The Coming War with Iran

It_is_my_time

Hummingbird
911 said:
A couple of notes:

-Notice that the news outlet breaking this story is Israeli, the story had died out before with no declared casualties. It's as if they want to prod the US into a military escalation...

-Supposedly the soldiers injured had severe concussions, as opposed to being hit directly or getting shrapneled. My guess is that they had advance warning and might have been in shelters, and still got injured as those shelters weren't safe enough against missiles with 1-ton plus payloads delivered with pinpoint accuracy.

Apparently Iran has literally thousands of those missiles, which means it's a total game changer, as in an all-out conflict they will have hundreds of soft targets and they could easily inflict 1,000-5,000 US casualties. You'd have to go back to WW2 or maybe Korea for an opponent with that kind of capability, all the previous wars fought since (Vietnam, Iraq 1 and 2) were basically asymetric guerilla wars against third world enemies that couldn't strike back with that kind of accuracy and firepower.
Yep, I agree completely. I am hopeful that the US tested Iran's flexing ability and found out they have more fire power than we realized and decided a war with them would not be possible.

I guess we will find out. Iran has had decades to prepare for a US invasion so it would be hard to believe they don't have something up their sleeve.
 

Dr. Howard

Peacock
Gold Member
911 said:
It_is_my_time said:
dicknixon72 said:
It_is_my_time said:
I need to post this here too. I didn't think it would be confirmed. So it appears Iran has more fire power than we were aware of and we are backing down. Hope we don't get stupid and try to test them again. 11 good men maybe had their lives ruined.

I'm not trying to be rude, but what is with this weird fetishization of the idea of Iran having superior armaments?
Superior armaments? I don't think anyone here has said Iran has superior armaments v. the USA. As far as we know they don't even have a nuclear weapon.

I am guessing you would rather ask "what is the fetishization of Iran having better weapons that we guessed?"

Well, my hope is the dummies in DC underestimated Iran's ability and realized that they would be a serious threat if we were dumb enough to start a war with them, so they decided to back down.

I have no idea if this is true or not. It appears they injured 11 of our soldiers in these attacks and we didn't respond. So something is going on behind the scenes.
A couple of notes:

-Notice that the news outlet breaking this story is Israeli, the story had died out before with no declared casualties. It's as if they want to prod the US into a military escalation...

-Supposedly the soldiers injured had severe concussions, as opposed to being hit directly or getting shrapneled. My guess is that they had advance warning and might have been in shelters, and still got injured as those shelters weren't safe enough against missiles with 1-ton plus payloads delivered with pinpoint accuracy.

Apparently Iran has literally thousands of those missiles, which means it's a total game changer, as in an all-out conflict they will have hundreds of soft targets and they could easily inflict 1,000-5,000 US casualties. You'd have to go back to WW2 or maybe Korea for an opponent with that kind of capability, all the previous wars fought since (Vietnam, Iraq 1 and 2) were basically asymetric guerilla wars against third world enemies that couldn't strike back with that kind of accuracy and firepower.
I didn't even read that it was severe concussions. Severe to me would not mean symptoms developed days after the explosions, it would be more like dazed/unable to stand with bleeding ears immediately after the explosions.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
According to the wiki for the weapons used, anything within 500 miles of the Iranian border (140ish miles for the lesser missiles) would be a sitting duck. Basically almost everything East of Jordan.

It seems Iraq would also immediately end up becoming injun country again.

The US would obviously still win (assuming no Chinese or Russian interference) but probably at a cost greater than anything suffered since Vietnam, although unlike Vietnam it would come all at once rather than in a steady stream. Then the US would have to deal with the Strait of Hormuz basically being shut down indefinitely via guerrilla warfare.

I don't really think the Empire has that much fight left in it to be honest. Nobody trusts the Zio-golem to honor any negotiation and they know they only have to wait for the US to collapse under its own morbid obesity.

I think everyone is going to do a big song and dance about revenge and whatnot but at the end of the day the US is the one between the rock and the hard place. Damned if they do and damned if they don't.
 

