The "Cold War", not a war but a warm cooperation.

[paternos]

Lately, I have been contemplating the Cold War and the idea that it may have been a carefully orchestrated spectacle for the masses. This notion suggests that the so-called "Cold War" was, in fact, a mutual agreement between the Soviet Union and the United States to maintain a bipolar world order that benefited both parties for three decades.

Over the past few weeks, I have been delving into this hypothesis, and the evidence seems to support it. I'm curious about your thoughts on this matter.

Allow me to provide an overview:

In the aftermath of World War II, the world faced turmoil and the looming threat of another war. With Europe in shambles, the need for stability was evident. Truman, the newly elected President of the United States, aimed to secure the power of the US and create stability in Europe. In February 1945, he attended the Yalta Conference with Churchill and Stalin to divide Europe into spheres of influence, and later that year, he participated in the Potsdam Conference to discuss the post-war order.

Truman's goal with his well connected internationalist Jewish advisors was to establish a stable world order, but he understood that achieving it was unlikely. Although General Patton proposed invading the Soviet Union, Truman believed that such action would only lead to further chaos. Instead, Truman opted for a strategy that aligned Western Europe with the US and Eastern Europe with the Soviet Union. This division helped to shape an artificial "conflict" between the two superpowers.

The nuclear bomb and the Space Race served as propaganda tools rather than genuine weapons or pursuits, reinforcing the perception of the Soviet Union and the US as global powers. Hollywood played a significant role in cultivating this image, providing a sense of hope for the masses through the orchestrated Space Race and moon landing.

It is worth noting the surprising extent of cooperation between the US and the Soviet Union during this period, as documented in Anthony Sutton's book, which can be found at the following link:

https://crystalbook.ru/wp-content/u...-Soviet-Economic-Development-1945-to-1965.pdf

The Soviet Union and the US worked together to counter nationalist uprisings in Asia, as they had done in Germany. The Vietnam conflict, for instance, resulted from a nationalist uprising and led to a divided Vietnam, with half under Russian influence and half under US influence. Similar patterns can be observed in other proxy wars, such as in Korea.

In conclusion, Truman understood the importance of stability in post-WWII Europe and collaborated with the Soviet Union to establish spheres of influence. The nuclear bomb and the Space Race were employed as propaganda tools to perpetuate the image of two superpowers locked in a Cold War.

Curious to hear your thoughts.

 

[911]

5min summary response:

There was some degree of secret collusion between the West and the Soviet block, especially in the first 20-30 years after WW2.

This level of collusion started diminishing as zionist control of the Soviet Union diminished, with the Soviets increasingly supportive of the Arabs against Israel after 1967.

Nuclear weapons are 100% real, don`t fall for the classic Cass Sunstein-style cognitive infiltration "overshoot" of tainting and discrediting a real conspiracy with falsehoods that are meant to undermine the credibility of truth seekers.

Other notable examples of these cognitive infiltration psyops:

-using the flat earth psyop in order to discredit truthers exposing the NASA lies about the Apollo moon landings

-using fantastical theories about directed energy weapons that could vaporise skyscrapers and turn steel into dust in order to discredit the fact that WTC 1, 2 and 7 were controlled demolitions that were prepared weeks in advance of sept. 11 by zionist elements.

If the US had such weapons in 2001, Russia would have been anihilated by now...

 

[Giordano Bruno]

This brings up a question of why Kennedy was assasinated. Was he uncovering secrets that would have threatened this paradign in this hypothetical conspiracy?

 

[911]

There is a long thread on the JFK assassination here, basically he crossed several red lines, taking on the deep state and the precursor of AIPAC, banning Israel from getting nukes and making plans to register AIPAC`s precursor as a foreign agent. These forces conspired to have him killed.

Good start here:

The Zionist Coup Against Kennedy

Barren Summit Forty years and counting Since Kennedy was killed And our vacuum of leadership Still has not been filled. Why should those shoes present Such difficulty filling? The candidates are weeded out By those who did the killing. by David Martin, author of The Assassination of James...

www.unz.com

From Yahweh to Zion - Laurent Guyénot : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive

There is no question of the extraordinary gifts and achievements of the Jewish people and of their enormous contribution to American culture and intellectual...

archive.org

 

[paternos]

This brings up a question of why Kennedy was assasinated. Was he uncovering secrets that would have threatened this paradign in this hypothetical conspiracy?

