reignited when the US abrogated the ABM Treaty. Russia chose to respond asymmetrically by developing a whole new series of nuclear weapons, including non-ballistic intercontinental missiles and nuclear-powered cruise missiles with almost unlimited range. These negated the ability of the US ABM/BMD systems to intercept them. Also included in new Russian systems were hypersonic Mach10 missiles that made US aircraft carriers and the rest of the US fleet sitting ducks, and a remote controlled sub/drone that reportedly carries a 100 MT warhead, possibly salted with cobalt. Not to mention the S-400 and S-500 interceptors; the S-500 reportedly can intercept ICBMs in the stratosphere, too.

Of course, Mr. b already stated this in a much more eloquent fashion in a recent post, Why The End Of The INF Treaty Will Not Start A New Arms Race

Posted by: Perimetr | Aug 6 2019 20:39 utc | 12

karlof1 #8 -

Unfortunately, as acknowledged during US-Australian consultations on Sunday, the US is already on course to introduce the missiles described by the now defunct INF treaty into the Pacific region, to be aimed at China. US Sec Defence Esper: ""We now are free to develop that range of weapons, 500 kilometres to 5,500 kilometres, that had not been available to us from a ground-based deterrent posture."

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-05/defence-minister-linda-reynolds-rules-out-us-darwin-missiles/11382852

Posted by: jayc | Aug 6 2019 20:55 utc | 13

The US of A is getting closer and closer to a real shooting war in the Persian Gulf and possibly in the Pacific and the South China Sea. There is irony in all this. Historically the US came to blows with Britain in 1812, over interfering in US trade with continental Europe, and almost, during the American Civil War over the building of Confederate blockade runners and warships such as the CSS Alabama; the CSS Shenandoah, CSS Florida, among others, which decimated the US merchant fleet. In 1917 the US declared war on Germany over the sinking of US and British merchant and passenger vessels. And US entry into World War Two was hastened by the sinking of US flagged merchant ships, culminating in the torpedoing of two US destroyers, the Kearny and Reuben James, off the coast of Iceland in October 1941. About 6 weeks later, Japan would raid Pearl Harbor and formally settle the issue of US participation in WWII. This time around, things are a bit different. The US is provoking a rising new super power, namely China, over our willingness to block Iranian oil shipments. The consequences of this policy are far reaching. A major war between two nuclear super powers could erupt, putting all humanity at risk. I hope cooler heads prevail.

Posted by: GeorgeV | Aug 6 2019 21:00 utc | 14

The US of A is getting closer and closer to a real shooting war in the Persian Gulf and possibly in the Pacific and the South China Sea. There is irony in all this. Historically the US came to blows with Britain in 1812, over interfering in US trade with continental Europe, and almost, during the American Civil War over the building of Confederate blockade runners and warships such as the CSS Alabama; the CSS Shenandoah, CSS Florida, among others, which decimated the US merchant fleet. In 1917 the US declared war on Germany over the sinking of US and British merchant and passenger vessels. And US entry into World War Two was hastened by the sinking of US flagged merchant ships, culminating in the torpedoing of two US destroyers, the Kearny and Reuben James, off the coast of Iceland in October 1941. About 6 weeks later, Japan would raid Pearl Harbor and formally settle the issue of US participation in WWII. This time around, things are a bit different. The US is provoking a rising new super power, namely China, over our willingness to block Iranian oil shipments. The consequences of this policy are far reaching. A major war between two nuclear super powers could erupt, putting all humanity at risk. I hope cooler heads prevail.

Posted by: GeorgeV | Aug 6 2019 21:00 utc | 15

Perimetr @12--

Agreed, and it was Bolton who got W Bush to drop the ABM Treaty. IMO, given the unprecedented lack of the Outlaw US Empire's military readiness in all branches, but especially USN & USAF, it's highly likely MAD no longer acts as a credible deterrent to counteract Russian capabilities, and that the Russians know that; thus, their lack of hurry to match their adversary's action. As Peter Lee points out in his blog essay, one aim is to get China roped into all new arms control treaties, but nothing is happening on that front now.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 21:08 utc | 16

Thanks for the background on China's experience with empire of the global seas, b

I don't believe that these global confrontations between China/US we are seeing are going to go on for the decade that you wrote about.

I take issue with the quote from Peter Lee
"
But like they say, War with China: one trillion dollars. Postponing the loss of US hegemony in the Pacific: priceless.
"

It is not just US/empire hegemony in the Pacific that is at stake in this current war, it is global private finance hegemony that is at stake.....and empire is losing day by day, confrontation by confrontation. The situation in Venezuela is just as critical as the potential for piracy in the Gulf to global empire hegemony.

This will not go on for a decade. I doubt that it will go on for another year without "resolution".

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 6 2019 21:09 utc | 17

So far it is only Britain which will go with the U.S. plans. France, Germany and other 'allies' rejected U.S. request to join the mission.

The "So far" part did not last long. The German regime is now considering to join US forces in the Persian Gulf. I was aware that would happen. Germany is not a sovereign Nation and will do whatever its boss tells it to. That's just the way it is. The fact that the US ambassador to Germany was not declared 'Persona Non Grata' after his last egregious interference into German affairs gave it unmistakably away. But then, there are no German affairs. They are US affairs. The article is in German, as it was not published on the English version. But you will manage, I am sure.

Federal Propaganda Conference

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Aug 6 2019 21:12 utc | 18

Meanwhile Russia brings more nations to host their Army Games, and by rumours wants to give test runs for all-women tank crews, very politically correct :D

http://armygames2019.mil.ru/location_of_the_contests_en

The map is just asking about Obama's Pivot To Asia :)

Posted by: Arioch | Aug 6 2019 21:17 utc | 19

Here is an important part of the article by Peter Lee:

"Failure of trade negotiations was pretty much baked in, thanks to Lightizer's maximalist demands. And that was fine with the China hawks. Because their ultimate goal was to decouple the US & PRC economies, weaken the PRC, and make it more vulnerable to domestic destabilization and global rollback. If decoupling shaved a few points off global GDP, hurt American businesses, or pushed the world into recession, well that's the price o' freedom..."

They want to hamper the global economy and roll back globalisation now, because many scientific scenarios show that the US will retain the most of its hegemony if the global economy is severely hampered, thus slowing down the catch up process of the developing world.

They realised that globalisation is now weakening the US, as it leads to the rise of developng nations.

Here again i will mention the world scenario that results in the lowest loss of power for the US, according to large amount of studies on this issue.

This is the scenario where the US retains some of its power, although at the price of self harm too. The strategy is to make everybody lose, and make others lose more than the US would lose.

"SSP 3 (Socio-Economic Pathway 3) - Fragmentation (or Fragmented World)

The world is separated into regions characterized by extreme poverty, pockets of moderate wealth and a bulk of countries that struggle to maintain living standards for a strongly growing population. Regional blocks of countries have re-emerged with little coordination between them. This is a world failing to achieve global development goals, and with little progress in reducing resource intensity, fossil fuel dependency, or addressing local environmental concerns such as air pollution. Countries focus on achieving energy and food security goals within their own region. The world has de-globalized, and international trade, including energy resource and agricultural markets, is severely restricted. Little international cooperation and low investments in technology development and education slow down economic growth in high-, middle-, and low-income regions. Population growth in this scenario is high as a result of the education and economic trends. Growth in urban areas in low-income countries is often in unplanned settlements. Unmitigated emissions are relatively high, driven by high population growth, use of local energy resources and slow technological change in the energy sector. Governance and institutions show weakness and a lack of cooperation and consensus; effective leadership and capacities for problem solving are lacking. Investments in human capital are low and inequality is high. A regionalized world leads to reduced trade flows, and institutional development is unfavorable, leaving large numbers of people vulnerable to climate change and many parts of the world with low adaptive capacity. Policies are oriented towards security, including barriers to trade."

So globalisation and global cooperation is key and they need to stop it if they are to retain some power.

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 6 2019 21:22 utc | 20

Like I said the other day -- China should each Wednesday roll a new Carrier off the docks.

Posted by: bjd | Aug 6 2019 21:25 utc | 21

"But like they say, War with China: one trillion dollars. Postponing the loss of US hegemony in the Pacific: priceless."
Maybe so, but the Empire will first of all spend a lot more and borrow everything - and that's exactly why it won't reach its goal and lose its hegemony.