Salinger

Woodpecker
Leonard D Neubache said:
The US would obviously still win (assuming no Chinese or Russian interference) but probably at a cost greater than anything suffered since Vietnam, although unlike Vietnam it would come all at once rather than in a steady stream. Then the US would have to deal with the Strait of Hormuz basically being shut down indefinitely via guerrilla warfare.
I'm by no means an expert at this stuff...but wouldn't the Chinese be glad to fight a proxy war with the US over there?

I would fully expect them to join the other side if we went to war with Iran.
 

911

Peacock
Gold Member
The Chinese are the ultimate long game players, they'd be happy to sit this out and see the US still embroiled in Endless War in the region for another 10 or 20 years while they keep investing their trillions into their economic infrastructure. At this rate China will have 1.5x to 2x the size of the US economy by the middle of the century, by then it will be a global economic juggernaut with a decent military arm. They're smart enough to realize that economic might comes before military might.

They don't need to intervene militarily in Iraq or Syria, they will let Russia do this for them. The current blatant US occupation with Pompeo threatening to close Iraq's Fed account, and Trump "taking the oil" in Syria is pushing these countries into China's arms, the Chinese will just come in with their reconstruction billions and have a ready-made market for their Huaweis and Haiers.

If nature abhors a vacuum, so too does geopolitics. When President Trump months ago announced plans to pull US troops out of Syria and the Middle East generally, Russia and especially China began quietly to intensify contacts with key states in the region.

Chinese involvement with Iraqi oil development and other infrastructure projects, though large, was significantly disrupted by the ISIS occupation of some one third of Iraqi territory. In September, 2019 Washington demanded that Iraq pay for completion of key infrastructure projects destroyed by the ISIS war– a war where Washington as well as Ankara, Israel and Saudi Arabia played the key hidden role—by giving the US government 50% of Iraqi oil revenues, an outrageous demand to put it politely.

Iraq China Pivot

Iraq refused. Instead Iraqi Prime Minister Adel Abdul-Mahdi went to Beijing as head of a 55-member delegation to discuss Chinese involvement in the rebuilding of Iraq. This visit did not go unnoticed in Washington. Even before that, Iraqi-China ties were significant. China was Iraq’s number one trading partner and Iraq was China’s third-leading source of oil after Saudi Arabia and Russia. In April 2019 in Baghdad, China’s Deputy Minister of Foreign Relations Lee Joon said China was ready to contribute to Iraq’s reconstruction.

For Abdul-Mahdi the Beijing trip was a major success; he called it a “quantum jump” in relations. The visit saw the signing of eight wide-ranging memoranda of understanding (MoUs), a framework credit agreement, and the announcement of plans for Iraq to join China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It included Chinese involvement in rebuilding Iraq’s infrastructure as well as developing Iraqi oilfields. For both countries an apparent “win-win” as the Chinese like to say.

It was only a matter of days after the Beijing talks of Prime Minister Abdul-Mahdi that nationwide protests against Iraqi government corruption and economic policies broke out, led by opposition cries that Abdul-Mahdi resign. Reuters witnessed snipers carefully fanning the violent protest firing on the protesters giving the impression of government repression much as the CIA did in Maidan in Kiev in February 2014 or in Cairo in 2011.

There is now strong evidence that the China talks and the timing of the spontaneous October 2019 protests against the Abdul-Mahdi government were connected. The Trump Administration is the link. According to a report by Federico Pieraccini, “Abdul-Medhi made a speech to Parliament speaking about how the Americans had ruined the country and now refused to complete infrastructure and electricity grid projects unless they were promised 50% of oil revenues, which Abdul-Mehdi refused.” He then quotes sections of Abdul-Mahdi’s speech translated from Arabic: “This is why I visited China and signed an important agreement with them to undertake the construction instead. Upon my return, Trump called me to ask me to reject this agreement.

When I refused, he threatened to unleash huge demonstrations against me that would end my premiership. Huge demonstrations against me duly materialized and Trump called again to threaten that if I did not comply with his demands, then he would have Marine snipers on tall buildings target protesters and security personnel alike in order to pressure me. I refused again and handed in my resignation. To this day the Americans insist on us rescinding our deal with the Chinese.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/did-trump-just-give-middle-east-china-russia/5700660

The main problem with US mideast policy is that it is tied to the hip to Israel, whose interest is to see failed states in their extended neighborhood through agents of chaos like ISIS and US/NATO military backing. Boomers have been conditioned even before 9/11 to see the locals as the archenemy ever since the end of the Cold War.
 