In the 25 years after WWII, propaganda was common as governments used mass communication for their goals. WWI started mass communication warfare, and WWII expanded it with powerful images.

The US had a strong propaganda system after WWII, using it to shape public opinion. Some people view that period positively, but information wasn't as reliable as they might think. Governments created unity through controlled narratives.

It's likely that exposing any lies from these campaigns would be met with resistance, as governments tried to protect their narratives. An example is the McCarthy era in the US, which led a crackdown on dissenting voices. I know little on Kennedy but I wouldn't be surprised he was sacrificed protect the lies.

 

[paternos]

5min summary response:

There was some degree of secret collusion between the West and the Soviet block, especially in the first 20-30 years after WW2.

This level of collusion started diminishing as zionist control of the Soviet Union diminished, with the Soviets increasingly supportive of the Arabs against Israel after 1967.

The decline of the US/USSR relationship after WWII is fascinating, but I haven't formed a clear opinion on it.

As the US grew stronger, the USSR lagged behind, which eventually led to the color revolutions influenced by the Chernobyl nuclear event in Ukraine.

Nuclear energy has long been a threat to US hegemony. With the most significant deposits in Kazakhstan, the USSR could have gained global control over energy, explaining the focus on oil of the US.

After the 1989 color revolutions, Jewish people who were transported from Germany and Poland during WWII could finally leave the USSR for Israel and the US. I think Jewish interest indeed is crucial in the US/USSR relationship.

I'm aware of conspiracy theories poisoning the well and have a different opinion than most on this forum on nuclear bombs, as I believe nuclear bombs don't exist. I know I could be wrong, but that's my current view. The nuclear bomb and moon landing represent a combination of fear and dreams.

This approach is similar to the US's current strategy with climate change and the green economy, using both fear and dreams to drive policy.

This is marketing.

Any brand uses it. E.g. Men are made afraid that women think the stink, hence they buy deodorant and now women think they are superattractive with Axe deodorant.

This isn't real. This is marketing. Or propaganda. Made by Unilever. But also by the US Government. As narratives keep us together. And controlled.

 

[paternos]

But I'm also drifting of a bit. Do you think it makes sense to see the "cold war" more as a cooperation?

A mutually beneficial agreement. Which gave both the US and the USSR a narrative to control the population, to increases taxes to support the looming nuclear war.

 

[Iacobus]

There's a middle ground to this question I think, the two powers have always had aggressively competing interests particularly over control over the Middle Eastern/central Eurasian trade corridor & oil supplies, which is the same conflict playing out now between Russian & the West. I think this is the main geopolitical crux of the issue and I think the two powers have always had real conflict over this. Furthermore I don't think the West wanted the USSR to have nearly so much control over Eastern Europe post-WWII but they had no real choice given that they assessed Nazi Germany to be the bigger threat in the '30s-'40s.

On the other hand both countries used the conflict as an internal political/social tool as you describe. Two powers can be enemies but also use that relationship to their respective advantages, as well as both finding it to their benefit to maintain a political and martial equilibrium. Ultimately, no one actually wants nuclear war other than legitimate madmen, and the power players are usually psychopaths/sociopaths moreso than madmen.

I think in cases like Vietnam & Korea, you're observing a kind of dialectic outcome that is a result of the objectives & influences of the two countries rather than a result they actually collaborated on with intent.

 

[Giordano Bruno]

There's a middle ground to this question I think, the two powers have always had aggressively competing interests particularly over control over the Middle Eastern/central Eurasian trade corridor & oil supplies, which is the same conflict playing out now between Russian & the West. I think this is the main geopolitical crux of the issue and I think the two powers have always had real conflict over this. Furthermore I don't think the West wanted the USSR to have nearly so much control over Eastern Europe post-WWII but they had no real choice given that they assessed Nazi Germany to be the bigger threat in the '30s-'40s.

