Connecting the dots - Are we on the brink of calamity?

[Smiling Buddha]

Hello friends. Lately I've been working on a personal project to put together all of the dots that I have tended to look at in isolation over the past few years. In connecting these dots I have come to the conclusion that we are on the brink of some serious, serious s**t going down. I was inspired to put my spare time into this by the work of 'Aaron Hawkins', the man purportedly behind the stormcloudsgethering youtube channel and scgnews.com website. If you aren't familiar with SCG, I urge you to take a look at his channel - and soon.

I am only about halfway through the treatise but since the world seems to be moving very quickly right now, and I am notoriously slow to finish personal research projects, I figured I would share what I have come up with so far. Note that I have tried to structure the piece in a logical fashion and Part 4 (which will hopefully be added within the next day or two) specifically deals with Australia's impending financial-economic collapse, which will likely be triggered by events covered in the first three parts. Note also that Part 3 isn't quite complete yet either but is sufficiently so to allow you to get the bigger picture I am painting.

I welcome all constructive feedback on what is to follow. You'll note that my claims are all backed (with hotlinks) by reputable mainstream sources and/or reputable independent sources. If you disagree with any of these claims, I'd greatly appreciate links to information which is similarly reputable. With your help I might be able to refine my theory before attempting to spread it beyond bigfooty's attention. Thanks in advance to those who treat this thread and those who post in it with the respect these conversations deserve.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Part One - Is the US on the verge of civil war?

i) Large parts of the American population impoverished. History tells us that this a key ingredient in fomenting civil unrest. They are in far more strife than our mainstream news seems to want us to realise. Some 50 million Americans are on food stamps. Or, at least, they were, until $8b in cuts were made to the program a few weeks ago. In a country of 320 million. Half of the population lives paycheck to paycheck. The US has the weakest social safest net of any advanced country and so any further economic problems will only exacerbate these issues.

ii) Wealth and living inequality in the US is surprisingly high and widening by the day. Some argue this might be another a key ingredient in fomenting civil unrest. The following video explains just how much worse the situation has gotten since the beginning of the GFC.



iii) Faith in democracy is at record lows and slipping. More than 80% of Americans are dissatisfied with Congress (a record-high) and 6/10 would throw out every single member of Congress if they had that option on their ballot. Two-thirds of Americans are already concerned about the size and power for their government, and under Obama this figure is the highest it has been since these polls began.

iv) The Dept of Homeland Security (created after 9/11) has put in a purchase order for 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition (enough for a twenty-year hot war on American soil) and several thousand armoured personnel carriers. For domestic use. They appear to be planning for civil unrest and martial law. The following video shows what took place when Watertown was 'locked down' (another term for what was effectively martial law) after the Boston Bombings.



v) Following incidents such as Sandy Hook, the Obama government has taken steps to curtail citizens' consitutional right to bear arms, even stating he will do so "with or without Congress". In response, gun and ammunition sales have dramatically increased over the past year.

tl;dr The US is in far worse economic and political shape than most of us realise, and wealth inequality is rising by the day. Their 'law enforcement agencies' have become highly militarised since 9/11. These agencies' procurement and training strategies suggest that they are preparing for the inevitable outcome of what is taking place there: civil unrest and potentially civil war. It would appear that many Americans are making similar predictions and preparing themselves accordingly.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Part Two - Are we on the brink of World War III (Middle Eastern front)?

i) In 2012 the US and her allies (specifically UK and France) attempted to pass a UN resolution which they hoped would allow them to take out Syria's leader Assad the same way they had taken out Libya's Gaddafi in 2011. Russia and China vetoed the resolution as they have done two other similar resolutions. Put another way, the only thing that has so far stopped a Western invasion of Syria has been the veto by Russia and China. There is strong evidence that the 'chemical weapons' line spun by Obama and British PM David Cameron to justify this attempt at war was a blatant lie, like the WMDs coverstory for invading Iraq in 2003.