Posted by: Pnyx | Aug 6 2019 21:30 utc | 22

GeorgeV @15--

Thanks for the historical recap. IMO, none of the nations currently targeted by the Outlaw US Empire's illegal actions will backdown--Syria, Iran, Venezuela, Cuba, China, and Russia with Yemen, Iraq, Nicaragua, Turkey, and Bolivia waiting in the wings, while the entire NAM condemned the economic terrorism being waged. Even Brazil's Bolsonaro signed on to the BRICS statement about adhering to the UN Charter and International Law. Realistically, the Empire only has two allies it can count on--Occupied Palestine and the core of the UK, Britain--neither of which will be of much help. That being the case, the woeful USN will be facing the very well prepared Russian, Chinese and Iranian navies well within range of Iran's anti-ship missiles. Only two carrier task forces are currently at sea, the remainder remaining in port because of a vast number of readiness deficiencies, both vessel and air wing readiness. The upshot is Trump's bluster will be challenged as it is already with unknown consequences given recent erratic USN behavior.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 21:37 utc | 23

@ karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 20:17 utc | 8

IMO, until the Neocons and their Neoliberal allies are ousted from all Anglophone governments, no "meaningful talks" will be undertaken.

Isn't that the sad truth? 'Sad', because I cannot see that these criminal psychopaths will let go of the button without pushing it. A fatal situation in which the only people that could do something about it are busy shooting each other now.

@james | Aug 6 2019 20:25 utc | 10

...this is one more example where idiots in the usa think their local agenda is applied to the rest of the planet without question... that is part of the reason why the usa is such an exceptionally idiotic nation...

The problem seems to be inseparable part of the cognitive dissonance of the entire Western hemisphere. With populations that suffer from cognitive dissonance, criminal psychopaths have easy game to line the populations up behind them. The reason why there is no massive anti war movement in the US and UK. Especially UK folks should remember 'Threads' by the BBC (pointed to by TJ in the open thread).

People must understand what is at stake. The hopes that no nuclear conflagration will start with a similar scenario as shown in Threads, seem to be utmost delusional. The people with access to the button that unleashes the doomsday machine are not in anything remotely resembling a right mind. They are extremely mentally ill - to gamble with the continuation of life on Earth. How sick in the head does one have to be to consider that? Does that not warrant an immediate admission to a psychiatric ward?

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Aug 6 2019 21:38 utc | 24

The underlying struggle is between the maritime empire- spawned by the 'discovery' of the Atlantic Islands and eventually America- and land based Eurasia/Africa.
The obvious course, which will take time to fructify, is to marginalise maritime trade, including that of oil by employing interior pipelines, rail and road communications. This, it seems to me, is what the whole Silk Road project is about.
If Iran can move its oil overland and supply itself with necessary imports through the interior routes the US blockade will not only fail but, by leading to blockages in sea lanes, work against the interests of the Empire.
In the long run the use of sanctions and blockades weakens the imperial system by forcing its customers to improvise and look elsewhere for supplies.
The basis of imperialism is long distance maritime trade, when that dries up or becomes uneconomical, the imperial system crumbles.

Posted by: bevin | Aug 6 2019 21:48 utc | 25

Quick thoughts:

1) Sad the article mentions the cost of war in money, not lives.

2) Where are the leaders voicing diplomacy, cool heads, and reason?

3) Sinking a ship/ships is a favored US way to drag people into war.

4) A war with China will cost over $1 trillion.

5) Bullish on the MIC, unfortunately.

6) Also bullish on de-dollarization.

China and India have been world's largest two economies and powers for much of human history. After a Eurosurge, that trend is reverting.

There's nothing much the US and others can do about this. Bluster and bluff, huff and puff, and that's about it, unless they want to destroy what they cannot control in a truly MAD pact.

Posted by: OutOfThinAir | Aug 6 2019 22:12 utc | 26

>"Foreign Minister Israel Katz said Tuesday that Israel was involved in a US-led naval mission to provide maritime security in the Strait of Hormuz, where Iran recently seized merchant ships."
https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel-involved-in-us-led-naval-mission-in-strait-of-hormuz-foreign-minister/

Posted by: BraveNewWorld | Aug 6 2019 22:16 utc | 27

The Chinese are perfectly well aware that they face a Thucydides trap and that conflict with the United States is unavoidable. To be certain, they want to delay that conflict breaking out into violence as long as possible, as each day that passes the empire becomes weaker while China becomes stronger; nevertheless, they know that the conflict turning violent is inevitable, with this inevitability reinforced by the continuing divergence of American policy from reason.

The Chinese realize a couple additional details: A) That inevitable fight will cripple the empire and dramatically accelerate its decline. B) China might lose the battle.

Because of this it is crucial for China that the battle be fought somewhere far from their shores. The Chinese have been developing the South China Sea as their preferred battlegrounds, but the Arabian Sea and Gulf of Oman would work just fine for their purposes as well. They just need to keep the fight far enough away from home that America cannot manufacture an excuse to attack China's civilian population (Americans love killing civilians and will do so at every opportunity that they can claim it to be accidental).

I somewhat doubt the Chinese are ready to deliberately spring the Thucydides trap yet, but they have to eventually rather than let the empire choose the battlefield (which will obviously be somewhere that the empire can get at civilians too). We'll see if the Chinese move a significant force to the Arabian Sea.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 6 2019 22:58 utc | 28

"This U.S. - China confrontation will be with us for at least the next decade."

By 2028, China's GDP will be twice ours and her defense budget will therefore be equal to ours.....

Posted by: Godfree Roberts | Aug 6 2019 23:07 utc | 29

@ Passer by with SSP3 scenario

I am curious where you are finding these scenarios and apologize if I missed your provision of such earlier

I disagree with the scenario because it must make the assumption that the world stays under the global private finance hegemony and i don't see that happening

In fact I continue to see the world engaged in WWIII over who controls the money system and the private folks are losing because in spite of spinning every geo-political plate they can, the rest of the world is moving closer together and refusing to back down from the bullying.

It will be empire that initiates the last stupidity that will end the world as we know it or be the tipping point that brings most of the worlds civilization states together to isolate and eliminate empire of private finance

And it is not going to go on like this for decades or even years because the civilization states know better than to let it drag on and empire cannot maintain faith among the jackbooted that long, IMO

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 6 2019 23:11 utc | 30

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 6 2019 20:17 utc | 8

Oh, and Iran has boosted the range of its missiles to include London.

While I consider that good news, I failed to find any information about it after one hour of search under various terms. Could you please provide a link to this information? It would be a game changer of epic proportions - Europeans would be now under the threat that has been sold to them for the past years by the US.

Thank You.

Posted by: nottheonly1 | Aug 6 2019 23:11 utc | 31

karlof1 @ 23

"Realistically, the Empire only has two allies it can count on--Occupied Palestine and the core of the UK, Britain..."

Occupied Palestine - just love it!

Posted by: Nathan Mulcahy | Aug 6 2019 23:32 utc | 32

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 6 2019 23:11 utc | 29

No one can say for sure if this or that scenario would happen or not; these are the scenarios for the world in the 21st century developed by the science community for the InterGovernmental Panel on Climate Change, in order to estimate the impact of Climate Change on the world. These scenarios also deal with world GDP as this is important for estimating the level of Climate Change, and the important part is that they estimate GDP per country up to 2100 under various scenarios. They are also used by the OECD for forecasts.

So this, at least to me, is important, as it shows the various types balance of power in the future under various scenarios. Or level of multipolarity, if you wish.

I noticed the SSPs are used by some US Think Tanks for future forecasts (such as Pardee Center for International Futures, whose work is used by the US National Intelligence Council’s Global Trends reports), so it also came to my mind that US strategists must be aware of the SSP scenarios for the world and are probably taking them into account.

Some scenarios lead to high level of multipolarity - the rise of the developing world, and some do not, or at least lead to slow catch up process in which the West retains lots of power, although at lower level than today.

I think that there is good possibility that the US may be secretly trying to realise some of the SSPs where they manage to retain some power, although such scenarios usually are also the worse for the world, with the lowest level of development, characterised by conflict, lack of cooperation and deglobalisation.