On the other hand both countries used the conflict as an internal political/social tool as you describe. Two powers can be enemies but also use that relationship to their respective advantages, as well as both finding it to their benefit to maintain a political and martial equilibrium. Ultimately, no one actually wants nuclear war other than legitimate madmen, and the power players are usually psychopaths/sociopaths moreso than madmen.

I think in cases like Vietnam & Korea, you're observing a kind of dialectic outcome that is a result of the objectives & influences of the two countries rather than a result they actually collaborated on with intent.

This reminds me of a battle in Chinese history, where Zhuge Liang learned that the enemy general Sima Yi was going to be killed if he won the battle, and so gave him an opportunity to retreat by using the open fort strategy.

Despite having never met or exchanged any words, they were able to collaborate for mutual benefit.

Similiar principle. Even if you are enemies, mutual benefit always wins over mutual destruction.

Remember, both the USA and Russia, are at least in principle, Christian nations, and have been since their very inception. Though I guess both were also heavily infilitrated by the Chews at the time, so it's likely Israel was pulling some strings.

 

[Iacobus]

This thread reminds me of the ending to Dr. Strangelove:



Americans, Russians and Nazis who, upon realizing the world will be destroyed by automated nuclear bombs, immediately team up and start slapping each other on the back about how they'll be the kings over the underground bunkers... followed by strategizing how they can undermine the others' mineshafts.

Hilariously shows how the 'elite' from supposedly enemy nations are all in it together when compared to the 'masses', yet their power grappling and infighting will also never cease.

 

[MusicForThePiano]

5min summary response:

There was some degree of secret collusion between the West and the Soviet block, especially in the first 20-30 years after WW2.

This level of collusion started diminishing as zionist control of the Soviet Union diminished, with the Soviets increasingly supportive of the Arabs against Israel after 1967.

Nuclear weapons are 100% real, don`t fall for the classic Cass Sunstein-style cognitive infiltration "overshoot" of tainting and discrediting a real conspiracy with falsehoods that are meant to undermine the credibility of truth seekers.

I was always on the fence about this. I don't think the weapons aspect of nuclear energy is as foreboding as they tell us. The energy and radioactivity certainly are a real phenomena, but not in the ways we are told. Your concept is 100% correct about inserted falsehoods that discredit truth-seeking. Watch this video though, where a renowned nuclear physicist consumes radiation and claims he has been doing it for years and that it is harmless:



Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wilmington, NJ. Among his positions of expertise he was in charge of measuring and controlling the nuclear fuel inventory and storage. Galen Winsor traveled and lectured all over America, spoke on national talk radio, and made several videos exposing the misunderstood issues of nuclear radiation. He shows that fear of radiation has been exaggerated to scare people… so a few powerful people can maintain total control of the world’s most valuable power resource.

He about a fabricated limit imposed based on supposed erythema from x-rays. He used to go behind the reactors to kick loose pieces into the heated pool and never got burned. The glowing in the dark from infrared heat was when cesium-137 was compressed into a pellet. He mentions "Major Jordan's Diary" where the technology and material was shipped directly to Russia on USAF planes from Alaska and Montana, with the approval of FDR (we knew this from his jewish lend-lease act in the 30s). Plutonium won't go critical at any solution at 5% or less.

Galen Winsor is a nuclear physicist of renown who worked at, and helped design, nuclear power plants in Hanford, WA; Oak Ridge, TN; Morris, IL, San Jose, CA; Wilmington, NJ. Among his positions of expertise he was in charge of measuring and controlling the nuclear fuel inventory and storage. Galen Winsor traveled and lectured all over America, spoke on national talk radio, and made several videos exposing the misunderstood issues of nuclear radiation. He shows that fear of radiation has been exaggerated to scare people… so a few powerful people can maintain total control of the world’s most valuable power resource.

This video was filmed by Ben Williams in 1986. In the video, Galen will lick a pile of highly radioactive uranium off the palm of his hand and ignite a chunk of plutonium into a shower of flaming dust. Galen also drank reactor cooling pool water for fun and liked to go swimming in the pool to relax. He also spiked the basement flooring of his own home with enough radioactive material to send any Geiger counter reading off the scale to disprove the fear mongering surrounding radon at the time.

