Generational Dynamics World View News

Discussion of Web Log and Analysis topics from the Generational Dynamics web site.
Trevor
Posts: 1211
Joined: Tue Nov 15, 2011 7:43 am

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Trevor »

John wrote: OK, that all makes sense to me. Let me add a couple of additional
thoughts, and ask your opinion.

First, a lot of people talk about civil war within the US, but I just
don't see it. I expect the country to unify behind President Trump or
whoever follows him (in generational theory this is the "Regeneracy").
The fault line from the American Civil War has pretty much healed.

But China has had two major, bloody civil wars -- the Taiping
Rebellion and Mao's civil war -- along the north vs south fault line.
And as we know, there are hundreds of thousands of "mass events" in
China every year, and one of those could certainly spiral out of
control.

Mao and Chiang were able to put the civil war on hold because of the
Japanese invasion. But if China is the aggressor this time, then
China's society may be split and remain split, causing China to be
bogged down with an internal civil war. Have you looked into that at
all?

Second, it's claimed that if there's an EMP blast, then 90% of the US
population will die from starvation and disease within a year, because
the entire transportation system will be crippled. Have you looked at
that? Is that what you mean by, "go after the US power grid"?

Third, I've estimated that 3-4 billion people will die in the war,
from nuclear weapons, conventional weapons, ground war, riots, disease
and famine, leaving behind 4 billion people to hold an international
peace conference and rebuild the world. Does that make sense to you?

Fourth, I could imagine a scenario where China launches lots of
missiles, and destroys a lot of American cities and aircraft carriers,
but still loses the war because they have their hands full fighting
Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Australia, India, and probably Russia.
Does that make sense to you?
From what I've read, the 90% death rate from EMP originates from a science fiction novel: "One Second Later". And the assumption that book made was that EVERYTHING would be destroyed by a single EMP. All electronics, the entire grid, every vehicle in the nation.

I've looked up and watched videos of their effects on vehicles. It takes an enormous amount of electronic interference to shut down a vehicle and even then, it can be restarted most of the time. About 10-15 percent of vehicles would be affected, which would be enough to cause massive traffic jams all throughout the nation. And this was a test at maximum intensity (50kv/m)

EMP blasts would definitely cause a lot of damage, but I haven't seen any validity to the claim that 90% of our population would be dead. And it's a weapon we could just as easily use against China.

Now our power grid I consider more vulnerable, primarily because of all the Chinese components that have backdoor programs inside them.

[Admittedly, this is a fictional example, but I have a death toll of around 1-1.5 billion with my novel on the subject. To keep it realistic, the estimates of total deaths vary]

However, I expect we won't know for sure until well after the war's over, and likely hotly debated even then.

I don't see China winning this war, but we'd be fools to underestimate them.

John
Posts: 11485
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

Trevor wrote: > EMP blasts would definitely cause a lot of damage, but I haven't
> seen any validity to the claim that 90% of our population would be
> dead. And it's a weapon we could just as easily use against
> China.
Trevor you reminded me that we discussed this issue a year ago
in the Nuclear Winter thread:

** Nuclear Winter
http://gdxforum.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=4686

On a slightly separate subject, while I was searching for that thread
this morning, I can across a comment that someone on Breitbart wrote
to me that's related:
> My sister and her husband are doomsdayers. They have multiple
> properties in mountainous rural areas each with 2 cargo containers
> buried and reinforced with really cool entry and separate exit
> points. Bryan is an excellent electrician, has his own bulldozer
> and a Federal Firearms Dealer License, (seriously he has old .45
> Browning Tommy Guns in mint condition, AKs etc) the containers are
> chock full of generators, fuel, weapons and ammo out the
> gazoo. Water, food, water filters, medical supplies, venting
> systems,....its truly amazing. They tell me there is a whole
> subculture of people like this, although they are the only ones I
> know personally. Anyway, I know where I'm going if s h i t hits
> the fan.
So I think that we now have a range of responses to how people would
like to prepare for a world war: live life as before and hope for the
best; same but stock up on food, water and other supplies; plan or
arrange to die (not wanting to live through a world war); move to some
safe place on earth (if any such place exists); become a survivalist -
move to a bunker in the midwest.