See all of those studies if you are interested. Pay attention to China vs US estimates, as well as poor and mid income countries vs high income countries GDP estimates.

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378016300681#sec0025

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378015000837

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378015000242

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162506001387

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378004000111

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959378015000382

https://www.gtap.agecon.purdue.edu/resources/download/6003.pdf

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 6 2019 23:54 utc | 33

@24 nottheonly1.. you and i tend to see it the same in terms of those who are pushing the agenda here being crazy.. it is unfortunate, but that is what it looks like to both of us...

@ 25 bevin and @28 william g.. both insightful posts.. thanks...

Posted by: james | Aug 7 2019 0:04 utc | 34

The Empire is going to blow a cool $211M to build yet another utterly useless military base besides a new Chinese cargo port in Darwin, Australia. China can always rely on US stupidity and hubris to fall for their strategy of gradual death by a thousand cuts.

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 7 2019 0:17 utc | 35

nottheonly1 @30--

There's this tweet citing INRA:

"Iran has extended the range of its missiles to counter the regional and extra-regional threats | IRNA

"(extra-regional threats = The United Kingdom is within range of Iran's ballistic missiles)"

And this article from 5 August citing an Iranian general.

One simple way to increase range is to reduce payload. Currently, the UK's a very divided nation in the process of splitting apart. It would be supremely foolish to target it with essentially meaningless missiles that would only galvanize the population and do the Tories a massive favor they can't accomplish themselves.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 7 2019 0:20 utc | 36

Makes me wonder if the real objective of the Hong Kong/Black Umbrella thing is persuading Taiwan to go for full independence from China

Posted by: Ghost Ship | Aug 7 2019 0:21 utc | 37

4 - karlofi - Hudson's Energy Policy

If by 'plays right into US policy' you mean:

"The short-sightedness of America’s aggressive oil diplomacy is causing opposition in Europe as it buckles under unprecedented summer heat waves, just as U.S. cities are being devastated by drought, forest fires, floods and other extreme weather."

The only problem is the claim is patently a specious futurology. Europe is not 'buckling' under 'unprecedented' heat waves. It was a week of very hot weather, but with far fewer deaths than in previous decades. Greenland is 'melting!' as it has every year since the Year Dot, and will be frozen solid again in 30 days. The USA is not 'devastated', unless he means the NOAA-certified 2019 January to June COLDEST SIX MONTHS IN RECORDED HISTORY, ...after the NOAA-certified 2017-2018 (MINUS) 0.056-degree GLOBAL COOLING that up-ends the very core of AGW Theory and blows up their 'causation' claim.

Again Hudson veers into 'End of the World in 18 Months!' woowoo-land:

"Warmer air temperature means a higher rate of evaporation, and hence more rain, tornados and flooding, as we are seeing this year.

If that were true, (and it's not), the Sahara would be the largest inland sea. You remember the Sahara, where IT SNOWED THIS PAST WINTER for the first time anyone can recall. AGW Theory clearly predicts gradually warming global temperatures, and gradual MODERATION of temperature extremes. What we are seeing with the NOAA-certified 2019 January to June COLDEST SIX MONTHS IN RECORDED HISTORY, is just a common weather phenomenon of the US High Plains, where LINGERING COLD FRONTS cause moist Gulf air flow to dump rain and hail, like the GRAPEFRUIT-SIZED HAIL in chilly-August Edmonton last week.

In fact, across the US, people are reporting an unusually MILD summer after an unusually COOL spring. In the PacNW, across Puget Sound, in the Dog Days of August, we barely break 80F and farmers are reporting their best crops in THIRTY YEARS! It's a beautiful sight!

Again, the perfidious malingerer Hudson:

"It is one thing to say that global warming, climate change and the resulting extreme weather are existential threats to present-day civilization and economies. It is another to spell out the preconditions for solving the problem in the sphere of economic and tax reform, military and U.S. national security policy."

Repeating, AGW Theory calls for MODERATION of weather extremes. Read Aarhenius. As far as 'pre-conditions' IPCC is calling for Zero Carbon by 2050, under their egregious $2,700-a-CO2-Ton tax regime. That's $34 a gallon of gas, or EU8 a liter of petrol, for everyone. An energy HOLOCAUST! It will cost as much to fill your tank, as to buy a used car to get to work. Anyone who thinks they can take 8,000,000,000 humans and shove them into energy tithe-tax cattle cars to 'Save The Planet' is either certifiable, or they're making bank by publishing End of Days tripe to Green Press.

The fact that AGW Theory has now been debunked by the climate itself, after IPCC models have WILDLY missed their estimates EVERY YEAR since the peak 1998 temperature high, (and far below 1934 high and 1945 high), should tell any political science observer we are entering a New Dark Ages of Corporate:State:Scientocracy, of DELIBERATE destruction of global food security and COMPULSORY starvation of global energy security.

It's not rocket science. People will pay ANY PRICE for artificially scarce resources, and oh, how much better, if Global Deep State can TAX THEM FIRST to create those scarcities! Reminding, Cheney's destruction of Iraq's $15 a barrel Food for Oil spiked oil TEN TIMES, the greatest surge in strategic resource costs in human history. Only the beneficence of nature and back-to-back record grain harvest prevented BILLIONS of humans from a global pandemic of starvation.

Now imagine instead, IPCC's tax regime for $900 a barrel oil SIX TIMES HIGHER THAN CHENEY'S, not for two years, but for TWENTY YEARS! And if the scales haven't fallen off your eyes yet about the Globalist Deep State agenda for depopulation by 'structural adjustments', look at Zimbabwe and Venezuela. The Neue Buchenwalden are going to let those 10s of MILLIONS starve EN MASSE!

Our AGW future isn't +1.5-degree by 2100. Our AGW future is a Scientocratic jackboot stomping on the neck of our food and energy security.

Posted by: Terry Michels | Aug 7 2019 0:40 utc | 38

For what it is worth, here's a Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) paper on the foreign military presence in the Horn of Africa region and surrounding areas.

Neil Melvin, "The Foreign Military Presence in the Horn of Africa" (SIPRI, April 2019)

There are a number of CGTN videos of China's military base in Djibouti and troop movements from China to the base there. Here's just one such video:
Video of Chinese military ships leaving Guangdong for the Chinese naval base in Djibouti in 2017.

Posted by: Jen | Aug 7 2019 0:42 utc | 39

@ Passer by with the links to ScienceDirect...thanks

I skimmed the links enough to convince myself that, like economic modeling, it all depends on your assumptions about how the world works. In no economic model, nor these, are there alternative global finance structures....there is only private finance in the West, that is being challenged.

I think the assumption of an ongoing global private finance controlled world is why we are experiencing the conflicts all around us which I call WWIII.

The future of humanity is much more constrained by who owns the world of finance than any other factor, IMO, except Gaia has the final word.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 7 2019 0:51 utc | 40

b said;" What it can, and should be ready to do, is to protect its ships from U.S. piracy."

Absolutely, but, what really transpires will set the tone for the near future.

I hope not, but I believe China will roll over for the empire, and find some way to defuse the situation without a confrontation.

We'll see....

Will someone, anyone, stand against the empire?

Posted by: ben | Aug 7 2019 1:14 utc | 41

If China is convinced to send more ships to the region, it shouldn't be a problem for them. They already have a flotilla in their anti-piracy duties. And supplies from their Djibouti naval supply depot will make things easier for them.

However, I get the feeling that by having others patrol the Strait of Hormuz, it would create an opening for US forces to attack. IF such an attack did occur, Iranian forces may have a difficult time to distinguish between which cargo vessel belongs to enemy forces. IIRC, doesn't China already have a rail system (OBOR) in place to move goods? If so, they wouldn't even need to participate in this mess.

Posted by: Ian | Aug 7 2019 1:22 utc | 42

As to the US strategy: I quite like the SSP3 scenario, so called, in which the US fragments the rest of the world in order to maintain relative strength even though these actions diminish itself.

Sharmine Narwani in the wonderful interview on RT's Renegade Inc a few weeks back made that same supposition: namely that the US is going down but if it can drag and crush other players down with it, its relative position is maintained.