Galen surmises the regulations and fear mongering that surround radioactive materials are in place to prevent the widespread adoption of nuclear power in local small scale neighborhood/home based reactors. Galen also points out that hot nuclear “waste” can be effectively turned into a safe power source through thermionic conversion, which is how the U.S. submarine navigation network was powered. The heat it gives off can also be used to safely heat homes.

He points out that nuclear “waste” is worth roughly $10 million (in 1986 dollars or 25 million is 2022 dollares) a ton if it were to be reprocessed to collect its useful isotopes, so all of this talk about trying to bury it is a sham. He says the power companies are holding all the waste with the intent of playing the plutonium futures market. The “waste” could be stored above ground in already constructed buildings meeting all the regulatory requirements without the need to have these outrageous basalt mines dug into mountains. The only reason he can think of for these underground vaults is to hide bodies/evidence that the state doesn’t want uncovered.

At its core, he says federal controls over nuclear material is about maintaining power and control over the masses through the denial of self-sufficient power sources. Obviously if one had a personal sized power source that was cheap and efficient, they wouldn’t need to be connected to the “grid” for anything. The power grid is the control grid our rulers use to keep us under their thumbs.

 

[paternos]

This reminds me of a battle in Chinese history, where Zhuge Liang learned that the enemy general Sima Yi was going to be killed if he won the battle, and so gave him an opportunity to retreat by using the open fort strategy.

Despite having never met or exchanged any words, they were able to collaborate for mutual benefit.

Similiar principle. Even if you are enemies, mutual benefit always wins over mutual destruction.

Remember, both the USA and Russia, are at least in principle, Christian nations, and have been since their very inception. Though I guess both were also heavily infilitrated by the Chews at the time, so it's likely Israel was pulling some strings.

It's also my personal experience in business, whenever i have the personal / business interest of the other in mind, business is very easy. This is our natural state. Mutually beneficial relationship. Based on this essential principle our economy works.

I find this Rosenberg case also very interesting:

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

2 alleged Jewish spies in Russia that were prosecuted by a Jewish prosecutor and convicted by a Jewish judge in America.

This is an interview with their son who grew up in another Jewish household.

The WSWS speaks to Julius and Ethel Rosenberg’s son

Robert Meeropol is the younger son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the couple executed by the US government in June 1953 on trumped-up charges of atomic espionage.

www.wsws.org

FM: Why do you think the death penalty was handed down and carried out? What is your opinion of your father’s statement: “This death sentence is not surprising. It had to be. There had to be a Rosenberg case, because there had to be an intensification of the hysteria in America to make the Korean War acceptable to the American people. There had to be hysteria and a fear sent through America in order to get increased war budgets.”

This is very interesting and ofcourse we see this all the time, Jews are also sacrificing their own, there are so many similarities with the Epstein case between these Rosenberg.

They are just part of a larger power play. Anyhow the Rosenbergs show their was a lot of transfer of information between the countries and the Jews had a leading role in that. As they always want to be: Brokers is power.

Just like the Jews were instrumental in getting the US involved in WW1 and in WW2 again.

Merchants of power.

 

[paternos]

This thread reminds me of the ending to Dr. Strangelove:



Americans, Russians and Nazis who, upon realizing the world will be destroyed by automated nuclear bombs, immediately team up and start slapping each other on the back about how they'll be the kings over the underground bunkers... followed by strategizing how they can undermine the others' mineshafts.

Hilariously shows how the 'elite' from supposedly enemy nations are all in it together when compared to the 'masses', yet their power grappling and infighting will also never cease.

You finally convinced me to watch this movie, which I've never seen before. You've described it well, and indeed, Kubrick captures the essence brilliantly.

The quest for power is deeply ingrained, particularly within the psyches of the elites. I find it always intriguing to observe elections, when one party emerges victorious and celebrates their triumph. We won! They've secured power for four years, but the focus is rarely on how it will be used. Whether it's conservatives, democrats, greens, or any president, winning is about power – the ability to overpower others or be overpowered in turn. The same dynamics apply to sports, sexual relationships, and even debates.