ii) Iran and Syria signed a mutual defense pact in 2006, meaning that if Syria were to be invaded, this would be tantamount to a declaration of a war with Iran. Note also that Russia leases a strategically invaluable port at Tartus, which provides Russia's only access to the Mediterranean Sea.

iii) We know that the US have long planned to invade Iran as the final act in its attempts to topple key Middle Eastern and African nations as part of a wider push for world supremacy. The first of the two following videos shows former US military General Wesley Clark, speaking in 2007 (before Libya was toppled by Western forces in 2011). The second features powerful pro-zionism lobbyist Patrick Clawson, who has worked for the IMF, World Bank and is now a director at the Washington Institute of Near East Policy, in a clip filmed in 2012.




iv) Iran happens to be a key ally of Russia, who have large defense contracts with the nation. Although they do not state so openly (in contrast to the US's blatant warmongering and threats), Russia would defend Iran militarily if she were to be invaded.

v) Saudi Arabia is a key ally of the US. During a private meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin which took place in August last year, Saudi Prince Bandar (then-head of Saudi intelligence) threatened Putin that if he did not allow an invasion of Syria, Chechen terrorist groups which Bandar claimed to control would attack Russia's Sochi Winter Olympics. Putin rebuffed this threat. Since then the Saudis have stepped up their support of the Syrian 'rebels' (terrorists attempting to overthrow the Syrian government).

tl;dr The US and UK attempted to use the same strategy of lying to the public to justify an invasion of Syria that was successfully used to invade Iraq, and it almost worked. This invasion of Syria was planned years ago, and it was foiled only by Russia and China. Key US allies are now attempting to topple Syria indirectly, which will either achieve the same desired outcome (a pro-Western government) or provide the pretext for another attempt at securing UN approval for an official invasion. An invasion of Syria will equate to an invasion of Iran (which the US has long wanted anyhow) and this will in turn lead to a Western war with Russia - in other words, World War III.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Part Three - Are we on the brink of World War III (Eastern European front)? [Updated 18/3/14]

i) The coup which took place in Kiev recently was clearly Western-backed, rather than the organic uprising by the masses the MSM would have you believe. There is ample evidence that this was yet another CIA-backed coup. Leaked calls have demonstrated that US officials were involved in hand-picking the 'interim government' and that the sniper attacks on civilians and police were carried out by the same people (i.e. plants to create chaos and garner international outrage). Whilst the protestors who initially gathered in Maidan were predominantly peaceful, the armed men who led the storming of government buildings and attacked police were clearly a violent, organised outfit led by far-right neo-Nazi militia - so much so that they not only overpowered the police, but managed to literally capture dozens of them.

ii) Ukraine is of tremendous economic, geopolitical importance, specifically with regards to its potential inclusion in Putin's Customs Union. Ukraine is seen as a key plank in any such 'Eurasian Union'. Former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has openly declared that American plans are to 'slow down or prevent' this Russian-led union from going ahead. Shortly after the 'interim government' was installed, a team from the IMF was sent to Kiev to organise loans (whose conditions will include reductions in services for Ukrainian people, including increased gas prices).

iii) Crimea is of tremendous strategic, geopolitical importance. One of the crucial factors in Germany's defeat in WWII was her insufficient supplies of oil, which some historians believe was Hitler's 'prime motive' for invading the Soviets when he did. In August 1941 Hitler declared, "The most important aim to be achieved before the onset of winter is not the capture of Moscow but, rather, the occupation of the Crimea, of the industrial and coalmining area of the Donets basin, the cutting of the Russian supply routes from the Caucasus oilfields...". Note that, in reference to the outcome of WWII, Stalin is quoted as saying, "The war was decided by engines and octane", while Churchill said, "Above all, petrol governed every movement". The following video goes into further detail about the geopolitical importance of Ukraine in general:

Embedded media from this media site is no longer available

iv) Propaganda, both overt and covert, to garner public and worldwide support for a Western invasion in Ukraine has been ramping up for months. Overtly, the New York Times (among other publications) has been running stories about Crimean Tatars' concerns of 'ethnic cleansing' and 'forced deportation' at the hands of Russian forces - examples here, here, and here. NYT has even tried to downplay the decision by the 'interim government' to remove Russian as an official language of Ukraine, despite a majority of Ukrainians in the Eastern part of the country speaking Russian as their first language. Covertly, the viral youtube video 'I am a Ukrainian' (embedded below) is easily shown to be a piece of shameless propaganda, produced by people with direct links to the US government.



v) The US has already begun its attempts to isolate Russia diplomatically. On the surface this appears to have worked to at least some degree with China abstaining from a recent UN resolution which sought to invalidate the recent referendum in Crimea. US officials have openly admitted that their strategy is to keep China from supporting 'separatist' movements elsewhere given their fear of Tibetan and Uighur movements closer to home. We know that the US has been funding and fomenting separatist agitations in Xinjiang for years through its 'National Endowment for Democracy'. China's support of the 2001 US invasion of Afghanistan (the first time since the Cold War that China supported US military strikes in another country) came on the proviso that the US officially list Uighur separatist groups as 'terrorists', which the US promptly did. The US is attempting to use its political leverage combined with CCP fears of separatism to isolate Russia on the international stage and specifically the UN Security Council.

vi) Troop mobilisation is ramping up. There are alleged to be as many as 60,000 Russian troops already within Crimea itself, although different sources cite lower figures. Kiev has approved its own mobilisation and announced the creation of a new 60,000-strong National Guard. US/NATO have yet to send their own troops but the Russians have already captured a US drone which had been flying over Crimea. More significant than any of this is that Russian forces have already been sent into Ukrainian territory beyond Crimea.

tl;dr The current events in Ukraine and surrounding areas are not an unforeseen, spontaneous reaction to a peaceful public uprising in Kiev, but the results of a calculated gambit by Western powers to destroy the Kremlin's plans to increase Russia's sphere of influence via the customs union. Russia's response in taking Crimea is a predictable play given the geopolitical importance of the area. Western media is prepping the masses for any military action which is to follow by repeating blatant propaganda which bears little resemblance to the realities of what is taking place. Attempts by the US to isolate Russia on the world stage, Ukrainian troop mobilisation and further Russian incursion into Ukrainian territory suggest that this crisis will not end with the return of Crimea to Russia.

 

[Smiling Buddha]

Part Four - Is Australia on the verge of financial/economic collapse? [Updated 20/3/14]

i) Australian banks are incredibly reliant on the ongoing stability of the domestic residential real estate market. Since 1990, Australian business loans have shrunk from 270% of the value of housing lending to less than 60%. The following chart shows that around two-thirds of Australian major bank lending is directed towards residential real estate.

ii) Australian banks are highly leveraged. A mere 4% fall in asset values would render the Big Four banks insolvent. This is because the Big Four are leveraged to 27 times their underlying capital. In fact, the Big Four leverage their Tier 1 capital as much as 85 times when advancing home loans. Without getting too technical, Tier 1 capital is the good kind of capital, the type you want banks to have plenty of in case of problems. A bank's Tier 1 capital ratio is determined by dividing the total Tier 1 capital amount (numerator) by the Risk Weighted Assets on the bank's books (denominator). Government bonds (historically safe) have a risk weighting of 0%, the riskiest assets have a risk weighting of 100% (see this for more detail).