Rigsby

Pelican
Gold Member
It_is_my_time said:
I almost wonder if not only was this attack kind of allowed, but it was also a show to the US intelligence what exactly Iran has and it might be impressive enough that it alone prevented any more stupid actions for the time being.

If their missiles are that accurate, it would make a war with Iran way too bloody for the Americans to accept. I still remember early in the Iraq war of 2003 some how a few Iraqi's got a Scud missile set up with some type of Russian radar jamming system and they were able to get the Scud missile through all our defense systems and it luckily hit nothing. It scared the hell out of the media and the people in the USA for a day or two until they realized this was a one off attempt they couldn't pull off again. If Iran has technology this accurate they could kill hundreds/thousands of our soldiers from a distance before we ever step foot on their soil. Americans would never accept this as war weary as we are.

We are so enlightened that many of us mention 'the talk' that new US Presidents get when put in to power (See Bill Hicks). It's logical and makes sense. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility. But how many of us can take this particular conspiracy theory a step higher? What about the talks that go on between nation states, as they both laugh and joke on the phone, while their sovereign citizens and young men have been killed and they have a real sense of duper's delight.

Is it really beyond sanity to think that we are all being played. All of us. From the top politicians down to the lowly service men that take pride in fighting for their country and ultimately pay the ultimate price.

Trump and whoever in Iran might not be laughing and joking, but they still might be having some kind of chat that would shock us. Realpolitik.

You realise Mr. Trump, we will have to retaliate? We could not face the domestic unrest here at home if we were not seen to hit back at the Big Satan?

Etc. Etc.

Recursively back and for from the whole mess that got 'us' in to this situation, to it being played out and fizzled down so not too many people have to die.

This was very much a Chess game. With the moves pre-agreed in advance by both sides. So really it was just more theatre for the dumb masses.


I've been following this quite closely. Doing quite a bit of research. Reading about stuff that Iran has been up to with its proxy warfare. Interesting stuff. I'm considering things I didn't before this all blew up. But the further down the rabbit hole I go with it all, the more I realise that it's hard to know who to trust. I've been following quite closely on some British Military websites I have quite a close relationship with. I know who the major players are and what their backgrounds are and whether they lean left or right (a lot of Military are very 'progressive' these days - especially higher ranking members who got the 'memo').

So I have a pretty good feel for those who are credible. No one has broken OpSec obviously but you can read between the lines with information from both Air Force and Navy to count on.

I've made a few posts before in this thread and it seems my very uninformed opinion (and one from whom is not a Military man don't forget) is not so far off the mark. As I've already noted, I grew up in this part of the world and I consider it my spiritual home, hoping to go back there to be buried if possible when I die. I have a deep love for the region and a deep love for the people. Yes, they are flawed. But has anyone taken a trip around a british shopping centre lately? I rest my case. These are not my people.

When it comes down to it, I have no credentials to offer for anyone to take what I say with anything more than a big grain of salt. With that being said...

I will repeat myself. My previous views have been consolidated.

There will be no great war with Iran. There simply can't be. It is the immovable object vs. the irresistible force.

No one is 'fetishizing' Iran's fire power. But it is to be expected. Wasn't there some old Chinese bloke who wrote some kind of screed on the art of war and one of his main points was: respect your enemy and do not underestimate them.

It is well known that Iran has just about the most cutting edge weapons in existence, relatively speaking. Because already it's overkill. Do you really need an S-500 SAM system if you have a S-400 SAM system? Does Iran even have an S-400 SAM system? They have an S-300 SAM system - one of the most potent anti-aircraft missile systems in existence.

Then there is the anti-ship tech like the Sunburns that Iran have. They might even have more potent systems than that again. Some say that these missiles are useless - that they can be shot down by anti-missile systems. But I'm not so sure. These things are just a few miles off the coast. The strait of Hormuz is only measured in tens of Kilometres. It would be a matter of seconds before impact. You wouldn't see these ones coming. Anything in the target zone is a sitting duck.