~~

As to China's strategy. There is a school of thought that says the Thucydides Trap is NOT inevitable, and I am of this school - especially when it comes to China, which plays not by ancient Greek rules but from its own knowledge of the universe.

The more that China rises, the closer I accord with psychohistorian's view that the game is being played by private finance against public finance, and for control of all of it.

China is not a nation state but a civilization state, as Martin Jacques has illustrated so well. China therefore will not play war by attacking another state but instead by subsuming that state's culture into its own - as in fact the US has done with the world until now, as the Hollywood wave breaks, and rolls back.

That is, if in fact China even wants to play war. A culture that understands the Taoist laws of the universe - where grasping for a thing pushes it away, and where to have a thing one must be that thing, for example - is unlikely to fight against the western empire using the same paradigms that have brought that empire to its own demise.

~~

China will fight the Chinese way, just as Russia has fought the Russian way, and as Iran is fighting in the Persian way. I think none of these ways depends on anything the US understands or expects.

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 7 2019 1:23 utc | 43

Terry Michels @37--

No. Hudson is not a climatologist; he's a political-economist. What's to be heeded is the policy ploy of US Energy Dominance to thus render other nations dependent.

As for the reality of the Climate Crisis, I've already provided the scientific proof of its existence and have told deniers where they need to extract their head from. The physics and chemical evidence is ironclad--period.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 7 2019 1:26 utc | 44

@43 karlof1

Yes, your correspondent presents yet another simplistic view that conflates weather with climate.

Thanks as always for your many contributions. I don't always get the time to respond, but I always read them, and many's the time that I can even sail out on some of the links, and be gone far beyond the horizon ;)

Posted by: Grieved | Aug 7 2019 1:31 utc | 45

Like I said the other day -- China should each Wednesday roll a new Carrier off the docks.

Posted by: bjd #21

I dont buy that line bjd. China does not have to build carriers as missile technology has leapfrogged their utility. Monitor USUK carriers and battleship course and get a precise fix on their GPS position and target accordingly. Easy and cheap.

China can then get on with building the social and economic capacity of their citizens. They are going flat out on a number of domestic industries to achieve just that. No need for warmongering on anything like the US scale. The USUK or B team has built themselves an obsolete and bloated arsenal that now drives their national budget. AND many of their citizens are fully aware of that stupidity.

Posted by: uncle tungsten | Aug 7 2019 1:34 utc | 46


On the Climate Change issue seen from a geopolitical point of view i can add that i have seen the estimates about who loses the most and who gains the most.

Russia, Canada and Scandinavia are the biggest winners. The US, Europe overall, and China are neutral.

The biggest economic losses are estimated to be in the global south - Latin America, Africa and India, Australia to some extent too. This is also bullish for large migration waves, the way i see it.

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 1:54 utc | 47

I expect IndoPACOM to agitate for an aggressive program--via its allies in the Philippine military--to confront the PRC over its artificial islands, especially Mischief Reef, in the South China Sea.

These facilities are a major affront to IndoPACOM's manhood and must be removed. And that means war, or something close to it.

Remember, as IndoPACOM jefe Admiral Davidson put it: "China controls the South China Sea in all scenarios short of war."

He's not making these statements to signal American surrender, folks. IndoPACOM is China hawk HQ. ......

'LET'S BOMB EVERYTHING': PHILIPPINES PRESIDENT DUTERTE URGES U.S. TO DECLARE WAR ON CHINA
"I right behind you" This is the Duterte calling out US warmongers and home and in the US. They (US) are trying to make me the bait!

Posted by: col from Oz | Aug 7 2019 1:59 utc | 48

Grieved @44--

Thanks for your note! I mentioned earlier that Iranian, Russia, and Chinese chess masters were well ahead in their gambit versus the obviously inexperienced Outlaw US Empire's, which was again placed in check. In that comment, I reviewed the current inability of the Outlaw US Empire to project force as it was once capable of 20 years ago. And to have any chance of winning in the current theatre of operations--the Persian Gulf Region--the Empire requires 5-6 or more carrier groups where it can currently muster only 2, and even those aren't 100% capable. That fact is perhaps the #1 reason why the military continually has refused to go to war against Iran even when it had all those assets already within Iraq. In military parlance, Iran can be interdicted to a degree but it can't be eradicated without the Empire and its few allies sustaining unacceptable damage themselves--what point is there going to war to advance the interests of Occupied Palestine and Saudi when they're both destroyed by that war and no Rapture comes? IMO, the Saudis have finally seen the light, coincidentally right after the UAE did, and both are now rising to the bait deployed by the Russians with their collective security proposal.

It's that 1-2 punch of Russian proposal followed by China's escort trial balloon that has no counter by the Empire, which was topped by Iran's pragmatic ploy of if we can't go through your strait then you won't go through ours. What move remains for Trump? The Zionist offer to escort shipping will be nixed by UAE and Saudi as they don't/can't risk any further escalation--they are already checkmated.

US Imperialists think no further ahead than their Wall Street allies--one Q at a time--and are compromised by their hubris such that they are unable to see many things plainly. For example, you're threatening peer militaries on their side of the planet without your own military capabilities even close to being prepared--"We've done it before, and we'll do it again" goes the refrain--well, no you haven't.

I see the Fed was able to staunch the bleeding for today, but gold broke 1500, and tomorrow's another day. The key indicator is the global bond market as it's always the bond holders--the .1%--that get saved ahead of all other players as admitted in every recap of previous downturns. And the current trends look poor indeed.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 7 2019 2:24 utc | 49

Sometimes I wish the US would step over the line decisively, just so Russia would nuke them, and it would be DONE already.

I’m sure I’m not alone, as a Nihilist. I’d be happy to sacrifice myself, if it’s for a better World.

Posted by: Featherless | Aug 7 2019 3:04 utc | 50

karlof1 @43

"As for the reality of the Climate Crisis, I've already provided the scientific proof that its existence is total bullshit and have told the climate cultists where they need to extract their head from. The physics and chemical evidence is ironclad--period."

Multiple comments on everything. Shut down anybody that remotely disagrees with you. Increasingly dismissive & arrogant as you try to direct the narrative.

This constant 'thanking' of others (and of course the return 'thanking') is just puerile and childish. A sure indication that the comments section has finally reached 'peak American stupidity' - a phenomenon where a critical mass of American commentators has finally been reached. Echo chamber validation is complete & god forbid anybody straying from the party line.
The only person who needs to be thanked is B - the person putting in all the work.

Pull your head in matey & take a deep breath.

Posted by: ted01 | Aug 7 2019 3:20 utc | 51

@ karlof1 who wrote
"
I see the Fed was able to staunch the bleeding for today, but gold broke 1500, and tomorrow's another day. The key indicator is the global bond market as it's always the bond holders--the .1%--that get saved ahead of all other players as admitted in every recap of previous downturns. And the current trends look poor indeed.
"
The global bond market is touted as where the big players and money is but I posit that precious metals are where the real power and control is and will come from in the future.

Bonds are pieces of paper backed by the US Reserve Currency which is worthless and so all the bonds just represent DEBT and nothing more. As a storage of wealth they fail because they have no intrinsic value and haven't since 1971.

When the music stops do you want a piece of paper with value based on the US dollar or precious metals that have more history of intrinsic value shared all over the world?

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 7 2019 3:27 utc | 52

Terry Michels @37

Our AGW future isn't +1.5-degree by 2100. Our AGW future is a Scientocratic jackboot stomping on the neck of our food and energy security.


Thank you for your post, that needs to be repeated. The AGW scam is the biggest non-scientific lie the world has ever seen. It is all about money and control. Where I live we are seeing this now, the government is banning use of oil for heating, claiming it will save the planet. If the planet needs saving it is from these people!

Posted by: Norwegian | Aug 7 2019 5:25 utc | 53

psychohistorian,

I'm putting you in my block list for your unhinged goldbuggery.

Posted by: Jonathan | Aug 7 2019 5:48 utc | 54

RE: Missile technology. It's been obvious since missiles were invented that the future of air combat was drones and "precision guided" missiles. Humans are expensive to keep in the plane, and they can not take the "G"s, they die without oxygen, etc. And the US Air Force is run by and for pilots, and they have been resisting all that, they like being pilots. So that is why we have lots of large expensive aircraft with pilots, sitting in missile silos is boring. The Chinese and Russians (and in fact most everybody else by now) has given it up or settled for a few token carriers etc. Keeping it cheap. And of course the non-state actors, as they say, all get straight to the drones and cheap rockets, then they graduate to missiles. Now everybody is using cheap chinese drones.