Here is the tricky bit: Mortgaged real estate is given a risk weighting of only 15-20% by Australia's Big Four, so the denominator in these equations is deceptively small. The Big Four officially declare Tier 1 capital ratios of between 7.8% and 8.8% but these figures understate the true magnitude of the assets on their books, because the actual dollar value of these assets (denominator) is lowered in these equations by their low risk weighting. If the target capital ratio is 8%, and the risk weighting on mortgaged real estate is 20%, this means that a Big Bank need hold only $1.60 worth of Tier 1 reserves for every $100 it loans out for mortgages in order to claim a capital ratio of '8%'.

iii) Australian banks came a lot closer to collapse during the height of the GFC than you may think. It was only announced in late 2010 that in the period following the Lehman Brothers collapse in late 2008, the Federal Reserve bank in the US had to make emergency loans (called a 'Term Auction Facility') of $4.5b to NAB and $1.09b to Westpac. See this Federal Reserve spreadsheet for yourself. Note that the details of these emergency loans were only revealed due to an amendment pushed by an independent American Senator. Further details emerged after Bloomberg won a Freedom of Information court case to force the Federal Reserve (which had argued that releasing this information would create a 'stigma' around the banking industry) to open up their books. Our own Reserve Bank of Australia had to utilise this same Fed emergency lending facility to the tune of $53b. Without these emergency loans, our financial system would have collapsed. Compare this reality with what is reported in the MSM.

Note that Australia is one of the few developed countries whose central bank does not enforce monetary reserve requirements. Capital reserves - yes; monetary reserves - no. Following the collapse of Lehman Brothers, Australian depositors withdrew about $5.5b from their banks in the space of ten weeks, which led to the RBA having to ask their printers to create about $10b worth of new notes quicksmart - it was a 'silent run' on the banks that to this day has been scarcely reported on by the mainstream media.
iv) Bank regulations have scarcely improved since the GFC:

• The regulators have huge conflicts of interest. In late 2012 the IMF released a report in which called for an increase in Tier 1 capital ratios amongst the Big Banks. At the time, former CBA chief David Murray joined others in rejecting this proposal. Murray is now head of Treasurer Joe Hockey's inquiry into financial services, which will also receive the input of other vested interests such as David Morgan (ex-chairman of the Australian Bankers Association), Carolyn Hewson (former director of Westpac), and Craig Dunn (outgoing head of AMP and its banking subsidiary). If this all seems a little cosy, note that Treasury secretaries Ken Henry and Ted Evans and RBA governor Ian Macfarlane have all recently served on major bank boards. Hockey's inquiry is expected to report back by November 2014. In announcing the inquiry, Hockey also declared a three-year moratorium on significant new regulation on the banking sector.

• Capital ratios have barely improved. The Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) has asked the Big Four to raise minimum Tier 1 capital ratios by a measly 1% but even this does not come into effect until 2016 - and it was so limp-wristed that share prices in the major banks actually went up upon the announcement. In fact, the current Tier 1 capital ratios of the Big Four are already above these 'tough' minimums to be introduced in 2016. Note that the banks themselves get to determine the risk-weighting of assets. That is, the regulator stipulates a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio, but the Big Banks get to decide how to measure the assets that make up the denominator of that ratio.

• Liquidity requirements have actually gotten worse. The banks will be required by 2015 to meet minimum liquidity requirements, but in order to save the banks from having to actually keep enough liquid assets on hand to meet these requirements, the RBA has effectively pre-approved the Big Four for $380b of bailout loans at the cash rate +.4%. The figure below illustrates how much of the Big Banks' minimum liquidity has been pre-approved by you, the taxpayer.

v) Banks (and related companies) make up a huge proportion of our overall economy. Financial services (of which the banking sector constitutes a major part) is a bigger share of Australia's national production than any other industry, having surpassed mining, farming, education and health services in the decade from 2000. With a combined market capitalisation of $390b, the Big Four banks alone comprise more than a quarter of the ASX200. Our Big Four banks are all in the world's top 20 lenders - in a country of some 23m people. Whereas manufacturing and agriculture once made up a sizable proportion of our economy, the vast majority of us are now employed in the services sector:

vi) Australian house prices are currently being driven up by foreign investors. As a response to the GFC and the potential for it to undermine Australia's real estate market, the Rudd government significantly relaxed foreign ownership laws pertaining to real estate in 2008 (implemented 2009). While these changes were slightly modified in 2010, their effects continue unabated to this day, with (known) foreign investment in real estate totaling more than $17b last financial year. Chinese investors alone are purchasing 18% and 14% respectively of new homes in Sydney and Melbourne. Other countries have experienced similar issues and dealt with them accordingly (see Hong Kong, Canada, Singapore, New Zealand) while Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey has launched an inquiry which isn't due to report back until October of this year.