With regard to what the Trump administration can do, we've discussed
using trade and negotiations to slow China's (and North Korea's)
preparations for war, freedom of navigation operations to challenge
China, and reallocating forces from Syria and other locations to be
able to respond to an attack.

John
Posts: 11485
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 8-Feb-2019 War between China and Japan

We've addressed how the war between China and the US would proceed,
but one thing that I've never seen discussed anywhere is how the war
between between China and Japan would proceed.

We can assume that China and North Korea will launch missiles at Japan
(as well as America), but will the Chinese go farther? I'm sure
they'd like to.

China and Japan have fought a number of wars, but they've all been on
Korean soil or Chinese soil, never on Japanese soil. I don't believe
that there's ever been an attack on Japanese soil except for the
American bombing in WW II.

So what are the Chinese planning? Are they planning to send Chinese
(or Korean) troops to invade and occupy Japan? We know that China has
plans to send troops to invade and occupy Taiwan. Are the plans for
Japan the same? And whose side will Korea be on? (History and
generational theory say that Korea will be on China's side.)

On the other hand, what are the Japanese planning? Are they planning
to do what they've done so many times in the past -- invade Korea and
China?

I think that this is a really interesting question. Does anyone have
any thoughts?

CH86
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:51 am

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by CH86 »

John, I'm going to make my point and opinion clear here: A chinese attack on the US would probably concentrate mostly against the US forces that are on hand in the western pacific theatre. Same with an attack on Japan, it would concentrate against the rykuyu and kyushu japanese defense commands. An hypothetical attack on India would concentratrate against the Indian Northeast defenses, while an attack on russia would concentrate against the russian far east and its forces, not this nonsense about Moscow. With the (possible to probable) exception of the invasion of Japan, where the chinese would be much more indiscriminate; elsewhere the Chinese would probably like to avoid collateral damage, in order to prevent runaway escalation of the conflict. The miscalculation by the chinese would be underestimating their enemies will to escalate to total war after a "smash and grab" or a "grab and talk" attack.

John
Posts: 11485
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

CH86 wrote: > John, I'm going to make my point and opinion clear here: A chinese
> attack on the US would probably concentrate mostly against the US
> forces that are on hand in the western pacific theatre. Same with
> an attack on Japan, it would concentrate against the rykuyu and
> kyushu japanese defense commands. An hypothetical attack on India
> would concentratrate against the Indian Northeast defenses, while
> an attack on russia would concentrate against the russian far east
> and its forces, not this nonsense about Moscow. With the (possible
> to probable) exception of the invasion of Japan, where the chinese
> would be much more indiscriminate; elsewhere the Chinese would
> probably like to avoid collateral damage, in order to prevent
> runaway escalation of the conflict. The miscalculation by the
> chinese would be underestimating their enemies will to escalate to
> total war after a "smash and grab" or a "grab and talk"
> attack.
I think that a distinction has to be made between two phases of
war. China and North Korea will be launching nuclear missiles,
and the US and allies will retaliate. India and Pakistan will
be launching nuclear missiles at each other.

But that's actually a small part of the war. As Navigator
pointed out, every war is fought on the ground between armies.

So the question I had, particularly with respect to China and Japan,
is what happens after the missiles are all launched, and the war
becomes a ground war?

CH86
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:51 am

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by CH86 »

I don't think the nukes would come before the ground war. I think the nukes would come later, once the ground war enters it's terminal phase. The nukes would come in play as a launch by whoever is losing the war in my opinion. Although tactical nukes may be used from early on in the war.

Regarding the ground war itself, the campaign against taiwan would come first, along with a (possible) invasion of South Korea at the same time. If china succeeds in those battles, the invasion of Japan would follow.

John
Posts: 11485
Joined: Sat Sep 20, 2008 12:10 pm
Location: Cambridge, MA USA
Contact:

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by John »

** 8-Feb-2019 Thailand King's older sister to run for prime minister in the Land of Smiles

Image

(Thailand's Princess Ubolratana Rajakanya Sirivadhana Barnavadi)

Thailand probably has the most bizarre national politics of
any country in the world. Most democracies are pretty much alike
-- there are elections, some people cheat, some people win,
some people lose, and so for. Most dictatorships are pretty
much alike -- there are rigged elections, the person in power
stays in power for decades by arresting, beating, raping,
torturing, or killing anti-government protestors.