And it's finally got to the point where it cannot be ignored, everybody can hit back.

Posted by: Bemildred | Aug 7 2019 6:04 utc | 55

"So far it is only Britain which will go with the U.S. plans. France, Germany and other 'allies' rejected U.S. request to join the mission."

Yeah . . . well so far is the most important operative in that sentence. That unreconstructed slug, Mike 'the paper tiger' Pompeo has been scuttling around trying to stand over the 3rd rate adherents of 'america is the greatest empire' since the euros gave them the big knockback.

Australia was one of the first to cop a slap from the rusty steel glove encased in a tatty, rotten and rapidly disintegrating velvet plush. As this Channel 9 report demonstrates in that unquestioningly inimitable way that Oz media uses to repeat the lies of their betters eg the bullshit about the 3rd boat, which was a criminal enterprise engaged in transporting stolen Iranian oil, a well known, widely reported fact that the Nine report omitted.

Needless to say all the corrupt and fawning australian media have hopped on board this convoy of lies by behaving just as they did with Pompeo's demand from the day before, in that case the 'request' to station nuclear armed ballistic missiles on Australia's Northern coast - by insinuating these are already done deals so aussies should talk about something else.

We can see right from the start that Australia's government owned and managed Australian Broadcasting Service has been pushing the population toward the use of Australia as a nuclear missile base with nonsense such as this where a self styled 'defence expert', a not very erudite academic who happens to be a notorious 5 eyes' asset, repeats the usual lies concerning China's defense planning in China's backyard - the South China Sea. Ask the people of Puerto Rico whether they would have preferred if the US had knocked up a few artificial islands or invade their homeland then rape butcher and rob Puerto Ricans, just to make the Caribbean 'american'.

This is crazy stuff one can only assume that the few remaining Australians who still hold huge investments in the unprincipled aand depraved Australian 'resources' industries have done the numbers and calculated that half a pie in an enviroment full of starving fellow citizens which richly rewards those with portions is way better than living in a society where everyone gets a whole pie made of ingrediants divided equally among all and that external support via america's GWOT is the best method of securing that.

I'm still amazed that so many Australian bourgeoisie are so busy scrabbling for the few crumbs left on the table by the likes of Gina Reinhart, that they fail to comprehend the crumbs are a once in a lifetime trail leading to the demise of 99% of the Oz population.

Australia's population continuously expanded by the policy of importing maximum numbers of europeans the more stupidly conservative the better - see the influx of white South Africans since 1990, or the stupid Ukrainians & Balts arriving by the planeload to keep wages low, now means Australia is no longer self sufficient in food, meaning we have to keep selling off everything we own just to stay alive. When the last hole in the ground has been dug the demise begins.

Except for the blackfellas who have learned adaptability over 60,000 years (It is amazing how quickly that exotic imported animals such as the buffalo are adopted as clan totems by blackfellas) who will revert back to hunting and gathering tucker rather than hunting out stupid pieces of coloured paper or metal discs to exchange for tucker.

The whitefellas will disappear fast. As soon as the energy to keep the air conditioning going in their ugly rabbit warren apartment blocks stops the dying will start. No more instant meals in the freezers of the local supermarket, they simply will not have a clue what do do. That is particularly true of the mobs who have jumped aboard over the last 100 years, who spend their time trying to keep the real Australia outside their life. With no tradition of working with the place rather than supressing it, they will not last a decade.

Posted by: A User | Aug 7 2019 8:12 utc | 56

@ #2 Nick if you think schlepping oil across land from one end of China to the other side is an economically viable solution, you may want to brush up on 1) chinese demographic distribution and 2) the costs of land based commerce versus water based commerce. Ever wondered how tiny Holland, Belgium and UK could be so rich, or why Russia never had colonies?

Posted by: EtTuBrute | Aug 7 2019 9:35 utc | 57

I continue to see the world engaged in WWIII over who controls the money system and the private folks are losing because in spite of spinning every geo-political plate they can, the rest of the world is moving closer together and refusing to back down from the bullying. Pyschohostorian..@

psychohistorian's view that the game is being played by private finance against public finance, and for control of all of it. China will fight the Chinese way, just as Russia has fought the Russian way, and as Iran is fighting in the Persian way. I think none of these ways depends on anything the US understands or expects. by: Grieved @ 42

The USUK or B team has built themselves an obsolete and bloated arsenal that now drives their national budget.AND many of their citizens are fully aware of that stupidity. by: uncle tungsten @ 45

It is becoming clear, the elected politicians in USA-UK, are no longer independent governors of the masses, as politicians they merely rubber stamp the orders of their bankers in Mussolini style. Collectively these governments lack sufficient force to enforce the sanctions, the private banking sectors have ordered the politicians to direct the governments to impose.. .. but the private bankers federal reserve, BIS, etc do have the power to make their will happen..
Free and open expression, protected under the constitution, are being snuffed out by laws, which I am sure the courts will affirm over constitutional protections; generally few members of the governed masses are satisfied with this state of affairs..(government without the people so to speak). The governed in America and Britain seem about to split with their governments..likely the one's with the personal weapons will win out probably that's why the episodic false flag mass shootings to false flag justify take the guns away from the masses doctrine. My opinion no one will give up their guns.

Posted by: snake | Aug 7 2019 11:05 utc | 58

Grieved @42 pointed out: "China is not a nation state but a civilization state"

This is very true, but it doesn't matter how civilized China is. The barbarians will force the issue. It doesn't matter how rational you are, you cannot reason with a rabid dog. No matter how much you try to appease and calm that rabid dog it will eventually turn on you and bite because it is not rational and can never be. The Chinese, along with the Russians, have been trying to reason with the mad dog empire since it destroyed Yugoslavia. Has the empire really listened even once in all that time? No, the empire's madness has just compounded as its decline progressed.

The Thucydides trap isn't something China gets a choice in. The only party that can prevent it is the empire, but there are no forces within the empire moving in that direction. The only way that China can force-disable the trap would be to somehow overnight become the undeniably dominant military power on the planet such that the empire would be terrified to even consider "bloodying their nose". Here we are talking about the development of some sort of game-changing new tech like atomic weapons were and having it demonstrated, à la Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The demonstration is necessary as the empire is no longer capable of reason: They need to see it... feel it.

But that is even less in character for the Chinese, and they are not pursuing anything like that in any case.

The Thucydides trap is unavoidable because the US is no longer a rational actor on the world stage, and has not been for decades. China cannot fix that no matter how hard they try. The one thing that the Chinese can do about the Thucydides trap is to deliberately spring that trap in a way to minimize damage to the world, including the USA. If the Chinese choose not to do that the trip will still be sprung, but in a time and place of the empire's choosing, which would probably be Taiwan, or perhaps even Hong Kong and southern China (R2P and all of that nonsense).

If the Chinese are successful in springing the Thucydides trap in a controlled manner, out in the middle of the sea, it could be that no civilians get harmed at all. Only some military hardware destroyed and soldiers killed. That is really the best possible outcome at this point.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 7 2019 11:20 utc | 59

China will fight the Chinese way, just as Russia has fought the Russian way, and as Iran is fighting in the Persian way. I think none of these ways depends on anything the US understands or expects.
Posted by: Grieved | Aug 7 2019 1:23 utc | 42

Very true. China will let the US huff and puff and wear itself out at great expense in money, assets and material resources, while China herself nimbly avoids the blows and uses the momentum of US' own blows to cause maximum destruction to the attacking forces. Putin-style judo defence with a Chinese flavour, one might say. (Putin's judo itself originates from the Far East, of course).

Posted by: BM | Aug 7 2019 11:31 utc | 60

The only way that China can force-disable the trap would be to somehow overnight become the undeniably dominant military power on the planet such that the empire would be terrified to even consider "bloodying their nose". Here we are talking about the development of some sort of game-changing new tech like atomic weapons were and having it demonstrated, à la Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 7 2019 11:20 utc | 60

The masterful capture of the British tanker under the bloody noses of the British warship - complete with threat to the warship not to endanger their own lives - is the perfect counter-example. By their action Iran not only bloodies UK noses but implicitly also US noses - it was a game-changer, that showed up the USUK as a paper tiger while Iran is a tiger with real teeth (within it'a own region and in defence).