vii) Australia's economy is in much worse shape than we're led to believe. GDP per capita has grown less than 1% per annum since the beginning of the GFC. If Victoria isn't already in recession, it is headed towards it. Jobs are being shed left, right and centre. Unemployment and underemployment continue to rise. Small business insolvencies are increasing. Every single state of this nation, as well as the national government, are not only in debt but increasing their debt levels as we speak. Despite the boom times enjoyed during the period in question, Australian federal governments will have achieved budget surpluses in only 11 of 25 financial years from 1990-2015, and the structural deficit (which began under the 'strong economic manager' John Howard and continued under the ALP) means we might not see another surplus for a very long time - if ever. Governments, national and state, are preparing to sell off yet more assets to temporarily make up the shortfall. Several states' credit ratings have been dropped which will make borrowing more expensive.

tl;dr Our big banks rely very heavily on real estate lending. These banks are highly leveraged and even a small (4%) drop in their asset values would see them insolvent. Their leverage ratios are more alarming when you learn how they are calculated, and even more alarming again when you realise that the banks valuation methods are effectively self-regulated. Our Big Banks were much closer to collapse post-GFC than the media tends to tell us - they didn't just come close to running out of capital, they had to print up $10b of notes just to avoid running out of currency. Regulations in this country have not improved post-GFC and the changes that have been implemented have arguably made things worse, with the taxpayer pre-approving the Big Four banks for hundred-billion-dollar bailouts. The people charged with overseeing regulation of the banks are hopelessly conflicted due to their connections with the banks.

If the banks were to collapse, they would take the entire national economy with them because they form the heart of not just our financial system but our economic 'production' and 'wealth' as well. The main driver pushing house prices further up is foreign investment, which other countries are clamping down on (which leads one to wonder why our government hasn't done similar) and our own economy, despite 'weathering the storm' of the GFC, is already in big trouble. Essentially, any knock to our economy (or that of our major trading partners) could precipitate a financial (and then economic) collapse - one which most of us can barely imagine the consequences of.

 

[clogged]

Part One - Is the US on the verge of civil war?

Strangely enough there is a lot of thinking in Russian circles that this is a reasonable likelihood of happening - or more reasonably a severe economic collapse similar to what they went through in the 1990s.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Strangely enough there is a lot of thinking in Russian circles that this is a reasonable likelihood of happening - or more reasonably a severe economic collapse similar to what they went through in the 1990s.

It wouldn't surprise me. It is also why China are playing the financial game. Step 1, undermine the US's industrial capabilities and massively increase the trade deficit via cheap goods facilitated by artificially depressed labor prices. Step 2, get US addicted to debt and foreign loans, so create a budget imbalance to go with the trade imbalance. Step 3, secure as yet non exploited resources in frontier regions such as West Africa. Step 4, as labor costs become uncontrollable begin slow process of deregulation and become a vacuum for foreign capital. Step 5, undermine the petro dollar, by directly conducting trade in native currencies or gold.

Ok, I am kind of joking. Not sure if it has been that deliberate but the Chinese combined with the US grifter class are going a long way into sinking the country into unmanageable debt, inequality, poverty and maybe eventually civil war.