What's fascinating is the mutual dependence that emerges in these contests. Both parties benefit from the struggle, regardless of the outcome, because it's not about winning but about power. The power is derived from the existence and perceived importance of the match, whether it's the world championship, the war of all wars, or the space race.

In the world of professional sports, everyone involved—from the athletes to the trainers, directors, and media moguls—benefit from the game's power. The outcome is inconsequential; as long as people believe it matters, it does.

Similarly, Formula 1 and political systems lose their power when people no longer care about the outcomes. The US/USSR conflict, for instance, was designed to make us feel that it was the most crucial contest in the world. Both parties benefited from the conflict, which was centered around power.

The topic of power is so captivating. Empires inevitably decline when people cease to care about them—as in Rome, which fell apart when its citizens abandoned the city for rural life, indifferent to the opinions of those in togas.

What if, in the end, none of it truly matters? What if there is another King—Jesus—and a heavenly kingdom?

Earthly distractions such as the Cold War or the economy lead us away from what truly matters. The greatest fear for democratic politicians is that people will stop voting, disinterested in to even spend 10 minutes to support one party or another.

From a distance, this is how I view the Cold War. The same can be said for the Jewish people's fight against anti-Semitism. They need adversaries who express hatred and governments that emphasize the significance of combating anti-Semitism. For them, the greatest threat is being ignored. It's all a grand struggle for attention, emotions, and power in the earthly sense. The holocaust needs to be the #1 historical event.

That's why I find solace in the teachings of Jesus Christ, who showed us an alternative path where the last shall be first, and the first shall be last. It's a profound truth.

 

[Giordano Bruno]

I was always on the fence about this. I don't think the weapons aspect of nuclear energy is as foreboding as they tell us. The energy and radioactivity certainly are a real phenomena, but not in the ways we are told. Your concept is 100% correct about inserted falsehoods that discredit truth-seeking. Watch this video though, where a renowned nuclear physicist consumes radiation and claims he has been doing it for years and that it is harmless:

An important thing to remember is that what's considered a 'dangerous dose of radiation', just increases your chance of getting cancer. It's actually pretty hard to get a dosage that will cause radiation poisoning. Just look at how Hiroshima and Nagasaki didn't have to wait to rebuild, even if those were airburst detonations.

As for nuclear weapons not being as dangerous as they say.

Well, it's true that Nuclear Winter is massively exaggerated. As in, the papers that predicted it massively overestimated how many fires would be caused by nuclear weapons. Thus it is likely that even thousands of nuclear weapons wouldn't cause Nuclear Winter.

The Nuclear bombs themselves though?

Well, you can see the test footage for yourself.

Though, there are systems to shoot down ballistic missiles. There is also the fact that a portion of missiles will fail to launch, or have mechanical issues that might cause failure to reach the target or detonate.

That said, you are absolutely 100% on how the elites are doing everything to avoid nuclear power. For several reasons. Nuclear power is cheap. When you look past the bureacratic tape, it's the cheapest and most reliable form of energy, and could easily power the world. It also would mean fossil fuel magnates wouldn't be able to make billions of dollars while lobbying the government to maintain control. Countries like America wouldn't be as reliant on places like the middle east and Saudi Arabia, so you'd have less impetus to intervene on Israels behalf.

It would also take away from the environmentalists propaganda scheme. Practically every environmentalist is a con artist. You'll notice not a single one advocates Nuclear.

 

[paternos]

That said, you are absolutely 100% on how the elites are doing everything to avoid nuclear power. For several reasons. Nuclear power is cheap. When you look past the bureacratic tape, it's the cheapest and most reliable form of energy, and could easily power the world. It also would mean fossil fuel magnates wouldn't be able to make billions of dollars while lobbying the government to maintain control. Countries like America wouldn't be as reliant on places like the middle east and Saudi Arabia, so you'd have less impetus to intervene on Israels behalf.

America controls the oil market globally. It is able to dictate the prices via OPEC. Oil is traded in dollars. America rules the waves and every shipment of oil is transported by ships. The largest producing countries in the world are in America's hands.

With the falling of the USSR Russia didn't become a colour democracy. And we see that Iran is making a strong rise selling oil directly to China. Hence we see that oil is shifting. Less judeo-american control.