The US military is overstretched, worn out, its ships, aircraft and weapons don't work properly, its servicemen lack morale, sense of direction, and motivation, and its leaders are self-deluded through hubris and criminal corruption. Under these conditions a simple event like the capture of a tanker can be a game-changer. If the US tries to pull a stupid stunt using force in the South China Seas it can rapidly find the tables turned by China in an analogous manner. No "nuclear breakthrough" is required other than a "hubris breakthrough". Paper tigers are very flammable, and burn up quickly when put to the match, with little effort on Chinese part beyond wisdom, foresight, preparation and execution. The same 4 critical elements - wisdom, foresight, preparation and execution - can be used to describe the Iranian execution, and of course also the Russian.

Posted by: BM | Aug 7 2019 11:49 utc | 61

Most people miss what it is all about .It is about DEDOLARIZATION and not about war, which no one can afford. It is SOUND and FURY signifying the collapse of the West, because the US is deindustrialized and BANKRUPT. Russia, China entering the stage-prepare for a new world by the collapse of the old financial system,the crisis is on the way.

Posted by: Friar Ockham | Aug 7 2019 11:51 utc | 62

@58 you're confusing things.
Today it's an open globalized market with financial system and credit based economic hyperaccelerate their activities creating an inflated record. Who can have faster transfer of goods can have a higher inflated records.
A much different time when the western colony are built based on monopoly and gunboat politics. We no longer need to find out where in the world spices or silk can be found.

Posted by: HW | Aug 7 2019 11:55 utc | 63

The "So far" part did not last long. The German regime is now considering to join US forces in the Persian Gulf.
Posted by: nottheonly1 | Aug 6 2019 21:12 utc | 18

You appear to have misread the article, as I see it. It states that the block on taking part in the proposal stands, although the statement applies to the present point in time and under the present circumstances. In other words, circumstances can change - what is new? That a change of stance in the future cannot be comprehensively ruled out is no major change of position. Whilst you could argue that the creation of the slight opening is merely preparation for fully opening the door, that is reading more into it than is there in the article, and it is possible, but there is no evidence for it at present.

Posted by: BM | Aug 7 2019 12:04 utc | 64

About the many comments here talking about the Thucydides Trap.

The USA is really exceptional in the sense that, since its foundation, it has been a very lucky nation: every time all the stars and planets aligned to give the Americans the best possible historical outcome with the least possible damage.

It's path to the sole superpower was very smooth.

Even then, the circumstances that made it the world's sole superpower (lone superpower) were exceptional, without any close parallel in History. Not only the stars and planets, but also all the galaxies and dark matter and whatever other quantum shit alligned to give this unipolar configuration. And, even then, it only lasted 17 years (1992-2008).

Unipolar world orders are unique in human History and very unstable. China and Russia know that, when the USA falls from grace, there won't be another sole superpower (i.e. another unipolar world order). That's not their will, that's the simple recognition of the objective reality.

Hence the choice is not really between unipolar and multipolar, but in which terms the new multipolar order will be structured on. The concept of Thucydides Trap will only apply on regional blocks ("spheres of influence").

Posted by: vk | Aug 7 2019 12:11 utc | 65

The obvious course, which will take time to fructify, is to marginalise maritime trade, including that of oil by employing interior pipelines, rail and road communications. This, it seems to me, is what the whole Silk Road project is about.
Posted by: bevin | Aug 6 2019 21:48 utc | 25

Road transport of course is phenomenally expensive, inefficient, and damaging to the environment. Astonishingly, what seems to be the game-changer is high-speed rail, which according to the claims is meant to be highly energy-efficient and economical (one suspects such claims may be heavily weighted by the disproportionate costs of road transport, as the energy and financial costs of transport by massive container ships and supertankers are supposed to be phenomenally low).

One experience of high-speed trains is enlightening: whilst travelling on a TGV at 400km/hr feels phenomenalogically rather similar to travelling in a normal train at 150km/hr but somewhat quieter and smoother, the shattering experience is that of a total electical cutout - sitting in total silence with the noisy air-conditioners finally silenced, with not one iota of vibration, and on a very very gentle incline, we were floating effortlessly and silently through the air like a paper dart quietly gliding through still air. Seeing the landscape gently waft past the windows at around 60km/hr was like a dream, it did not seem to match up with the apparent reality of our stillness. Some 20 years ago, it was an experience I shall never forget, and speaks volumes about the potential energy efficiency of high speed rail.

The Chinese are also currently building high speed rail at a great pace - one track-laying machine can progress at 2 or 3 kilometers per day (if I remember correctly). There is also a high speed rail project in Iran.

The maritime-land transport balance has changed forever. I wouldn't write maritime transport off though - only the stranglehold on power that maritime powers once had can be written off.

Posted by: BM | Aug 7 2019 12:36 utc | 66

BM @61 about changing the game.

But the game has not changed. Iran's capture of the tanker may be viewed as a tactical setback by the empire, but the empire still views itself as the undisputed military power on the planet and it still believes that it must utilize that power to maintain its dominance. The empire feels certain that if it doesn't maintain that dominance then what the empire has done to other states will be done to it. This is life and death to the empire. The only thing that will stop the empire's rush into the Thucydides trap is the certain knowledge, from what little forebrain it has down to the depths of its gut, that if it continues with the aggression it will be destroyed utterly. Right now the conviction within the empire is that if it doesn't continue the aggression it will be destroyed. It will take dramatically more than a simple interdiction of a commercial vessel to turn that around.

No, the empire will just keep trying to take down Iran, just as it has continued trying to take down Venezuela, and even Russia. It might back off briefly to try and trick its victims into inattention, but it is not going to stop. It can't.

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 7 2019 12:40 utc | 67

September 20, 2015

In April, Qiao Liang, a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Major-General, gave a speech at a book study forum of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP’s) Central Committee and government office. Qiao is the PLA strategist who co-authored the book, “Unrestricted War.”

In his speech, Qiao explained that he has been studying finance theories and concluded that the U.S. enforces the dollar as the global currency to preserve its hegemony over the world. The U.S. will try everything, including war, to maintain the dollar’s dominance in global trading. He also discussed China’s strategy, to rise as a super power, amid the U.S.’s containment.

The following are excerpts from his speech.

PLA Strategist: The U.S. Uses Its Dollar to Dominate the World
http://chinascope.org/archives/6458/76

Posted by: day and night | Aug 7 2019 12:57 utc | 68

BM@66

Land transportation is much more secure. It always (largely; generally) takes place within the borders of lands under government. Sea transport is, and always has been, rather different.
This Empire began with piracy. Of course pirates have to sell their loot so they also trade. But maritime trade has always been tainted with piratical aspects-the sea lanes being policed by the navies of the Empire- Portuguese, Dutch, French, British, American- imposing a rough set of rules founded on the ancient principle that might makes right.
We have now reached a stage in which piracy is very easy, and preventing it almost impossible. Pirates no longer need ships-drones and land based missiles will do. Trump's coalition might work against Iran but it can't work against non state agents levying tolls on maritime traffic.
What the Americans seem determined to do, as lunatic dreams of 'all spectrum domination' and rule over the entire planet dissolve in the eastern dawn, is to open Pandora's box, muttering, as Louis XIV, a bit of a mad dreamer himself, did 'apres moi, le deluge."

Posted by: bevin | Aug 7 2019 13:51 utc | 69

A User @56

Got yerself a new handle Debs (Debsisdead)?

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 7 2019 14:24 utc | 70

William Gruff @59: The Thucydides trap isn't something China gets a choice in.

Well, they have the choice of whether to submit or not. But that is not something they will willingly do, ergo the 'trap'.

Submission is demanded by AZ Empire which IMO sought to avoid the trap by controlling China's ambitions. That ended in 2014 when it became clear that Russia would ally with China instead of the West. China HAD TO BE ISOLATED in order to be controlled. When that wasn't possible, the 'trap' was sprung.

Other than this quibble, your comment is excellent and should be read by all.