 

[blackcat]

It wouldn't surprise me. It is also why China are playing the financial game. Step 1, undermine the US's industrial capabilities and massively increase the trade deficit via cheap goods facilitated by artificially depressed labor prices. Step 2, get US addicted to debt and foreign loans, so create a budget imbalance to go with the trade imbalance. Step 3, secure as yet non exploited resources in frontier regions such as West Africa. Step 4, as labor costs become uncontrollable begin slow process of deregulation and become a vacuum for foreign capital. Step 5, undermine the petro dollar, by directly conducting trade in native currencies or gold.

Ok, I am kind of joking. Not sure if it has been that deliberate but the Chinese combined with the US grifter class are going a long way into sinking the country into unmanageable debt, inequality, poverty and maybe eventually civil war.

I would say, it is a confluence of those external factors. But the focus has to be internal, one billion of them.

And on Africa, that is why with have the first US defense command centre for Africa, AFRICOM, based in sou' italy of all places. ringfence sinos.

and puttng on my conspiracy hat, its a nice fit for me, i stole it off magic buddha, the KONY video had NCA bumping up the views, if not using youtube and bandwidth, just changing the views to tens of million. it certainly was not gangnam style or michelle jenneke youtube.com/watch?v=8PmD7FhbZCg

 

[evo]

I consider the Part 1 thesis has a lot of merit.Part 2 not so much, because the US cant afford a new major international offensive due to part 1

 

[clogged]

I consider the Part 1 thesis has a lot of merit.Part 2 not so much, because the US cant afford a new major international offensive due to part 1

Depends though whether they lash out as they collapse. The Soviet Union collapsed relatively peacefully, though many thought it wouldn't.

 

[clogged]

It wouldn't surprise me. It is also why China are playing the financial game. Step 1, undermine the US's industrial capabilities and massively increase the trade deficit via cheap goods facilitated by artificially depressed labor prices. Step 2, get US addicted to debt and foreign loans, so create a budget imbalance to go with the trade imbalance. Step 3, secure as yet non exploited resources in frontier regions such as West Africa. Step 4, as labor costs become uncontrollable begin slow process of deregulation and become a vacuum for foreign capital. Step 5, undermine the petro dollar, by directly conducting trade in native currencies or gold.

Ok, I am kind of joking. Not sure if it has been that deliberate but the Chinese combined with the US grifter class are going a long way into sinking the country into unmanageable debt, inequality, poverty and maybe eventually civil war.

Yep. Russia though no longer have the capability to play that game, they simply believe the US is heading towards collapse as did the Soviet Union and Russian Federation.

 

[Silent Alarm]

I consider the Part 1 thesis has a lot of merit.Part 2 not so much, because the US cant afford a new major international offensive due to part 1

Haven't most historians and economists realised war's actually good for a country's economy? So surely wouldn't a European war with US involvement make point one redundant. Or would a US civil war be the first step, creating some 'end goal,' with the pillaged state of the country then being fixed by a global war?

I'm not saying this is a chance to happen at all, but is this the thought process?

 

[The_Reaper]

On the topic of financial warfare isn't that would Reagan did in the 80s? He persuaded the Saudis to flood the market with cheap oil as to weaken the Soviet Unions main import.

Haven't most historians and economists realised war's actually good for a country's economy? So surely wouldn't a European war with US involvement make point one redundant. Or would a US civil war be the first step, creating some 'end goal,' with the pillaged state of the country then being fixed by a global war?

I'm not saying this is a chance to happen at all, but is this the thought process?

Not really.
It helped the Yanks in World War II but that's because the war wasn't fought on American soil and they could make money selling other countries what they needed.

It certainly ruined the Europeans for a while. As did WWI which led to the collapse of the colonial empires because of this.

 

[evo]

Haven't most historians and economists realised war's actually good for a country's economy?

not good economists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broken_window_falacy

 

[Hank Scorpion]

Some interesting points made, not that I agree with all of them.

Part 1 has some merit, parts 2 and 3 I'm not so sure and part 4 would need some explanation.

