Russia

[widestaringeyes]

This question is directed at Professor X (that's good humor by the way, not an insult) but open to all. Anyone who can help me understand basically.

Ok, I have been reading G.D. now for several years, almost daily. G.D. theory, in my opinion, makes way too much sense to be ignored. I am actually fascinated with the entire concept. There is one specific issue that I just cannot bring myself to believe, even though I have no doubts whatsoever in regards to G.D. theory.

Russia. I just can't imagine ANY scenario where the U.S. and Russia would become allied militarily. I just can't believe it. To be honest, I probably wouldn't believe it even if it were happening live right now, so there may be no help for me after all.

In my little world, an alliance is the polar opposite of a declaration of war. Both are formally acknowledged by Congress. So, my question is, how in the hell could we end up in such a position? What possible scenario could there be? I understand the Clash of Civilizations bit and also believe this to be inevitable, but I cant get myself to see an alliance with Russia. This is my first "bump in the road" with G.D.

Somebody help me out.

[John]

Am I Professor X?

It's really not that surprising. Stalin was our bitter enemy before
WW II, and Stalin was our bitter enemy after WW II. But DURING WW II,
Stalin was our ally.

I like to use the phrase "forced to choose." When you're talking
about day to day international politics, then Russia and Iran can bash
the United States for internal domestic political reasons.

But once a war crisis begins, and a country has to worry about its
very survival, then all the domestic political concerns melt away, and
the only thing that matters is survival of the country and its way of
life. In that circumstance, a country is forced to choose, and
they'll choose the side that makes more sense in terms of survival.

There have been several European invasions of Russia, but they've
usually been defeated with the help of the harsh Russian winters.
Historically, Russia's worst enemies have been the Central Asians and,
in the last 600 years, the Sunni Muslims.

Another way of looking at it is that Russia and Europe and America are
all Christian nations, and this provides a cultural link that is not
shared by Muslim nations.

Finally, Russia and China almost went to war in the 1960s. Russia is
closely tied to India, and China is closely tied to Pakistan. Thus,
India vs Pakistan will quickly become Russia versus China.

In short, everything changes instantly, once the war crisis begins,
and national survival becomes more important than anything else. At
that time, when a country is forced to choose, the choice will not be
the obvious one.

John

[gerald]

John very true -

However, alliances can mean nothing against a single foe with vastly superior technology.

For example, the Spanish conquest of the various Central American Empires. The initial Spanish numbered in the hundreds and Empires numbered in the hundreds of thousands, the Empires lost.

[widestaringeyes]

hehe.....yes. You are professor X. Not sure if you know of this character and his history, but he was one of the good guys (XMen). Whenever a subject allows me to introduce people to G.D. I am always eager to do so. And I tell people that I get daily updates from Professor X (they never believe me). Once people go to your site and see your name, they know what I meant. Either way, you are Professor X in my book (unless you find it offensive).

9.9 times out of ten I do not need to post a question or email you because you have a really good habit of answering my questions before I have to ask them. I read ALL of your daily updates. About the time I develop a question, it is usually answered a few sentences later.

Thank you for the reply. I have noticed that you are almost always two or three steps ahead of me with your conclusions. This is very good, makes me think things through. When you explain the alliance in such a way, I do understand. I was stuck in the "they will never be friendly to us" mode, but you are correct, when a crisis is upon you and your existence is at stake, things change. I often read articles from RT since you obtain reference material from them. As I read, I sense what I call a "permanent distrust" between our two nations. The Russians do not view the world nearly the way we do and I guess that makes it even more difficult for me to understand. According to G.D., the alliance makes logical sense......but what I see in the news and read on the internet does not really jive with G.D. In the end though, I will always hedge my bets on G.D. even if it seems too alien or too improbable.
And you are correct about the language and political jabs. I have no doubt that much if not all of that will settle down during a crisis. It may resurface afterwards but during it would quiet down.

Maybe I have become too desensitized to the use of the word "crisis". As you point out, this is not just some really big problem, this is entire generations and entire nations existence in the balance. Trying to keep that in mind is very difficult. Man I love this stuff.