These things fly at mach 2.2 even at low altitude. Over twice the speed of sound. Speed of sound is a bit less than 800 miles an hour. So around a couple of thousand miles an hour. How quickly do you think that would hit something moving at very slow speed that was only 10K away?

And Iran has a lot of coastline. A lot of nooks and crannies to hide stuff in. They might not have the latest fighter jets, but they do have a lot of missiles. Both homegrown and Russian.

There won't be any amphibious assualt by US Marines of Iran's coastline. It would be pointless anyway, apart from suicidal.

Iran has the upper hand here. It has home advantage and familiarity. And like that old bloke who wrote the art of war said: the moral high ground is everything. Iran have that. As well as the actual physical high ground. Get a few miles in even if you did storm the coasts and you are hitting mountainous regions. Take a look on Google maps. Saudi Arabia is a flat pancake of desert. Iran is the Switzerland of the Middle East.


This is a war that can never happen. And if it ever does it will be holy in more than one sense of the word. Because whilst Iran have the advantage on the ground, if push ever came to shove, US have the advantage in the form of the largest naval deployment in history (The US 5th Fleet stationed out of Manama, Bahrain), merely miles away, and with all that airborne firepower that included the nastiest missiles (non-nuclear, but nukes too don't forget) ever invented. Even being 50 feet underground rock solid mountain won't help you when the latest ordnance drops from the heavens.

It would be a war of attrition. And that is without the other proxies becoming involved, not least Russia and China.

Iran's tentacles stretch far and wide. I doubt they would stay quiet if the US decided to carpet bomb Tehran or Isfahan.

This would be the perfect storm. In a way, both sides hands are tied. Iran dare not use its frightening capabilities (sinking US aircraft carriers) and the US dare not blanket bomb the major population centres of a country that may have (ok, actually has) been conducting proxy guerilla assymetric operations against its 'enemies' - namely the US and SA.

There really isn't a war to fight.

If either side were to fire first or enter in to any kind of serious conflict it would be mutually assured destruction. Remember the MAD doctrine pertaining to the use of nukes?

There is only so much you can carpet bomb Tehran before Iran takes out a few carriers who are carrying those bombs and dropping them on Iranian cities. And in for a penny in for a pound!

And then there's a real possibility of seeing the nukes starting to fly.

Think about it. US levels Tehran. Iran then knocks out a couple of US aircraft carriers. 10,000 lives lost. 10,000 US service men at the bottom of the Persian/Arabian gulf. Never mind boots on the ground, we are talking bodies (what's left of them) at the bottom of the ocean.

But again, even so, would the US dare to use a nuke? What would be the point? You've already flattened Tehran. There are no possible nuclear sites left to hit - it's merely retribution and war-mongering by this point. And are you prepared to get Russia and China all nervy too.

This is never going to happen. If it does. It really will be WWIII.

Neither side can afford to display and maintain anything other than perfect impulse control and non-escalation in this matter.


And the whole way this was played out...

Ok, we gonna take out your main man. Had enough of his shit now. Suck it up sweetcheeks. You can't really do anything about it anyway.

Reeeeeeeeewind to the hypothetical conversation earlier that I posited:

You realise Mr. Trump, we will have to retaliate? We could not face the domestic unrest here at home if we were not seen to hit back at the Big Satan?


Recursively...


This is permanent war. Total war. Not between nation states but between the governments that rule their citizens (cattle) and keep them in a constant state of threat, disturbing their OODA loop, all in the name of divide and conquer, subdue and subvert. Agitate and disorientate.

This is not a battle between left and right. Not a battle between Christianity and Islam. It's not even an economic battle between rich and poor. Because there is no war to be had.

The poor should be fighting the rich, but they are too busy fighting each other. And this is not about the politics of greed/envy. It's about wanting a decent life for your children. We live as slaves for fuck's sake. In a prison planet. With cameras watching our every move and now microphones recording our every conversation not just on the telephone but in the supermarket where we shop. And no one bats an eyelid!

How did it come to this?

We didn't love our freedom enough?

Our we just loved our free porn and tossing off more?