If it is true that divide between rich and poor continues to grow, then civil war is certainly a possibility. It will mostly depend on how far Congress will go with cuts to welfare.

If people don't have access to the bare essentials, such as those provided by food stamps, there will be a massive spike in crime, unrest, and potentially civil war.

 

[medusala]

Haven't most historians and economists realised war's actually good for a country's economy?

No just magic pudding types (and alien invasion would do, just ask Krugman)

 

[benchwarmer5]

I just hope the revolution comes while I am still young

 

[blackcat]

Haven't most historians and economists realised war's actually good for a country's economy? So surely wouldn't a European war with US involvement make point one redundant. Or would a US civil war be the first step, creating some 'end goal,' with the pillaged state of the country then being fixed by a global war?

I'm not saying this is a chance to happen at all, but is this the thought process?

what, George Dubbya Bush is now a Chilean boy grad from Chicago?

 

[medusala]

what, George Dubbya Bush is now a Chilean boy grad from Chicago?

Harvard (Obama get an mba there?) Wonder how many paintings of him hang on the wall? Doubt too many.


As for Kirchner, love this quote.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2304369/What-Uruguays-Jose-Mujica-called-Argentinas-president-Cristina-Kirchner-thought-listening.html#ixzz2wF0OMtct

Argentina has made a formal complaint to its neighbour Uruguay after the country's president called his female Argentine counterpart an 'old hag'.
The famously candid Jose Mujica had no idea his microphone was switched on when he attacked Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, 60, moments before a press conference.
He was heard loudly: 'That old hag's worse than the cross-eyed one,' referring to Ms Kirchner's late husband and former Argentinian president Nestor Kirchner.

 

[Catfish Alley]

The US are stretched as it is. They are struggling to contain places like Iraq and Afghanistan with a lot of international assistance. I'm not sure how they could think they would take on Iran and Russia as well.

 

[blackcat]

Harvard (Obama get an mba there?) Wonder how many paintings of him hang on the wall? Doubt too many.


As for Kirchner, love this quote.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2304369/What-Uruguays-Jose-Mujica-called-Argentinas-president-Cristina-Kirchner-thought-listening.html#ixzz2wF0OMtct

Argentina has made a formal complaint to its neighbour Uruguay after the country's president called his female Argentine counterpart an 'old hag'.
The famously candid Jose Mujica had no idea his microphone was switched on when he attacked Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner, 60, moments before a press conference.
He was heard loudly: 'That old hag's worse than the cross-eyed one,' referring to Ms Kirchner's late husband and former Argentinian president Nestor Kirchner.

undergrad at Columbia, transfered from Occidental, I think that is a good liberal arts cge in Cal, then the law degree in Cambridge (Hvd) after doing social work in Chicago and building his political network for the Dems

 

[blackcat]

Hello friends.

 

[MaddAdam]

Tartus is in Syria. Iran has no Mediterranean coast.

 

[Slax]

The US are stretched as it is. They are struggling to contain places like Iraq and Afghanistan with a lot of international assistance. I'm not sure how they could think they would take on Iran and Russia as well.

The problem is that they still want to puff out their chest and pretend they are not. Crimea is a prime example, whilst the USA may threaten a lot of things they will get no support from NATO, none of them are stupid enough to assist and have far more to lose than gain (Unfortunately Abbott would agree to help).

They also are struggling to work out how to deal with China. The Chinese are developing a navy that will be able to compete with the USA within 10 years and thus the USA dominance, the USA by contrast is having to reduce its because of a terrible economy. As military expenditure drops because of needs to reduce budget deficits jobs will disappear through the industrial heartland and this is dangerous for the USA. Whilst it may not lead to civil war it will hopefully lead to the rise of a third political force in the USA.

 

[MaddAdam]

The US doesn't want to fight Iran. The US wants Iran to stop supplying China with energy.

For a while it looked like "the stick" was the way to do that. Now they are going the carrot.