Geopolitical strategic layout

The big picture is that America has been aware of its impending economic demise since before the 2008 crisis, which is obvious from looking at their policies, which are prolonging the present at the cost of a future, which means the ones making the moves didn’t see a way to save the future, not by any kind of normal policies. Also, about that time they tested the maximum oil output, found the peak that cannot be exceeded, and intentionally collapsed the world economy in order to lessen the demand in order to give themselves time. America’s problem is that the greatest oil and gas reserves belong to Russia, while those in the Middle East and elsewhere are basically exhausted. This means that, in a linear projection, Russia becomes the dominant economic power, and the standard wisdom of shoring up the Dollar by selling “protection” to the Arabs will fail in the near future, and not only will the Dollar cease to be the world reserve currency, but the Ruble will take its place, as the Russians will inevitably leverage their position of a dominant hydrocarbon supplier to shore up their own currency. This means that, by the estimate of the American analysts from the 2005-2009 or so, the greatest dangers to American world domination are the hydrocarbons and Russia. The propaganda about world climate being threatened by combustion of hydrocarbons and Russia being simultaneously an evil and backward empire that needs to be contained, controlled and “democratised” can be easily explained by this. Russia played with black figures here and only reacted to American moves, and I’m not sure if they could have done any better considering how the West has been subjugating and exploiting their country since the fall of the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, the Russian political class was extremely unwilling to understand what they are dealing with, which caused a significant delay in response to the situation, to their detriment. For instance, it gave the West time to completely nazify Ukraine and turn it into an anti-Russian fortress, when Russia could have simply solved the problem in 2014. However, had they gone in then, their economy would have likely had no time to adapt to the sanctions and this could have a disastrous effect. Also, had they done that, it would have been much more difficult to explain the situation to the rest of the world; now, it’s quite obvious what’s going on, which is why the Western propaganda has no effect outside the Western countries. This can be interpreted as Russia taking a short-term strategic hit in order to improve its strategic position in mid- and long-term.

Currently, the Western propaganda outlets are starting to prepare their respective populations for a strategic loss in Ukraine, but it might in fact serve the purpose of creating resolve for the use of nuclear weapons in order to prevent a resounding Russian victory once it becomes apparent that the collective West is losing. The Russian forces have started advancing despite the muddy season, and heavy cold is forecasted so I would expect Russia to go in fast and hard in attempt to wrap up the situation. This, however, requires an analysis of Russian strategy.

The Russians see a victory in the following scenario: they avoid a nuclear war with America, preserve their own economy and international relations, have no heavily militarised neighbours that threaten them with war, and have a future where they are able to freely trade and otherwise interact with most of the world unimpeded by America and its colonies. They don’t really care that much about Ukraine outside of those major strategic goals. As far as they are concerned, a neutral Ukraine that is not a heavily armed Nazi bunker is fine. Unfortunately, the Americans made sure such a Ukraine cannot exist, which will likely mean that the Russians will be forced to dismantle it as a country and turn it into something that is not a threat. This, however, is not easy to do, because winning a war in Ukraine at the cost of causing a nuclear war is no victory, which is why the Russians didn’t do the most obvious thing and just move south from Belarus and cut off the Ukrainian border with the West, which would have ended the war immediately, but at the cost of almost certain escalation. Also, they are not really in a hurry to win, because of several reasons. First, winning the war has to be weighed against potentially losing the economy, which would have terrible consequences they already had the misfortune to experience and are unlikely to be willing to repeat. Second, this is not a war with Ukraine. It’s a war with America, and the worst way to approach it would be, basically, by demonstrating a serious threat by being too effective. This would allow the Americans to mobilise against them more easily and the situation would escalate. However, if they make it a boring quagmire, the Americans would see that as something they want to avoid at all cost, because every single war they lost was a boring quagmire. Americans want something where they can go in fast and hard, demonstrate “superiority”, raise the flag and so on. The best way to win against Americans is to make it impossible for them to have a quick and decisive victory, and instead make the war boring, long and expensive. This description seems to fit nicely with what the Russians have been doing, and it doesn’t look like an accident either. The current situation, however, is quite precarious, since the boring phase seems to be unsustainable, mostly because the Americans are using medium-range rocketry to attack Russian civilian targets in Belgorod and Crimea. The purpose of this provocation is to force the Russians to respond in non-boring ways, thus giving the Americans an opening for a nuclear escalation. What the Russians seem to be doing is to simply move the front line to the West, until the Russian civilian targets are out of range, prolonging the boring phase hopefully enough for the Americans to go bankrupt, proclaim victory and leave.