And you rock John. Thanks again.

[widestaringeyes]

to gerald:

Professor X hooked me up perfectly with his answer. My question was not who would win. The outcome of the conflict, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant to my question. My question was how would it be possible to end up with an alliance when I see the Russians as our enemies. When I feel that Russia would stab us in the back at the very first opportunity.

"Forced to choose" is the answer. You dig brother?

The crisis forces the nation to make decisions that they feel will have the highest probability of ensuring survival. And, as is ALWAYS the case, G.D. makes perfect sense.

[John]

And you rock John. Thanks again.

I don't get too many compliments like that. Thanks.

John

[widestaringeyes]

Your quite welcome sir.

[gerald]

to gerald:

Professor X hooked me up perfectly with his answer. My question was not who would win. The outcome of the conflict, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant to my question. My question was how would it be possible to end up with an alliance when I see the Russians as our enemies. When I feel that Russia would stab us in the back at the very first opportunity.

"Forced to choose" is the answer. You dig brother?

The crisis forces the nation to make decisions that they feel will have the highest probability of ensuring survival. And, as is ALWAYS the case, G.D. makes perfect sense.

Regarding up coming events, there are jokers that change the rules. It is interesting non the less, -- enjoy the show. it is all a game.

[Trevor]

to gerald:

Professor X hooked me up perfectly with his answer. My question was not who would win. The outcome of the conflict, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant to my question. My question was how would it be possible to end up with an alliance when I see the Russians as our enemies. When I feel that Russia would stab us in the back at the very first opportunity.

"Forced to choose" is the answer. You dig brother?

The crisis forces the nation to make decisions that they feel will have the highest probability of ensuring survival. And, as is ALWAYS the case, G.D. makes perfect sense.

It is possible for Russia to be allied with China in the opening days of the war. They're supplying them with weapons and natural resources just as things stand, I think to help create a counterweight to the United States. However, they did the same thing in the early days of WWII. Germany's primary supplier was the Soviet Union because they decided that it would be in their interest to support them, at least until June 22, 1941.

[gerald]

to gerald:

Professor X hooked me up perfectly with his answer. My question was not who would win. The outcome of the conflict, in my humble opinion, is irrelevant to my question. My question was how would it be possible to end up with an alliance when I see the Russians as our enemies. When I feel that Russia would stab us in the back at the very first opportunity.

"Forced to choose" is the answer. You dig brother?

The crisis forces the nation to make decisions that they feel will have the highest probability of ensuring survival. And, as is ALWAYS the case, G.D. makes perfect sense.

I understand what you are saying and agree. But the stabbing in the back by Russia has more to do with leaders seeking power, then the "people". The people I found to be very friendly and helpful and some looked to America for ideas to fight their government. For example, in Moscow, about six years ago, I saw a painting by a Russian artist, It was a painting, of St.George on a white horse slaying a dragon with a lance. St George had a symbol of the USA and the dragon a symbol of old Russia - the party.

In either case regarding alliances, If one thinks they have superior technology over others, they may not want alliances, as indicated by the Spanish and the American Empire example. Spain wanted it all and essentially did get it all.

As far as alliances go it depends upon circumstances. My dad was in WW2, The US government put out a steady stream of propaganda how Russia was our ally, as it became apparent the the US would win the war, the propaganda gradually changed against Russia as our ally.

A side note. As a child I would listen to arguments by my uncles who were in the European Theater of war. The arguments were centered around why the US military did not go directly into Berlin and end the war sooner and save American lives,- but in stead, went into Upper Silesia. I have also read that there is a government policy that keeps some things under wraps for 60 years. Recently I have learned that FDR until almost his death was afraid the US would lose the war because of what our spies were learning regarding the Nazi developments in Upper Silesia. Supposedly, there was a test flight from Norway to within 60 miles of New York City in preparation for the dropping an atomic bomb on the city. For your amusement http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0itnYrK ... re=related and the bell http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWg42jPU-tg.