Nuclear is synonymous for Kazakhstan. Last year a colour revolution failed in Kazakhstan. Due to positioning Kazakhstan will most likely stay in the Chinese or Russian realm. Nuclear will never be the preferred source of energy as it would make the US and it's puppet states dependent on China and Russia.

I think we are at the risk of an energy war. Like Japan was isolated by the US. The west run the risk of being isolated now. "Green" is just energy policy to lower the dependency in a fastly changing global energy landscape.

I wouldn't be surprised we get it back. That the middle East turns east. (Look at the reception of Xi Jinping in Saudi Arabia)
Green is just a preparation of war.

 

[Bird]

That said, you are absolutely 100% on how the elites are doing everything to avoid nuclear power. For several reasons. Nuclear power is cheap. When you look past the bureacratic tape, it's the cheapest and most reliable form of energy, and could easily power the world. It also would mean fossil fuel magnates wouldn't be able to make billions of dollars while lobbying the government to maintain control. Countries like America wouldn't be as reliant on places like the middle east and Saudi Arabia, so you'd have less impetus to intervene on Israels behalf.

It gets even better in terms of cost and safety.
Well, it also says it's a clean technology because it emits zero CO2, so take that with a grain of salt.

About Dual Fluid

Dual Fluid is creating an entirely new type of nuclear reactor that

• provides emission-free electricity and hydrogen,
• significantly reduces today’s energy costs,
• burns nuclear waste, and is inherently safe.

Dual Fluid differs from other new nuclear concepts by its high efficiency: the nuclear fuel is utilized up to a hundred times better than in today’s light water reactors. The operating temperature of 1000° C enables new heat applications.

The Dual Fluid operating principle, based on different fluids for fuel and cooling, is described in scientific publications. There is worldwide patent protection, including in the USA, Canada, the EU, and Japan.

Dual Fluid Energy Inc. was incorporated as a public company in Vancouver, Canada, in January 2021 to bring the Dual Fluid technology to serial production status. The prototype of a Dual Fluid reactor is to be launched within this decade.

Dual Fluid – Next Level Energy

Dual Fluid is reinventing nuclear: good for people, good for nature. Nuclear waste becomes electricity for generations to come.

dual-fluid.com

 

[Yeagerist]

Makes total sense, since the forces of National Socialism were defeated by the Zionist Alliance in 1945.

Nuclear is synonymous for Kazakhstan. Last year a colour revolution failed in Kazakhstan. Due to positioning Kazakhstan will most likely stay in the Chinese or Russian realm. Nuclear will never be the preferred source of energy as it would make the US and it's puppet states dependent on China and Russia.

I think we are at the risk of an energy war. Like Japan was isolated by the US. The west run the risk of being isolated now. "Green" is just energy policy to lower the dependency in a fastly changing global energy landscape.

I wouldn't be surprised we get it back. That the middle East turns east. (Look at the reception of Xi Jinping in Saudi Arabia)
Green is just a preparation of war.

I wonder about the long-term repercussions of China making Iran and Saudi Arabia reconcile. Two of the world's biggest oil exporters (and one of them being a key military power in the proximity of Russia) possibly favoring Chinese markets in the near future.

I could totally envision petroleum as the main catalyst for World War III, although of course it'll just be an excuse for deeper agendas of globohomo, such as maintaining the current unipolar hegemony of America and exporting woke subversion to the Eurasian powers. However, the US no longer enjoys the privilege of sitting on a vast treasure of industrial resources like in the 1940s with its banking-based economy showing signs of fracture and collapse. I see this more as a last-ditch effort of the West to fight Russia and China in an all-or-nothing gamble.

Makes you really think the globalist elites aren't that omniscient after all. Any hypothetical American leader who sees the writing on the wall must realize that the only sustainable path for America is to downgrade itself into a continental power and accept its place in a multipolar order. John McCain once claimed notoriously that Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country. Looks like the actual case is that the USA is a PMC masquerading as a country. They can't forever sustain their hold over the petrodollar and the bankrolling of the defense industry while America is getting torn apart both economically and socially.

