15-Jul-18 World View -- Israel prepares for war on two fronts, Gaza and Syria

[Guest]

CH, when you started linking to Wikpedia, I knew you really truly sucked.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

....

China's territorial disputes are with its neighbors, not with the west. China would be happy with genuine western neutrality in those disputes if it means they get to conquer the disputed territories. The Notion that China deliberate sought western involvement in the disputes is nonsense. Modern Russia and Iran are military/industrial powerhouses, they are not democracies. China is a communist state, not an ethnic nationalist one, Most Chinese ethnic nationalists are anti-CCP because they hate CCP policies that allow non-Han Chinese groups autonomous Zones. Xi is attempting to re-inject more doses of Marxism (a very globalist ideology) into the CCP. The Rural Chinese would not favor the CCP because they are discriminated against under CCP rule. The Islamists in the middle east are mainly the Shiites lead by Iran; Iran is an ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, Hezbollah is Shiite and loyal to Iran, the Sunni Islamists generally seek the overthrow of the Sunni governments because they are the opposition party in most of those countries. The Actual Sunni governments are generally either Secular or Traditionalist.

http s://etcetcetc...

And what is your point?

Will China be the leader of the anti-west alliance in the upcoming Crisis war?
Will Russia and Iran both be in the pro-west alliance (even as merely a convenience)?
Will the "maximally chaotic" muslims be allied with China?
Will the "not overly apocalyptic" muslims be (strangely) allied with the west?

What are you arguing?

Your facts and opinions are lovely, but what do they point at? You SEEM to be arguing minutia in support of SOMETHING, but I'm a bit confused as to what the something is in the muddle of your stirred hot and sour bowl of soup of opinions.

Now, if you could state ONE (isolated) thing that you "see coming", and explain why you see it, that would start the process.

[CH86]

....

China's territorial disputes are with its neighbors, not with the west. China would be happy with genuine western neutrality in those disputes if it means they get to conquer the disputed territories. The Notion that China deliberate sought western involvement in the disputes is nonsense. Modern Russia and Iran are military/industrial powerhouses, they are not democracies. China is a communist state, not an ethnic nationalist one, Most Chinese ethnic nationalists are anti-CCP because they hate CCP policies that allow non-Han Chinese groups autonomous Zones. Xi is attempting to re-inject more doses of Marxism (a very globalist ideology) into the CCP. The Rural Chinese would not favor the CCP because they are discriminated against under CCP rule. The Islamists in the middle east are mainly the Shiites lead by Iran; Iran is an ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, Hezbollah is Shiite and loyal to Iran, the Sunni Islamists generally seek the overthrow of the Sunni governments because they are the opposition party in most of those countries. The Actual Sunni governments are generally either Secular or Traditionalist.

http s://etcetcetc...

And what is your point?


Will China be the leader of the anti-west alliance in the upcoming Crisis war?
Will Russia and Iran both be in the pro-west alliance (even as merely a convenience)?
Will the "maximally chaotic" muslims be allied with China?
Will the "not overly apocalyptic" muslims be (strangely) allied with the west?

What are you arguing?

Your facts and opinions are lovely, but what do they point at? You SEEM to be arguing minutia in support of SOMETHING, but I'm a bit confused as to what the something is in the muddle of your stirred hot and sour bowl of soup of opinions.

Now, if you could state ONE (isolated) thing that you "see coming", and explain why you see it, that would start the process.

I Think the war would be essentially an Asian war. China's war would be with its neighbors, who would end up under Russian Leadership against China. The West may get pulled in later on after Asia is in a state of full-scale war, but your proposed sequence of western involvement first makes no sense given the geographical locations of the belligerents. The Third world war would not be about the west as there is currently no anti-western alliance and the Asian powers do not trust each other. China would want to conquer Taiwan in order to establish the CCP as the undisputed authority within the sinosphere and close the book on the Chinese Civil war regardless of whether Taiwan would be being helped by the US or Not. India and Pakistan are enemies and this would be the case regardless of any western participation. China and India would have their disputes which can only be resolved by one side being defeated or backing down, and this would be the case regardless of whether western countries participate in the conflict or not. In the Middle east Erdogan has taken up the banner of defending Sunnis, that means that an alliance between Erdogan and Assad is impossible as Assad is using gloves off methods against the Sunnis. North Korea is a threat to the region as long as it has Nukes and this would be the case regardless of whether the US is in the region or Not. Given that the Asian countries have contested borders with each other and have military assets directed against one another, while the western countries do no have any territorial disputes with any Asian countries, what would cause the Asian nations to suddenly forget their enmities against each other and ally with one another for any reason?

For Example even if Xi proposed such an Idea let say to India's Modi, even if Modi agreed with him, what would be in it for Modi. Instead such a conversation would go like this:

Xi: Both of our Countries are of tough Asian blood, we are fellow Asians and are superior and More virile than these decadent westerners, together we can crush the west underfoot. Join us.