Thailand is a mix of the democracy / dictatorship model. The country
is in a generational Unraveling era following a crisis civil war, and
normally that would put the country firmly into the dictatorship
pattern, but in this case Thailand was only peripherally involved in
the civil war, because it actually occurred next door in the Cambodia
"killing fields" civil war of the late 1970s.

Thailand calls itself "the land of smiles," which should imply that
the country tries to be in the democracy pattern, but then you've got
that difficult ethnic problem.


The vast majority of the population are the dark-skinned lower class
indigenous people, also called "Thai-Thai" and "red shirts,"
comprising about 3/4 of the population, living mostly in the northern
and northeastern regions of Thailand, but who come to Bangkok mostly
to work in menial jobs serving the Thai-Chinese.

The Thai-Chinese, also called "yellow shirts," are the light-skinned
descendants of a wave of Chinese workers that poured into the country
to find jobs in the 1930s. They comprise 1/4 of the population, live
mostly around Bangkok, and are extremely contemptuous of the
indigenous Thai-Thai, whom they consider to be inferior.

The Pheu Thai Party (Puea Thai Party), originally called the Thai Rak
Thai (TRT) party, is the party of the indigenous "red shirt" people,
led by Thaksin Shinawatra. Thaksin was prime minister from 2001-2006,
when he was ousted by a military coup. He then engineered a series of
election victories for prime ministers from his Pheu Thai party, but
in each case the army, which supports the Thai-Chinese elites, used
some artifice to overthrow the elected prime minister.

In the most recent case, Thaksin's sister Yingluck Shinawatra won the
2011 election as the first female prime minister, with her election
campaign scripted by her brother Thaksin, who at that time was living
in exile in Dubai. But the army overthrew Yingluck in 2014, and
replaced her with a military junta headed by Royal Thai Army general
Prayuth Chan-ocha.

Prayuth has been governing as a dictator ever since. Since Thailand
is the "land of smiles," Prayuth was under pressure to hold an
election. He got the constitution changed so that it favored the
Thai-Chinese, and then called an election for March 24, thinking that
he would be easily elected.

So everything was thrown into chaos on Thursday (7-Feb), when
Thailand's Princess Ubolratana Rajakanya Sirivadhana Barnavadi
announced that she would be a prime minister candidate opposing
Prayuth, and that she's in Thaksin's Pheu Thai Party. Ubolratana is
the 67-year-old older sister of the King Maha Vajiralongkorn, who
became king after their father, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, died in 2016.

So the King's sister Ubolratana is running against the army general
Prayuth. So this raises several bizarre issues.

The first issue is that Ubolratana is representative of the indigenous
red-shirt Thai-Thai, whom Prayuth hates and considers inferior. But
criticism of any Thai royal is against the law, and anyone who does so
can be thrown into jail. Actually, Ubolratana is no longer a Thai
royal, since she married in 1972 an American, Peter Jensen, whom she
met at MIT when she was studying nuclear physics. However, she
divorced Jensen in 1998 and returned to Thailand, where many people
treat her as a royal.

The second issue is that Ubolratana says that she has the right to run
because she's a private citizen, and not a royal. However, the King
has issued a statement saying that even though she resigned from the
royal family by law, she is still a royal family member by tradition.
"Bringing a high-ranking member of the royal family to politics, in
whatever manner, is an act in violation of the royal tradition and
national culture and highly inappropriate."

The third issue is that Ubolratana has apparently been host
of a tv show in the past. Why is that important?

Because one of the previous prime ministers, Samak Sundaravej, who was
an ally of Thaksin, was thrown out of office by a court because he
previously had a cooking show on tv, and that was a conflict of
interest.