Posted by: Jackrabbit | Aug 7 2019 14:38 utc | 71

@ day and night # 69 with the PLA strategist link.....THANKS!

I encourage other MoA barflies to read the article at the link which supports my assertion that we are in WWIII and it is about who controls global finance in the future.

@ Jonathan who writes that I am a goldbug and they are somehow going to block me.

Gold has been historically linked to money but if you read me close enough you will see that I simply want to attach VALUE to the money and have written more about precious metals than gold. And if we were really forward thinking I posit that potable water would be a viable alternative if it could be defined/connected to money/finance in some reasonable way. Water is a scarce resource and necessary for our survival. I have studied enough astronomy now to understand that our earth will end up like Mars in the future, meaning we will lose our water supply so making it a central part of our medium of exchange would sharpen our focus on humanity's future.

Posted by: psychohistorian | Aug 7 2019 14:42 utc | 72

@karlof1, 23

Realistically, the Empire only has two allies it can count on--Occupied Palestine and the core of the UK, Britain-

The core of the UK is England.

Posted by: cirsium | Aug 7 2019 14:58 utc | 73

China still needs to be confronted over its piracy towards its neighbors. End the Chinese borg before its too late.

Posted by: Empire Watcher | Aug 7 2019 15:04 utc | 74

ted01 @51--

Your grotesque misquoting of me was hopefully seen by all and sundry, resulting in rendering your credibility less than worthless.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 7 2019 15:05 utc | 75

@a User, 56

As soon as the energy to keep the air conditioning going in their ugly rabbit warren apartment blocks stops the dying will start. No more instant meals in the freezers of the local supermarket, they simply will not have a clue what do do.

Why should the energy stop? If it hasn't yet created a renewable energy sector, surely Australia could buy in the technology to generate power from light?

Posted by: cirsium | Aug 7 2019 15:25 utc | 76

Escobar reports on Hong Kong & Kashmir, which are perhaps more linked than appears at first glance. I agree with his take that the CCP will allow HK to fester:

"In the end, Hong Kong will be left to its own internally corroding devices – slowly degrading to its final tawdry status as a Chinese Disneyland with a Western veneer. Shanghai is already in the process of being boosted as China’s top financial center. And Shenzhen already is the top high-tech hub. Hong Kong will be just an afterthought."

Kashmir is quite close to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Pepe provides this cryptic connection:

"While China identified 'Occupy Hong Kong' as a mere Western-instilled and instrumentalized plot, India, for its part, decided to go for Full Occupy in Kashmir."

If the situation blows-up into a "Kashmiri Intifada," it's entirely possible the conflict could interdict the CPEC damaging BRI's development and Pakistan's economy. IMO, Modi's become even more untrustworthy than before, probably due to some serious bribery.

Meanwhile, economic indicators are conflicting--Brent's below $58 while gold's over $1510 and the DOW's lost what it regained yesterday. This item highlights Trump's war with the Fed:

"'Our problem is not China,' Trump wrote, pointing to alleged US victories in the trade war with Beijing. 'Our problem is a Federal Reserve that is too proud to admit their mistake of acting too fast and tightening too much (and that I was right!).' Trump added, calling Fed policy a 'terrible thing to watch.'"

And the morning's only just begun here in Oregon.

Posted by: karlof1 | Aug 7 2019 15:36 utc | 77

excellent comments on the dynamics from many posters..many thanks everyone.. and as jr mentions - it is nice to see debs back, even if he is going by some dork name - a user..

Posted by: james | Aug 7 2019 15:51 utc | 78

US clout, control, force, influence, soft power is being dissipated into scattered endeavours and thus wasted due to a total lack of over-arching goals, meaning no solid plan for forward action is or can be formulated.

The neo-libs are obsessed with Russia. Now this may seem like a dopey plot (Russian interference in the election, Wikileaks, etc.) to justify Killary’s loss, yet it goes far deeper. Obama faked sympathy for Russia (Nobel Prize!), or changed his mind around 2013 when Russia showed it would support Assad - after the Lybia debacle Russia swore Plus Jamais.

The Dems have taken on the Clarion of Russia-loathing, aligning to some of their Anglo brothers across the pond. Russia is a OK ‘enemy’ as it will not react unless murderously provoked. Recall, Ukraine (Nuland, Biden ..) was an Obama + EU-NATO effort.

The neo-cons are obsessed with Iran, an enemy of allies Israel and KSA (allies is perhaps not the best term), and, .. like, real men go to Tehran. However invading Iran cannot happen as the allies would be attacked with some devastating success, world commerce would falter, ppl in the US would be thinking about special shooting ranges, and Iranians would resist very effectively. Second, they want to control the back-yard, see Venezuela.

Trump is obsessed with China, as the no. 1 rival set to become the ‘new’ hegemon, a view that is not crazy. Yet, as his bid to ally with Russia to prevent this was scotched, he continues..

The Chinese surely perceive all this though their analysis might be more subtle than my speedy screed, so their actions will be canny.. and as Gruff says delay right now is the name of the game.


Posted by: Noirette | Aug 7 2019 16:10 utc | 79

Violations?

I note the frequent use of the phrase “violation of US sanctions” in the NYT article, and I ask – how can there be “violations” of something that has absolutely no basis, justification or force in law? It would be far more accurate to say that Iran has been defying US sanctions, as there is nothing legal to “violate.”

Just one more example of the prostitue press' eager peddling of the oligarchy's propaganda.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Aug 7 2019 16:14 utc | 80

@ Terry Michels 38
Our AGW future isn't +1.5-degree by 2100. Our AGW future is a Scientocratic jackboot stomping on the neck of our food and energy security.

This is exactly what I have been saying. The solution is "Carbon Credits" doled out by the World Bank and IMF. Enforced by the US military, the largest fossil fuel consumers and polluters in the world. LMAO. Some solution. Greta Thunberg the child wonder leading the "science" of global warming. You can't make this stuff up.

Posted by: goldhoarder | Aug 7 2019 16:37 utc | 81

“We’re living in a world of international lawlessness,” George Galloway says. By openly aiming to decide a country’s future without letting it have a say, “the very people that keep talking about the rules-based order are in fact fomenting disorder everywhere in the world and the shredding of any rules that once existed.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VZYuaxSmLao

Posted by: day and night | Aug 7 2019 16:59 utc | 82

@81 antispin... i think it is propaganda for the home based usa crowd.... the idea that the usa gets to write the laws for the whole world is more insanity from the exceptionally stupid nation and it is supported by the usa politicians who yammer on about it regularly too - who is this idiot rubio?? graham - same deal... complete buffoons...

Posted by: james | Aug 7 2019 17:59 utc | 83

reply to
"So globalisation and global cooperation is key and they need to stop it if they are to retain some power."
Posted by: Passer by | Aug 6 2019 21:22 utc | 20

This perspective is very plausible and so opposed to the New World Order strategy of a select few in charge of the world. How do you see the conflict between the two play out?

Posted by: frances | Aug 7 2019 19:33 utc | 84

Karlof1 @23

Don't know if you will read this, given that we're a day later already, but I just felt it necessary to point out (as someone born in England) that for the first time that I can recall in my reading of your comments I have a little bone to pick with thee.

Britain equals the whole island which includes Scotland and Wales as well as England (the British Isles used also to include the whole of Ireland plus the Isle of Man, Isle of Wight and those islands off the mainland of Scotland). Thus British is a descriptor for anyone from the three main countries on the island, *not* just the English. I know that Americans frequently confuse Britain with England (only) and British with the English only. But that is not strictly accurate.

And when in 1709 the Act of Union between Scotland and England was effected, I can assure you that the English plebeians (especially those in northern England, what with Scottish invasions pillaging and plundering and the Reivers - of course, the English northerners weren't behind the door in these escapades, either; Reivers were common, and commonly at "work," on both sides of the border) weren't overly happy as were not the ordinary Scots. The Act of Union was all about and for the ruling aristocratic elites of *both* countries.

Like the Scots and the Welsh, the English (well, the plebeians, anyway) don't think or speak of themselves as "British" but as English.

Posted by: AnneR | Aug 7 2019 19:59 utc | 85

@ Terry Michels | Aug 7 2019 0:40 utc | 38

”In the PacNW, across Puget Sound, in the Dog Days of August, we barely break 80F and farmers are reporting their best crops in THIRTY YEARS!”