This, however, is in my opinion a central error in Russian thinking, because the entire geostrategic layout is about America degrading and destroying its possible strategic opponents for the duration of their own predicted economic collapse; essentially, they want to avoid a situation where they emerge from their own problems to find the world dominated by Russia, China and the EU, with them relegated to the position of a second-rate power. No, they want to return as the dominant power, even if it means they dominate over a scorched Earth, because rebuilding would likely be profitable. This means that the Russian strategy of buying time and making things as boring as possible would normally work, but their opponent doesn’t see this as a normal situation. It’s the end of America as we know it, and the only way America, as the narcissistic bully queen that she is, will accept its fall, is if others fall worse. However, I don’t really know what one can do about it if a nuclear first strike is not an option they are willing to consider. The only other option is what the Russians have been doing – make it boring, make it long, gamble on American bankruptcy and degradation while you grow stronger, and hope that they either die with a whimper, or militarily degrade enough by the time it comes to an exchange, that you can win decisively and with minimal losses compared to what you’d experience if an exchange came at a less opportune moment.

As for the situation in the Middle East, I already predicted some time ago that Israel will see that America is losing its geostrategic position of its major protector, and will use it to try and destroy/degrade all its regional enemies and improve its presently terrible strategic position, because if America falls, and their regional enemies continue to exist as such, Israel is lost. This understanding makes Israel’s actions panicked and desperate, and they will not rest until they either succeed at degrading Iran, Syria and other lesser threats, or they themselves are destroyed. In the near-term, this means Israel will try to use its lobbying power in America to cause a confrontation with Iran. However, I’m not sure China and Russia will allow Iran to be degraded like Iraq, Libya and Syria, and we can expect serious red lines to be both drawn and crossed there.

Individualism

“The UN chief said the condemnable Hamas attack on Israel could never justify collective punishment of the Palestinians,” The Times of Israel reported. The only “realistic basis for genuine peace and security,” according to Guterres, may be the creation of a Palestinian state.

That’s just the thing. A very small minority of people exist as true individuals. Most exist as an aspect of their group, a religious or a tribal designation. That’s why Muslims react as a collective entity – they are Muslims first, and everything else third. If you don’t treat them like a collective entity, you are exhibiting a fundamental misunderstanding of the available reality, essentially trying to replace the reality that is here, with some fantasy or philosophy that you would prefer in its stead. In fact, I don’t think they would want you to treat them as individuals, and not Muslims. When a Westerner has a child, they think they are making one more individual being. When a Muslim has a child, he’s making one more Muslim.

The Muslims don’t want a “Palestinian state”, unless it is formed on the ashes of a destroyed Israel, and after all the Jews have been killed or exiled. What Muslims want is universal Islamic supremacy.

The problem with the Jews is that they are almost the exact same thing. They are two materialistic non-transcendental religions that think they are ordained by God to rule the world. They think they are the true humans as God designed them, and everybody else is some sort of cattle. That’s the foundation of their “morality”, which is why I return to my original point, that there will be peace when those groups understand that their perspective is fundamentally flawed; essentially, what a Muslim sees after death is that they were completely wrong about everything, and what a Jew sees after death is that Christianity is the proper branch of Judaism, that got things right ever since st. Paul. The solution to their genocidal dilemma is therefore not genocidal destruction of one or both sides. The solution lies in transcendence of this world, and for both sides Christianity seems like the most logical and straightforward path. Sure, Hinduism or Buddhism would do just fine as well, but only to a few individuals with such inclinations; for the majority, understanding that Islam is basically a fake religion created by a madman who misunderstood what he heard about Judaism and Christianity, and hallucinated the rest, and Judaism is a dry branch that refused to accept the aspect of transcendence introduced by Jesus. Both sides have good reasons to repent and consider themselves sinners and fools. Yes, the Muslims are worse, but that doesn’t give the Jews a free pass. They are sinners who refused the hand of God when it was offered.

 

Antisemitism

A Turkish politician recently made a speech praising Hitler for killing Jews, I quote:

A local politician from Türkiye’s Justice and Development Party (AK Party) has publicly praised Adolf Hitler’s genocide of the Jews, adding that he was “praying” for the Nazi leader.

Suleyman Sezen, who represents President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s party in the Atakum district council in the province of Samsun, made the comments at a meeting on Wednesday.

“Hitler had this remark, ‘You will curse me for every Jew that I did not kill.’ Such true words, as Zionist Jewish Israel today is behind every single attempt at creating chaos in the world,” the politician declared in a rant shared online. He added that he prayed for “God’s mercy and grace on [Hitler] for his words.”

Sezen expressed hope that Israel “will soon cease to exist and there will be peace in the world once it is cleansed of Jews.”