So as I've said, nothing is too bizarre for politics in Thailand, the
Land of Smiles.


https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politi ... l-position

https://www.bangkokpost.com/news/politi ... nomination

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-47167633

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-thai ... SKCN1PX0NC

--- Related:

** 30-Oct-18 World View -- Thailand and Thaksin Shinawatra prepare for new national elections
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e181030




** 1-Jul-11 News -- Thailand's Yingluck promises to use 'femininity' to resolve disputes
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... m#e110701b



** 3-Dec-2008 Thailand government collapses, ending crippling riots from class war
** http://www.generationaldynamics.com/pg/ ... tm#e081203

CH86
Posts: 397
Joined: Thu Feb 08, 2018 8:51 am

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by CH86 »

John you overestimate the ethnic nature of the political divide in Thailand. The divide in Thailand is political, not ethnic. And the Royal family is NOT of Chinese descent, Chinese in fact were officially discriminated against until in Thailand about the 1960s or so. Thailand's military is much more integrated with the west than it is with china, US troops recently participated in a 10,000 man multinational exercise over there.
Last edited by CH86 on Fri Feb 08, 2019 8:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Navigator
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:15 pm

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Navigator »

John wrote:
OK, that all makes sense to me. Let me add a couple of additional
thoughts, and ask your opinion.

First, a lot of people talk about civil war within the US, but I just
don't see it. I expect the country to unify behind President Trump or
whoever follows him (in generational theory this is the "Regeneracy").
The fault line from the American Civil War has pretty much healed.

But China has had two major, bloody civil wars -- the Taiping
Rebellion and Mao's civil war -- along the north vs south fault line.
And as we know, there are hundreds of thousands of "mass events" in
China every year, and one of those could certainly spiral out of
control.

Mao and Chiang were able to put the civil war on hold because of the
Japanese invasion. But if China is the aggressor this time, then
China's society may be split and remain split, causing China to be
bogged down with an internal civil war. Have you looked into that at
all?

Second, it's claimed that if there's an EMP blast, then 90% of the US
population will die from starvation and disease within a year, because
the entire transportation system will be crippled. Have you looked at
that? Is that what you mean by, "go after the US power grid"?

Third, I've estimated that 3-4 billion people will die in the war,
from nuclear weapons, conventional weapons, ground war, riots, disease
and famine, leaving behind 4 billion people to hold an international
peace conference and rebuild the world. Does that make sense to you?

Fourth, I could imagine a scenario where China launches lots of
missiles, and destroys a lot of American cities and aircraft carriers,
but still loses the war because they have their hands full fighting
Japan, Vietnam, Philippines, Australia, India, and probably Russia.
Does that make sense to you?
First Issue - USA / China Internal Conflict:
I believe that by now enough people in the US hate their own country that there are enough for an insurgency should an outside party attack. They want to see the established systems destroyed or overturned, and would be happy to help out whoever is attacking us.
The current political divide is much worse than at any time since Vietnam, and the CCP will be happy to exploit this. The political vitriol will only escalate in the climate of a financial meltdown, as each side will blame the other for it happening. I do not believe that the "insurgents" will be anywhere near a majority, but I believe there will be enough of them to seriously impede our war-fighting ability for quite some time. I predict they will primarily target the power grid, as it is our Achille's heel.

I do not believe the USA could even conquer China by physically occupying it. This would be a monumental task, and is not militarily viable, even under full mobilization. The only way to end the war would be by leveraging what you have brought up, internal Chinese divisions, plus using Chinese that are anti-CCP. In the end, the Chinese people have to rise up against the CCP. Just like they did against the Kaiser in 1918. After all, the Germans in WW1 did not have a foreign invasion (the short Russian thrust into East Prussia in 1914 aside), but succumbed to revolution after military reverses.

Second Issue - EMP Blast
As someone else has already mentioned, you need LOT of EMP to actually destroy equipment. I think that most equipment will be ok. And once it happens the first time, people will know to put their equipment in faraday cages and the like (for shielding). I think you also underestimate the ability of hundreds of millions of people to adapt to drastically changed circumstances. I do not believe an EMP blast will shut down transportation system, but there are other issues that will come close.

The starvation Germany suffered in WW1 was only partially due to the British naval blockade. Most of it was due to the fact that German rail assets were diverted from primarily servicing the civilian economy to primarily servicing the military. There was not enough rolling stock to take care of the Army and to take care of shipping fertilizer and goods to market. Now I know this is something of a simplification, there were also farmhand shortages and so on, but the transportation issue was the main one.