Dual Fluid is creating an entirely new type of nuclear reactor that

• provides emission-free electricity and hydrogen,
• significantly reduces today’s energy costs,
• burns nuclear waste, and is inherently safe.

Dual Fluid differs from other new nuclear concepts by its high efficiency: the nuclear fuel is utilized up to a hundred times better than in today’s light water reactors. The operating temperature of 1000° C enables new heat applications.

The Dual Fluid operating principle, based on different fluids for fuel and cooling, is described in scientific publications. There is worldwide patent protection, including in the USA, Canada, the EU, and Japan.

Dual Fluid Energy Inc. was incorporated as a public company in Vancouver, Canada, in January 2021 to bring the Dual Fluid technology to serial production status. The prototype of a Dual Fluid reactor is to be launched within this decade.

Makes me realize that the Commie green parties in the EU (and the followers of Greta and all) might also be a controlled opposition of sorts. Environmentalism isn't necessarily leftist or anti-tradition or anti-conservative, but the way the green parties are set up, they're also the ones who are not only opposed to nuclear power but also the most fervent supporters of mass migration. If your platform is built on the idea of the scarcity of resources, then the very last thing you ever want to promote is to import more and more people who will only compete with your native citizens for resources and energy (and on top of the problems with the incompatibility of cultures).

As such, I don't see these nuclear energy innovations being backed by the Western governments anytime in the future. That possibly leaves China as a potential client for these startups. Last time I heard they're already doing some reforestation or reclamation of the Gobi Desert and the region of Xinjiang. And they've already built these "mini" nuclear reactors. Any environmentalist entrepreneur who sees a political opportunity can make a lot of money pitching this to the CCP. Maybe the Chinese could see advancements in nuclear energy as their own bargaining chip considering Taiwan's leverage over semiconductors.

 

[Sandalwood Peak]

Makes total sense, since the forces of National Socialism were defeated by the Zionist Alliance in 1945.


I wonder about the long-term repercussions of China making Iran and Saudi Arabia reconcile. Two of the world's biggest oil exporters (and one of them being a key military power in the proximity of Russia) possibly favoring Chinese markets in the near future.

I could totally envision petroleum as the main catalyst for World War III, although of course it'll just be an excuse for deeper agendas of globohomo, such as maintaining the current unipolar hegemony of America and exporting woke subversion to the Eurasian powers. However, the US no longer enjoys the privilege of sitting on a vast treasure of industrial resources like in the 1940s with its banking-based economy showing signs of fracture and collapse. I see this more as a last-ditch effort of the West to fight Russia and China in an all-or-nothing gamble.

Makes you really think the globalist elites aren't that omniscient after all. Any hypothetical American leader who sees the writing on the wall must realize that the only sustainable path for America is to downgrade itself into a continental power and accept its place in a multipolar order. John McCain once claimed notoriously that Russia is a gas station masquerading as a country. Looks like the actual case is that the USA is a PMC masquerading as a country. They can't forever sustain their hold over the petrodollar and the bankrolling of the defense industry while America is getting torn apart both economically and socially.


Makes me realize that the Commie green parties in the EU (and the followers of Greta and all) might also be a controlled opposition of sorts. Environmentalism isn't necessarily leftist or anti-tradition or anti-conservative, but the way the green parties are set up, they're also the ones who are not only opposed to nuclear power but also the most fervent supporters of mass migration. If your platform is built on the idea of the scarcity of resources, then the very last thing you ever want to promote is to import more and more people who will only compete with your native citizens for resources and energy (and on top of the problems with the incompatibility of cultures).

As such, I don't see these nuclear energy innovations being backed by the Western governments anytime in the future. That possibly leaves China as a potential client for these startups. Last time I heard they're already doing some reforestation or reclamation of the Gobi Desert and the region of Xinjiang. And they've already built these "mini" nuclear reactors. Any environmentalist entrepreneur who sees a political opportunity can make a lot of money pitching this to the CCP. Maybe the Chinese could see advancements in nuclear energy as their own bargaining chip considering Taiwan's leverage over semiconductors.

I believe it's oversimplification to kind of blame the United States in all this.