There has been lots of similar sentiment expressed lately, and a very concerted, regimented response of Muslims all over the world, which makes me think people are not perceiving the actual threat here. Also, I see there is a “factory” of false news in Palestine, that’s not being properly verified as it is re-published verbatim worldwide, which is quite similar to the situation in Ukraine, where the Ukrainian sources routinely create falsehoods that are then re-published and amplified elsewhere, creating a completely wrong impression about the reality of the situation. For instance, in the “news” about the Israeli strike on the hospital in Gaza, nobody really verified the number of people killed, and the number of 500 seems to be repeated without any verification, and I’ve seen EU sources mention the actual number of killed being in the order of 10-50.

With all this Muslim anti-Jewish sentiment being revealed, it is quite obvious that the Jews will conclude that the Muslims are in essence an implacable foe that needs to be completely defeated in order for any kind of permanent peace to be possible, and also that the Western “human rights” sentiment is making the West a serious obstacle to their long-term survival. This is nothing new, and I talked about this years ago, but this is now obvious enough for the non-Israelis to notice.

So, considering how the Muslims obviously act as a singular political entity worldwide, how Muslim immigration in the West is obviously a “fifth column” that just waits for the signal to overthrow the native Europeans, and considering how the Western concept of human rights and individualism makes it impossible to handle such threats in an appropriate manner, and in fact actively obstructs Israel in its attempts to properly handle the issue, it is not difficult to understand that Israel might resort to desperate actions in order to try to assure its survival, although I honestly don’t see what they could do in this situation that would not also result in the destruction of Israel.

The fact the Muslims managed to re-brand themselves as victims in order to weaponise Western idiocy for their purposes is as incredible as it is ominous.

 

The Israeli conundrum

Israel now has a problem.

The problem consists of being surrounded by Arabs who basically weaponised reproduction; every child they create is a weapon against Israel. If you take a look at the map of the Middle East, it’s a sea of “green” surrounding a speck of “blue”, and this sea of green can’t stand the existence of this tiny blue speck.

If they do nothing radical, America their protector will eventually lose global supremacy and they will suffer the fate of those Jews who recently crossed paths with the Hamas insurgents; their bloody corpses will be dragged across streets while the Arabs chant “Allah-u-akbar”.

However, if they act to solve their problem, and really solve it, they will have to resort to genocide; basically, kill and/or sterilize all Arabs in the region, and keep the survivors from ever having any serious power.

What I’m asking myself is, at which point will they understand and forgive the Germans? Basically, “Oh, so this was the position they thought they were in regarding us, because our Zionist leaders made a deal with the British to use their influence in the USA in order to bring them into WW1 on the British side, and in turn get the title to Palestine, which the Germans saw as a grave betrayal and evidence that we are an implacable foe hiding in their midst, conspiring against their vital interests in order to realize our own goals? And they decided that the only way for them to emancipate themselves and truly survive was to get rid of us; they wanted to exile us first, but nobody wanted to take us, so they eventually decided to just kill us all. And this is exactly the choice we now have with the Palestinians – we’d prefer to exile them to the Arab countries, but nobody wants them, so the choice is to either be subjugated, killed, or kill them to the last child.”

Do the Jews have enough introspection to even realize the nature of the situation, or do they think that German genocide of the Jews was wrong because it was a genocide of the Jews, and not because it was genocide? Do they actually think that only their lives matter, and the others are merely NPCs on the playground that is rightfully theirs?

I deliberately omitted the third option: to learn to live in peace with the Muslims, because that somehow never works in the long run, because the Muslims are never content if they are not in total power, and others are not subjugated, enslaved or killed, because they see this as their religious mandate, and anything else is a crime against Allah. The fact that the Muslim states have such a problem recognizing Israel as the only non-Muslim state in the Middle East, and in its historic borders, speaks volumes. I don’t think peace with the Muslims is ever a realistic option. The Hindus thought they have it, and suddenly they learned otherwise, in the epic slaughter when India gained independence and then broke into three countries after enormous religious genocide. I think anyone who thinks they can live in peace with Muslims is deluding themselves, and that includes Russia, which made a pact with this devil which will end very badly. I’m not saying peace with the Muslims is impossible, if you’re more powerful, and you never allow a Muslim minority within your borders. However, any Muslim minority will see it as their mandate to weaponise reproduction and basically do what the Albanians did to the Serbs in Kosovo – reproduce exponentially until you’re the majority, and then take over the country and reduce the non-Muslims to second-rate citizens, who need to be constantly reminded that they are worth less than a Muslim. Yes, the Jews can choose to live this way, if they choose peace – live as slaves and second-rate citizens, pay jizya and be slapped in the face for it, to remember you’re subjugated by Muslims, and pray to God for eventual deliverance… or they can concede that Hitler was justified in his actions.