Modi (to Xi): You have a whole army massed at my border and directed against me, even as we speak our two armies are staring eyeball to eyeball. You have Missiles pointed at my cities and I have Missiles pointed at yours. You are allied with MY blood enemy (pakistan) as well, and now you ask me to join you just to fight the west, why would I have any reason to trust a word that's coming out your mouth, whats in it for us (india), I would gain nothing from this.

[FishbellykanakaDude]

China's territorial disputes are with its neighbors, not with the west. China would be happy with genuine western neutrality in those disputes if it means they get to conquer the disputed territories. The Notion that China deliberate sought western involvement in the disputes is nonsense. Modern Russia and Iran are military/industrial powerhouses, they are not democracies. China is a communist state, not an ethnic nationalist one, Most Chinese ethnic nationalists are anti-CCP because they hate CCP policies that allow non-Han Chinese groups autonomous Zones. Xi is attempting to re-inject more doses of Marxism (a very globalist ideology) into the CCP. The Rural Chinese would not favor the CCP because they are discriminated against under CCP rule. The Islamists in the middle east are mainly the Shiites lead by Iran; Iran is an ISLAMIC REPUBLIC, Hezbollah is Shiite and loyal to Iran, the Sunni Islamists generally seek the overthrow of the Sunni governments because they are the opposition party in most of those countries. The Actual Sunni governments are generally either Secular or Traditionalist.

http s://etcetcetc...

And what is your point?


Will China be the leader of the anti-west alliance in the upcoming Crisis war?
Will Russia and Iran both be in the pro-west alliance (even as merely a convenience)?
Will the "maximally chaotic" muslims be allied with China?
Will the "not overly apocalyptic" muslims be (strangely) allied with the west?

What are you arguing?

Your facts and opinions are lovely, but what do they point at? You SEEM to be arguing minutia in support of SOMETHING, but I'm a bit confused as to what the something is in the muddle of your stirred hot and sour bowl of soup of opinions.

Now, if you could state ONE (isolated) thing that you "see coming", and explain why you see it, that would start the process.

I Think the war would be essentially an Asian war. China's war would be with its neighbors, who would end up under Russian Leadership against China. The West may get pulled in later on after Asia is in a state of full-scale war, but your proposed sequence of western involvement first makes no sense given the geographical locations of the belligerents. The Third world war would not be about the west as there is currently no anti-western alliance and the Asian powers do not trust each other. China would want to conquer Taiwan in order to establish the CCP as the undisputed authority within the sinosphere and close the book on the Chinese Civil war regardless of whether Taiwan would be being helped by the US or Not. India and Pakistan are enemies and this would be the case regardless of any western participation. China and India would have their disputes which can only be resolved by one side being defeated or backing down, and this would be the case regardless of whether western countries participate in the conflict or not. In the Middle east Erdogan has taken up the banner of defending Sunnis, that means that an alliance between Erdogan and Assad is impossible as Assad is using gloves off methods against the Sunnis. North Korea is a threat to the region as long as it has Nukes and this would be the case regardless of whether the US is in the region or Not. Given that the Asian countries have contested borders with each other and have military assets directed against one another, while the western countries do no have any territorial disputes with any Asian countries, what would cause the Asian nations to suddenly forget their enmities against each other and ally with one another for any reason?

For Example even if Xi proposed such an Idea let say to India's Modi, even if Modi agreed with him, what would be in it for Modi. Instead such a conversation would go like this:

Xi: Both of our Countries are of tough Asian blood, we are fellow Asians and are superior and More virile than these decadent westerners, together we can crush the west underfoot. Join us.

Modi (to Xi): You have a whole army massed at my border and directed against me, even as we speak our two armies are staring eyeball to eyeball. You have Missiles pointed at my cities and I have Missiles pointed at yours. You are allied with MY blood enemy (pakistan) as well, and now you ask me to join you just to fight the west, why would I have any reason to trust a word that's coming out your mouth, whats in it for us (india), I would gain nothing from this.

Yeah,.. asia certainly could have lots of "fun" warring amongst themselves without needing any extra input from "the west".

But what happens when trade route (and other supply line) disruptions happen that will certainly involve the west?

And I'm not really proposing a sequence of events as to HOW the coming crazy assed alliances will be formed, but eventually China will be seen (by everyone) as the big "grabby" player in the game, and all the other nations will fall into their "natural" positions on one side or the other in the global conflict.

Personally, I wouldn't mind at all if actual war could be "confined" to asia, at the various borders of China, but that seems like just TOO weird a scenario to take seriously.

I could see the "middle east" bursting into flames due to commodities (food, etc) being nearly impossible to get, and strange little "independence movements" breaking out due to the lessening of power of their "oppressors".

One HUGE (to gratuitously invoke a Trumpism) signal of impending even-more-strangeness would be Iran suddenly becoming a non-apocalyptic mostly-sane muslim state that "suddenly" discovers that it has much in common with the not-insane sunnis, europe and the Chinese-hating rest of eurasia.

That's kinda my personal wakeup call to REALLY get crackin' on getting my tiny blue water liveaboard boat fully seaworthy and buying up lots of provisions (and a watermaker).

Aloha! <shaka!>