Fuel supplies and distribution will be affected by a war. Plus the limited oil refining assets would be a great target for the insurgents mentioned above. Most resources will have to be prioritized, and transportation will be a priority for military and defense industries, not for shipping Doritoes to grocery stores.

Third Issue - Losses
Just as the losses in each of the two previous World Wars was unimaginable at the time, I agree that they will be unimaginable on the next go. Plus we are in a new cycle, with vastly improved technology. In WW1, France lost about 20% of her military age manpower (16-50yrs). Thats just military casualties. In WW2, German and Russian civilian casualties were roughly equal to their military losses. I would estimate that this time civilian losses could far exceed military losses.

The problem is that it is currently impossible to accurately predict either type of losses. We literally have no idea what our current weapons can do (let alone the ones that will quickly be developed during a World War). There has not been a force on force land conflict where both sides were competent since the 1973 Arab Isreali war. And weapons are vastly superior now to those used almost 50 years ago. And no one can really tell what is going to happen with Nukes.

Fourth Issue - China Overwhelmed
In the end the aggressor always manages to bite off more than they can chew. And in the long term, evil always loses. Its just that things can get very bad for a very long time before that happens. There is a lot to write about how the Chinese do not have a viable long term strategy (ala the Germans in WW1. What exactly was the Kaiser trying to achieve? What were German war aims? They were always unclear).

In the end I believe China will be fractured and devastated. But the US will end up a lot like France at the end of WW 1 to achieve that result. Bled dry itself.

Navigator
Posts: 906
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2019 2:15 pm

Re: Generational Dynamics World View News

Post by Navigator »

Here is what I wrote about the Electrical Grid on my own blog at www.comingstorms.com

Our Achilles Heel
In war, the best approach to take is to go after your enemy’s “Achilles Heel”. In World War Two, Germany’s Achilles Heel was oil. They had very limited fuel production, most of it being synthetic. Once we started bombing their fuel production facilities, they could fly their planes or get very far with their Panzers. For the Japanese, the Achilles Heel was imports. So sinking their merchant fleet basically ended their weapons production, plus starved their population. So when the next big war starts, it is only logical to assume that our enemies will attack our Achilles Heel.

The modern West has an Achilles Heel. It’s blindingly obvious when it is pointed out. Our entire society, our entire way of life is dependent on a single commodity; Electricity. Without it, just about everything that we do comes screeching to a halt.

Electrical power generation is concentrated at a few sites. The electrical grid itself is extremely vulnerable and is virtually unprotected. On top of that, repairing any kind of major damage to the power distribution system takes a lot longer than we would like even when it is just caused by a major storm. And this is only when the lines have been broken.

Much worse is if a power plant itself is damaged. The problem isn’t that it would take time to repair it, the problem is the scarcity of repair parts. No one is really making generators or any of the equipment needed to replace major electrical systems. This is because there is little ongoing demand for this stuff. So if a lot if it is suddenly damaged, it could be quite a while until power is restored.

Our enemies know this. There are sleeper cells of enemy agents in our country. Our enemies would be pretty daft not to have them here. And when the time comes, the electrical grid is probably their primary target.

When war breaks out, the government is not going to worry about your home not having power. It is going to concentrate on restoring power to those systems necessary for the war. Things like war industries and military bases. Your TV or refrigerator not having power is way way down on the list of things for the government to fix under such circumstances. And the vast majority of us will endure extreme personal hardship as a result.

What To Do
Recognize that we cannot always take electricity for granted. And recognize how much we are dependent on it. The realization of our personal dependency on electricity can help us to prepare for it not being there.

The most important need for electricity is not our smart phones. It’s the refrigerator. Most of us will have to deal with not having refrigeration for quite a while. This means that we need to know how to feed ourselves without things that require a working fridge.

Next is communication. We should have a portable radio; better yet, one that can be powered by a hand crank or solar power. There aren’t going to be a lot of batteries available for very long.

Last is light. We should have backups for light. The best option is some kind of solar power collection and storage. You don’t have to put giant panels on your roof, but have a solar collector that you can get for camping. It’s not going to power your fridge or your big screen TV, but it will allow you to have light.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 190 guests