Iran wants to come in to the new world. Its people aren't so far different to us. They want to have kids. Be healthy. See their family healthy. Hell, maybe even dress in some nice clothes and have nice relationships, marriages, looking after children, looking after parents when they get old.

I refuse to believe that Iran is the anti-christ or whatever monster it is being painted as.

Also, it's important for us to come in to the real world and realise that Iran has been conducting proxy operations that have seen both US and UK service men killed. Then again, they did fight ISIS.

Permanent war. Total war.

Everyone on the ground paranoid and ripping each other's throats out.

And that is the whole point. Whoever the (((masters))) are. Everything is going according to plan. Objective realised: nothing moves on, economic sanctions bite harder every year - foments more internal domestic grief - rinse, repeat - no room to breathe, to thrive, to come in to the new world.


I'd say this war is going pretty well really. For the Masters of War.


The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was to make people think he wasn't real.

The greatest trick the war-mongers ever pulled was to make us think we weren't already at war.



There will be no war with Iran.

The real war is right here right now.

And we are fighting it.

Whether we realise it or not.
 

Aurini

Ostrich
So bear with me for a sec.

I've been playing a lot of Europa Universalis 4 lately. If you haven't heard of it - well, it takes at least an hour to learn the basics of gameplay, and it's run on the aptly-named Clausewitz game engine. Think Civilization on ADHD medication.

So in the game, you start out in 1450, with whatever nation state you choose. You probably want to expand your border; how do you do it? War, diplomatic marriages, vassalization - whatever works. Integrating countries is time consuming and expensive, and initially there's going to be a lot of discontent. But invest enough time and energy - choose the right social policies (stay Catholic or Protestant reformation?) - and eventually you've painted the map a nice solid colour. Now you can invest in that area, and prepare to take over more territory.

All of this happens in a fog of war, of course. You can only see what you and your allies can see.

Now: what happens when all the borders have become too established to bother changing them? When you've got more benefits from trade with your neighbours than you would from warring with them?

The game itself ends in 1850; and right around that time is when national borders solidified. WW1 and 2 were 19th century wars happening a century too late. They accomplished very little, if anything, for the nations involved. WW1 in particular - think of all that death to try and claim five meters of ground, thanks to trench warfare. Why even bother?

So, back to the fog of war. If the national boundaries are pretty much set in stone - why bother hiding what you're doing from your opponents? Heck, your opponents have inherited the same sort of nation-state as yours. One where the people work, and do what they're told. At this point, the goal is to pretend that the Clausewitzian game is still playing, because it gives the citizens a flag to rally around. Both you and your 'opponent' are invested in the exact same thing; figuring out how to get the people to behave, when the Ottomans are no longer the threat they once were.

Bleeding-hearts might say we should uplift the people. Have you met people? Most of them are idiots. I just linked to Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Only about 1 in 5 adults understands Social Contract Theory, let alone universal ethical principles. You don't want kids to vote - why would you want to empower these idiots just because they're the age of majority? We're talking about people who are addicted to pokemon, and who are killing themselves with opioids. Keep those buffoons away from the button! Thank God there's Sportsnet to keep them entertained.

My point is that the idea of nation states warring is 200 years out of date. Geopolitics and Realpolitik are smokescreens for the fact that the game has fundamentally changed. Rigsby is right; this is all just public entertainment, because we haven't found a myth for people to believe in that's more useful than the nation state. Part of the problem with creating such a myth is that most people are too stupid to understand even the nation state - they only understand "Man in uniform give orders, me obey." The myths that might be created are utterly beyond the ken of most of these donkeys - so for the time being, the old game is being played, only they're pulling their punches. Boxing has turned into WWE, but thankfully most people haven't noticed just yet.

As to what is going on, that's something I'm trying to figure out. Because I'm sick of the donkeys giving me fleas.

EDIT: Just to be clear, I'm not saying that nuclear war is out of the picture - it's entirely possible for the game of grab-ass to escalate, and then somebody pulls out a loaded gun. But until that happens, it's still just grab-ass. When it comes to stuff like Iran, you should have no opinion or you should have the correct opinion; it's not like we have any control over it anyway.
 