Well I'm in the Pacific NW, in the cool, green (used to be) Willamette Valley, and we have been wilting under too many days in the high 80s and low 90s. My tomatoes are wilting, too.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Aug 7 2019 20:56 utc | 86

This perspective is very plausible and so opposed to the New World Order strategy of a select few in charge of the world. How do you see the conflict between the two play out?

Posted by: frances | Aug 7 2019 19:33 utc | 85

In order to have select few in charge of the world, they must first subjugate the world, which means war. Whether hybrid war, a Cold War, proxy wars or hot wars in some cases.

They (western elites) really wanted globalisation after 1990, because they thought that the world will be theirs, that they won, and therefore they could do whatever they want now, including deindustrialise their countries due to selfish, greedy, unstrategic motives.

Currently there is some tension between the western corporations, which would prefer (mindlessly) for globalisation to continue, and are blind to everything but their own profits, and the military/intelligence community, which sees where things are going and now understands that globalisation is weakening the central host country, the center of the Empire. Economically weak central country --> weak military --> weak empire. And you can't rule the world without an army. Therefore the rule of the few will not survive if there is no army to enforce it, and therefore the imperial center must be strenghtened by (temporarily) renouncing globalisation and using old fashioned economic nationalist measures.

Thus circumstances are causing the US elite, driven by the military/intelligence to turn into economic nationalists even though they are not genuine nationalists. Simply the world is structured in such a way now, that there are large countries and powerful forces out there. This requires a return to the Old thinking from before 1990 and even from before World War 2, to economic nationalism, open piracy, and extreme greed directed at other countries.

The aggression using nationalist methods is to continue until the world is subjugated. After they, they can may to go back to some kind of globalism again.

How were western countries behaving when there was not one dominant country? See history, their behavior before WW2. Very, very greedy and aggressive.

It is the same behavior that will return, as they can not afford to be "nice" anymore. Outright in your face piracy and open aggression against smaller countries. Something they have always done. The benevolent western mask will fall and an ugly, angry, greedy face will show up, foaming at the mouth. Consumed by hatred and anger because they lost the opportunity to rule the world.


The more the US Empire declines the more it will go crazy and will be forced to take measures against the current type of globalisation, with national security as an excuse. There will be growing censorship and hysteria against foreign enemies and their supposed domestic agents.

Whether the West has the capacity to subjugate the world, i don't think this is possible anymore, at least not in this century.

There are two possibilites. Either will the West collapse in 20 years, or it will manage to retain some of its power and try to play the divide and rule games that the British Empire played against Europe. You can see the US as another Britain and the World as another Europe, with the US now engaging in destabilisation activity against the world in order to stop it from cooperating and developing.

In the second case there will be cold wars, destabilisation, instability, low economic growth rates everywhere, etc. It will be bad for the world economy and the world will become more chaotic.

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 21:11 utc | 87

The marauding American Empire vs the Chinese Empire. Notice the difference?

Posted by: Arby | Aug 7 2019 21:11 utc | 88

Thanx MOA

Posted by: Jeff | Aug 7 2019 21:15 utc | 89

ted01 | Aug 7 2019 3:20 utc | 51

You rewrote karlof1's post at 43 so that it says precisely the opposite of what he actually posted, and then attacked him personally.

Why?

Posted by: AntiSpin | Aug 7 2019 21:17 utc | 90

The marauding American Empire vs the Chinese Empire. Notice the difference?

Posted by: Arby | Aug 7 2019 21:11 utc | 89

There will be no such thing. The word will be multipolar. Not bipolar. Most developing countries are rising, not just China. Look at growth in the ASEAN area. India too is estimated to have an economy bigger than the US.

Africa to have 4 billion people. 1 in 3 people to be muslim. It will be a post-western world.

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 21:28 utc | 91

karlof1 @76

Once again you manage to illustrate your total lack of self-awareness perfectly.

Willfully missing the point.

Telling people who disagree with you to pull their collective heads out of their arseholes enhances your credibility?

Posted by: ted01 | Aug 7 2019 21:29 utc | 92

@ ted01 | Aug 7 2019 21:29 utc | 93

Based upon the disinformational content of your handful of posts, and karlof1's boatloads of highly informative posts, I'd say that your own credibility is but a pimple on a gnat's behind, compared to that of karlof1.

Posted by: AntiSpin | Aug 7 2019 22:23 utc | 93

Antispin @94

You say that as if I should care what a group of self absorbed americans think of me or my 'lack' of credibility?

Typical tactics when dealing with dissent - shut 'em down & push 'em out.

.Period (look at me - using that infantile americanism to stifle any sort of discussion).

.Period.

Posted by: ted01 | Aug 7 2019 22:57 utc | 94

reply to
Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 21:11 utc | 88

Thank you, given the two options you suggest (which I agree with) of: the fall of the US empire vs a US using wars and govts destabilization to maintain disorder and thereby control, I don't see any way the US can have enough of a clean win for a New World Order to emerge. The adversaries are too strong, the US too weak.
But from what I have read of the New World Order crowd, they are resourceful.
Could it be the NWO play is to have the US fall and China rule the world and they rule China via control of its currency as the new dollar?
They do appear to be all about control of industry/govt through finance. Although as none, or very few, of them appear to be Asian it would be quite a trick to pull off...

Posted by: frances | Aug 7 2019 23:25 utc | 95

Could it be the NWO play is to have the US fall and China rule the world and they rule China via control of its currency as the new dollar?
They do appear to be all about control of industry/govt through finance. Although as none, or very few, of them appear to be Asian it would be quite a trick to pull off...

Posted by: frances | Aug 7 2019 23:25 utc | 96


The NWO is based in the US and the West. Chinese culture is diiferent, much more isolationist.

China itself does not have the power to rule the world. It does not have the dominance of the world language, plus it will run into demographic problems later in the century. It does not have many large outposts the way the West has - such as Europe, the US, Canada, Australia. The West is the only entity having a chance at ruling the world. Nobody else has that capacity. Not surprisingly, those who would want to rule the world nested themselves in the West.

The coming world is more chaotic and diverse. Post - European. Nothing like that existed in the last 500 years. It is a post western world. As i mentioned in a post above - a different world, with many players.

Just look at the demographics of 2100 - 1 in 3 people will be african. 1 in 3 people will be muslim, and this religion will eclipse Christianity. More than 8 out of 10 people in the world will live in Asia or Africa. India is estimated to have an economy bigger than that of the US. Indonesia - bigger than Germany or Japan. Top 7 of top 10 economies will be in Asia. Asia alone is estimated to account for 53 % of the world economy in 2050. It will be way different world than today. I would say a bad world for any group wishing to rule the world, due to its high level of diversity, technology diffusion (any state could get nukes very fast), different cultures, and players.

World economy 2100

China
India
US
Indonesia
Japan
Brazil
Russia

World Population 2100

India
China
Nigeria
US
Congo
Pakistan
Indonesia

Do you see the multipolarity now?

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 23:57 utc | 96

I love how trolls pretend to come here for "discussion".

Has anyone ever succeeded in changing a paid troll's mind with discussion?

Posted by: William Gruff | Aug 8 2019 0:30 utc | 97

reply to
Posted by: Passer by | Aug 7 2019 23:57 utc | 97
Yes, I do and thank you. I do worry though, are there other NWO agendas at work that will call upon other means, such as disease,to reset the game.

Posted by: frances | Aug 8 2019 1:19 utc | 98

other NWO agendas at work that will call upon other means, such as disease,to reset the game.

Posted by: frances | Aug 8 2019 1:19 utc | 99

Yes, it is good to be careful, nothing is set in stone. I think, from these people, anything could be expected. I'm hearing that the US, for example, is interested in studying russian genetic material. So one should never underestimate their opponents or how desperate in their actions they could become.

Posted by: Passer by | Aug 8 2019 1:43 utc | 99

reply to
Posted by: Passer by | Aug 8 2019 1:43 utc | 100

Well we live in interesting times, may we see peace before we die:)
Really enjoyed our discussion, thank you and good night.

Posted by: frances | Aug 8 2019 2:23 utc | 100

next page »

The comments to this entry are closed.