The thing about USD is it's only recently getting politicized, the markets don't care about politics, they only care about numbers, in theory at least. Well this intertwining of the the global financial system seems to be doing exactly what we were promised by globalists. It's preventing war. Many conspiracy theories point out that the US invades countries for not playing along with the USD, central banks or what ever. Well an interesting aspect to consider is can the US invade a country that IS playing along with wallstreet? I believe it would be nearly impossible.

The danger with Russia isn't really nuclear weapons, it's the question of are they willing to withdraw from the whole financial system. The interesting thing here is the West made an effort to force them. The other interesting thing Russia absolutely refused to withdraw. In fact Russia is making every effort to remain, even forgoing national interests, they're still buying T-bonds for god's sake.

This brings us to the Europeans. Why this push for green energy? Well it's definitely not the politicians. So it's undoubtedly think tanks or "globalists". The question is why? Well the most obvious is they're clearly steering the world in a specific direction and don't care about the day-to-day. You can call it good if you're a liberal or evil if you're a dissident. Well as we can see with the financial system, the incentives are tremendous, not only do you kind of prevent war by playing along but you're also ensure financial stability from the tight grip the banking system has on everything. The problems we are seeing now are nothing more than a transitional period, that have been foreseen for a long time, and I'm sure the key players got their radical "solutions" in place.

Well the point I'm trying to make is the globalist project is too big for anyone to opt out. If anyone wishes to have sovereignty it will absolutely have to be done with open war. So while some may cheer that US is losing it's status, I fail to see why the US is even necessary to the globalists except as a tool.

 

[Caduceus]

All the old videos from the 1950s/60s/70s from BOTH the Russian and American space race looks so fake now when you view it in the best quality resolution possible. Not only were the 5 american moon landings nonsense, but so was all the russian space achievements as well. Find me one video pre 1990 from any US or Russians in space that looks even remotely real.

For me the whole space race (and possibly the entire cold war) was an enormous money laundering operation for governments and the elites to steal the life savings from the majority of their populations (through endless taxation and artificially low salaries), and keep ordinary people anywhere from accumulating private wealth and improving their class status. This methodology continues today in other forms. It ensures no real opposition that is well financed can ever emerge.

 

[paternos]

Makes total sense, since the forces of National Socialism were defeated by the Zionist Alliance in 1945.

I like your thinking in your post.

I think it's true. It's a Zionist alliance. Both were internationalists. Anyhow they were the power brokers.

I think the end of the USSR was a colour revolution that went wrong.

I suggest to take a look at the SCO

Shanghai Cooperation Organisation - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Last year they met in Samarkand. Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt are dialogue partners. If they enter. This block ownes the Suez canal, the Borporus, the black sea.

It's 46% of the people globally and most of the resources.

Iran is in there, China, Russia.



If they form a block the west will be on its knees begging for a drop of oil. Or uranium.

Potentially and maybe it is already the biggest power block on earth.



The prices in Europe last summer for gas might be the beginning. If this group carefully plans we will be begging. As Japan was begging for oil before they got fire bombed.

Look at Samarkand 2022 where Xi Jingping, Putin and all the other presidents met. (Completely uncovered in our jewish media)



I just learnt about this event and was unaware about the strength of this block. For that reason Russia functions well now. As does Iran ( take a look at their stock exchange in the last 5 years, it's booming)

What you say about the green is also interesting are they are not pushing nuclear. Which IS the greenest form of energy.

It's about something else. It could be a megapush to try to be become energy independent. When the east closes stops the export to the west. That's a logical idea.

The migrants are just a logical form of internationalism. A borderless, free flow of people or trade, for the whole western world except for.israel. One world. One set of rules. Governed by a large bureaucratic apparatus.

Thats why I also think. The Communists and the American capitalists were brothers.

Both army nations, "space racing" building brutalist architectur, internationalist, godless.

And a self sufficient energy economy might be the only way for the liberal internationalist enterprise to succeed. I think that's the thinking and the people to belief it's for co2.

If they would say it nobody would agree. The people would say. Just do business with china and stop make them liberal.

These internationalist are the biggest scum of the earth. Liars, deceivers, murderers.