Easy_C

Crow
This is a war that can never happen. And if it ever does it will be holy in more than one sense of the word. Because whilst Iran have the advantage on the ground, if push ever came to shove, US have the advantage in the form of the largest naval deployment in history (The US 5th Fleet stationed out of Manama, Bahrain), merely miles away, and with all that airborne firepower that included the nastiest missiles (non-nuclear, but nukes too don't forget) ever invented. Even being 50 feet underground rock solid mountain won't help you when the latest ordnance drops from the heavens.

It would be a war of attrition. And that is without the other proxies becoming involved, not least Russia and China.
There's one important factor:

The entities pushing this just view the US as a tool to get what they want. To them US military losses are entirely expendable because it's someone else's loss and not theirs. So they don't actually care about the losses the US endures so long as the Iranian military is crippled as a viable threat.
 

Handsome Creepy Eel

Owl
Gold Member
Breitbart has really jumped the shark with their Iran hysteria. Their big scoop today is that Elizabeth Warren's son in law made a movie that was funded by their ministry... Which sounds ominous until you read that the movie is a drama about a farmer who loses his job.
 
Aurini-

I'm in agreement with your views except one thing-the nation states are still warring. And this time the method of weapon is far more destructive than any other weapons in the past save for nukes. This method requires no physical warfare of any sort. Best of all, the attacked population never have and never will know they are being attacked. It's an invisible weapon. Yet their country can be laid to waste on comparable scale to the destruction wrought in WW2.

Economic warfare. The central choices of weapons for this warfare is austerity and debt enslavement. The organization responsible for this task is IMF, International Monetary Fund.

This warfare has been honed and perfected over the decades...accumulating in the largest non physical warfare ever to be conducted early 90s, an atomic bomb equivalent; the complete and total annihilation of Russia with the corresponding fallout to other former Soviet satellites.

All spheres of life: social, economic, moral, morality, and all types of infrastructures and institutions completely in ruins. At least a million people would die over the next decade. Over hundred million in dire poverty. Millions more aborted babies.

This is the face of economic warfare and Russia was the victim of the largest economic warfare.

Russia still has yet to recover more than two decades later.
 
Aurini said:
Bleeding-hearts might say we should uplift the people. Have you met people? Most of them are idiots. I just linked to Kohlberg's stages of moral development. Only about 1 in 5 adults understands Social Contract Theory, let alone universal ethical principles. You don't want kids to vote - why would you want to empower these idiots just because they're the age of majority? We're talking about people who are addicted to pokemon, and who are killing themselves with opioids. Keep those buffoons away from the button! Thank God
Ofcourse this is how it is. This is normal. 4 out of 5 people are stupid because this is exactly what nature intended. This is called a community.

There is only only Alpha in a pride, otherwise it wouldnt work. Different paths for different people all in the same community.

We are not interested in lifting all the people. We need to lift the 1 in 10 top guy above the 9 others. Our current system is all about flattening that natural triangle of a small community. But human nature is hard-wired that way for a reason.

The elites dont want that community to have a King. A community with a King in a modern society is the greatest fear of the elites. This is why you cannot legally be obligated to disclose who you voted for. I cannot force the people in my family to vote for anyone, because that would undermine the power of the state. This is where the community is broken and we are forced to atomize.

There is no need for the bottom 5 out of 10 people to think about politics. Only the top people need to think about that. But Empire seeks to castrate the local King, the natural Alpha, by monogamy, by free markets, by atomization. The younger brother should respect the older brother and avoid competition/confrontation, this is the natural order of humans. But this natural human structure is broken by the state, who empowers the younger brother, taking advantage of his naturally softer disposition with Liberal doctrine, to compete and argue with the older one. Thus breaks the family and community.

Natural Human disposition is to live in small family groups and communities. Not groups (triangles) of 50mill+. This is at odds with the idea of the Nation-state, Empire, Capitalism and Elitism.

The 5 of 10 guys at the bottom are happy the 5 above them are limited by the state. The numerous smaller triangles are flattened, and an unnaturally large one, the Nation-state is created in their place.

With only one triangle, but many different ideas, histories and cultures available for people to identify with, there begins a never ending struggle for power at the apex for the differing world-views. The piecemeal transactions of the market for ideas, for status objects, social levelling results in a mish-mash of differing and incompatible world views in one open space.