There’s another option, of course – the Muslims can reject their false religion and convert to Christianity or Buddhism, and the entire problem would instantly cease to exist, because the Christians would have no issues with Jews having their own state, as long as they had access to their holy sites there. However, can you just imagine the improbability of this outcome?

About Jews and Arabs

I was thinking about the Israel situation where everybody seems to be taking sides, so let me try to summarise my perspective.

I see people complaining about Israel making Gaza into essentially an open-air prison, and they are formally true: Gaza is a prison inhabited by the Arabs, where exits are managed by the Israelis. However, what people don’t get is that the Arabs wanted it that way. It was a choice. I saw it happen in real-time, when there were serious negotiations where Israel was ready to give Palestinians statehood, but the very fact of signing such a document would mean that they recognize Israel’s right to exist, and they didn’t want to do that. Their position is that Israel as a state should not exist, the Jews have no right to exist there, and they will fight to the last man, woman and child to make sure that Israel is destroyed and all Jews are either exiled or killed. Also, there is absolutely no political support among the Arabs for any kind of a peace with Israel; if one political party showed readiness for it, the others would kill them. Also, they don’t know what to do other than wage perpetual war against Israel; if by some chance peace broke out, they would be ruined.

So, the Jews decided that the other side is unable to sign a true peace deal and they basically contained them in an open-air prison. They can “leave” at any point by signing a peace deal whereby they recognize Israel’s right to exist; they would get statehood and international recognition, and their situation would start improving. Instead, they indoctrinate their children with anti-Israeli hatred propaganda, and the children indoctrinated in the 2000s are the Hamas militants killing the Jews now. They will never accept peace because they believe that their entire reason to exist is to destroy Israel and kill Jews.

Both sides believe in some kind of a non-transcendental religion that’s very political; they think God is on their side and gave them the right to rule the world, and if anyone stands in the way of that, he opposes God’s will. They hate, despise and dehumanise the other side and think genocide is a perfectly ok thing to do, if they are the ones doing it. The Jews have America on their side, the Palestinians have all other Muslims with their oil money on their side.

Strategically speaking, the Jews made a mistake moving to Palestine and forming the country of Israel. It places them on a very poor, exposed piece of real estate, with not much to gain and everything to lose. It also places them in a strategic position where they have to make so many other players experience a catastrophic strategic loss, in order to merely survive. Any kind of balance they attain will be precarious. However, since they already invested so much in this project, it makes them think that they have no alternative to success, which makes them desperate and prone to extreme moves.

I am not inclined to moralize based on the modern ethics based on the so called “human rights” and their “violations”. It’s not how I think. I think from the position of trying to see which side embodies transcendence and transcendental virtues based on God. That which is not based on the firm rock of God will perish and is not worthy of existence. So, which side is closer to God? From what I can see, it’s all a battle for this world, and who has the right to control which portion of it, and each side claims some right originating from God, and I see no truth behind any of it. Essentially, even Josephus Flavius conceded that God is with the Romans and against the Jews, that God’s wrath was against them and their claim to Palestine was forfeit, so any claim based on the Bible is silly – God gave, God took away. As for the Arabs, they call themselves Palestinians but that is a falsehood, because they are essentially conquerors and migrants originating from Arabia. They have no claim to this land other than having come there at some point. All those claims to divine right are hubris and materialism thinly covered with fake mysticism, and I accept none of it.

The entire conflict is a very cruel interaction of two tribal entities, both cruel, arrogant and prideful.

Of those two, I prefer the Jews, because unlike the Arabs, they actually have a tendency of doing good and useful things, at least some of them. They have science, technology and the economy, and I sympathise with their predicament, especially since they would want nothing better than to just have peace so that they could do good and useful things with a sense of security. As for the Arabs, their position of preferring perpetual war and murder to any kind of a peaceful compromise makes them completely unlikeable, and I cannot force myself to give a fuck about them whatsoever. They could have solved this situation ten times already and chose not to, because they plan to eventually solve it by means of genocide, if they just endure long enough. Their argument, that this was their land first, is nonsense, because their claim is based on nothing more than just finding a vacant desert after the Jews have been exiled, and starting to live there. They could have accepted a rational compromise whereby both sides get part of the land and cooperate peacefully, but no, there needs to be genocide of the Jews in order for the Arabs to be happy with the outcome.

This being the reality of the situation, I seriously can’t pity them if their arrogance meets something even harder.