The field is large, but undifferentiated. Some play football, some cricket, and some rugby. All in one field, at the same time. The referee, in a position of power, wants to referee the biggest game, so wont split the field into different areas, one for each game. The football player want the rugby player to stop using his hands, maybe if he tries hard enough he and the other football players can argue loudly enough to prove football is the better game, and get everyone to play that. The rugby players do the same. No one gets to play the game they want. Each one thinking his game is the best, because that is what he is used to, and no one wants to give up their game, to lose the skill built up over time. So we have a stalemate, a lot of arguing, and instead of Dharma-shetre (The Field of Dharma, Law) we only have a field of Chaos.

Triangles are made of social groups. To break the larger triangle and establish a smaller one, one needs to understand the mechanics of social status. To create a triangle from a flat structure, you need to be the best, have access to the best, or to be able to make someone the best in social status. Once you have the best, you find the second tier, and so on until the bottom level. Then, this is important, everyone must know who is at the bottom. The bottom must be hell. They must be punished (socially). Fear of ending up at the bottom with negative social prestige is the only weapon you have to control the group.

The above is the natural structure of human societies. It has been suppressed over millenia by forces seeking the labour or other human capital of the lowest class. The drive for power and control of larger territories suppressed social levelling at the smaller scale. The smaller scale is where structure is created.

Human Evolution, Art, Greatness, Heroism are born of the desire for Social Prestige. Modern Society, the Nation-State, Capitalism nullify Social Prestige at the smaller triangles, by giving the lower-level the ability to purchase Goods, Ideas, Experiences in the free market, and thus Identities that give them a false sense of Social Prestige. That stupid cousin of yours, thinks he could be better than you, cos wears expensive clothes, and the adverts told him that makes him better than you.

In Social Triangles no one can be better than The Best. Doesnt matter what job they have been given, how much money the outsiders give them for their labour, what brand of car they have been sold, or what political idea they have been told makes them better.

Social structures can only exist as triangles, never flat, this is an important point. That requires power at the apex, but which the state will always seek to destroy.

Triangles benefit from outside conflict, to direct any internal conflict out. Thus, Big Triangles ie Nation-States will tend towards big conflicts. Hence, it is in the interest of humanity to progress beyond Empire, and the Nation-State, towards Freedom, Community, Trust and Co-operation.

Humans must live according their natural order. We are hard-wired for Community and competition for Social Prestige. Psychological well-being is more important then material well-being. Now that we have reached an age of abundance, there is no aim for which we should sacrifice the human psychological well-being that comes from living in accordance with our own nature.To go against the natural order is to live in darkness and suffering, as we are seeing.

For the natural order to return, the bottom 5 out of 10 (men) will need to be put in their place again. Their political, cultural, religious and economic decisions need to be controlled and cannot be 'free'. It's easy for someone to start a religion which tells the loser he is actually a winner, and should go against his community.

If you watch this video you will see that many people who leave Islam are amongst the best in their communities. "The Best of the Best" as the guy puts it. The best have to leave because the (external) religion/system is more concerned with empowering the bottom 5/10 than the actual best. So now you have empowered fools preaching to people much better than them. So there is a struggle for power, between local elites (The Best) and on the other hand an alliance of the weak (bottom 50% of men) with powers concerned with Empire on a global scale.

The question is who will win. Will humanity suffer the rest of it's existence where the weak dominate the strong, where Morality, Freedom, Art, Beauty and Excellence are forced into darkness, where the Nation-State led by greed, empowers the weak, the immoral, the unmanly to rebel against their righteous brethren, where damsels cry out for heroic saviours, but are
 

Nineteen84

Ostrich
Moderator
In Afghanistan but potentially related -
high-ranking CIA officers were on plane that crashed in eastern Afghanistan



But there are [conflicting?] reports of a passenger plane:

Passenger plane carrying 83 people crashes in Afghanistan

It is learnt that the Ariana Afghan Airlines plane, which was en route to Kabul from Herat, crashed in territory controlled by the Taliban.
https://zeenews.india.com/world/pas...83-people-crashes-in-afghanistan-2259539.html

[EDIT: The Ariana crash has been denied.]
 

Easy_C

Crow
Random thought: if the local “usurpers” drop the hammer in the US in any big way there’s a fair bet it while happen AFTER most of the military has been deployed to Iran leaving local militarized PDs and federal enforcement militias as the dominant force locally.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
:laugh:

"Militarized police" in place of proper Armed Forces. Imagine those fat fucks having to attempt squad based maneuvers. Imagine them having to defend against organised violence rather than inflict it.

Talk about a paper army.
 

Hansel

Sparrow
This Afghan crash has way more implications than it seems. To take down an E-11A carrying CIA high-ranking officers requires an acute grasp of the battlefield through accurate intelligence and on-the-battlefield reports, and advanced anti-air missile capabilities. It’s impossible the Taliban pulled this off with no outside help, and it couldn’t just be mediocre outside help.

1a. American intelligence deployments have been jeopardized. Sure, we were never that covert in Afghanistan. But it’s CIA teams this time, which means it’s a one-off deployment that has nothing to do with regular schedules that the Taliban can possibly observe and make out the pattern for an ambush. Which means it has to be leaked out from the CIA itself, which means the covert arm of the US is not so covert anymore. There’s no way the Taliban could get that information by itself.

1b. The BACN was downed just 10 miles away from the airfield. The Taliban has apparently gathered much information on blind spots of US patrols where they could launch the missile, kill off any surviving personnel and gather valuable information and technology before diving.

2. The AA missile launched doesn’t have to be high-tech. Probably the old Stinger missiles the US gave when they supported the Taliban against the Soviets. If they ran out of it, Iran could have easily polish off the dust from their arsenal and hand them 2000 more missiles. Bleed, goyim, bleed. Bleed your money and soldiers away in a wasteland with nothing to gain.

Based on this, I’m strongly suspecting this to be a joint-military operations. The personnel are from the Taliban and the missiles are from the Taliban/Iran. That leaves the crucial part - the intelligence. There’s only two countries that have the power, Russia and China. Personally I’m leaning towards China. The KGB hasn’t been very competent lately, right now they’ve probably got their hands full on defecting agents and we can safely assume that they don’t even have the funds to maintain asset loyalties. The best they can do is battlefield scanning. For China, they’ve regularly surprised the world with the advanced technology they’ve been pushing out lately and there’s no question at least some of it is stolen from the the US. There’s sufficient reason to believe that they could buy off insiders in the CIA to acquire the info needed to launch this operation when they could sneak out literally containers of blueprints back to Beijing from the military-industry complex.

Random thought: lately people have been blaming the Wuhan coronavirus on Chinese wild animal consumption or leakage from the BSL-4 lab outside Wuhan. But MSM has conveniently neglected to consider the timing: the virus has suddenly exploded in number of infections right before Chinese New Year, the time when 4 hundred million Chinese commute across the country, a prime time for a virus to thrive. Coincidence? I think not. Coupled with the trade war, the HK protests and the Taiwan election, this screams CIA to me. Could this be a Chinese retaliation?
 

Easy_C

Crow
Hansel is correct. I had a much closer view and better exposure to the Afghan mind than even most of your infantry “on patrol” soldiers in my role and I feel confident saying this is beyond them.

I’m not legally allowed to say why but I feel 90% confident it’s China.
 

Leonard D Neubache

Owl
Gold Member
Unless there was something incredibly important about that plane then it would be a pretty paltry payback for releasing a bio-weapon that's crippling China entirely. If they are engaging in tit for tat then there's still a lot of vengeance waiting in the wings.
 

Hansel

Sparrow
Leonard D Neubache said:
Unless there was something incredibly important about that plane then it would be a pretty paltry payback for releasing a bio-weapon that's crippling China entirely. If they are engaging in tit for tat then there's still a lot of vengeance waiting in the wings.
We’ll never know what’s on the plane. But Iran is claiming that Michael D’Andrea, the chief engineer behind the drone strike on Soleimani and head of the CIA’s Iran Mission Center was on the plane and killed. Assuming that’s true, he would probably have quite a bit of information carried around him. Meanwhile, Afghanistan says there were 4 dead and 2 MIA. If it happens that D’Andrea is among those alive, things would be even dicier...
 
Top