This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Former Goldman Sachs Analyst Charles Nenner Joins Marc Faber and Gerald Celente in Predicting Major War
I noted in 2009:
The claim that America would launch more wars to the help the economy is outrageous, right?
Certainly.
But leading economist Marc Faber has repeatedly said that the American government will start new wars in response to the economic crisis:
Is Faber crazy?
Maybe. But top trend forecaster Gerald Calente agrees.
As Antiwar's Justin Raimondo writes:
As Gerald Celente, one of the few economic forecasters who predicted the ‘08 crash, put it the other day, "Governments seem to be emboldened by their failures." What the late Gen. William E. Odom trenchantly described as "the worst strategic disaster in American military history" – the invasion of Iraq – is being followed up by a far larger military operation, one that will burden us for many years to come. This certainly seems like evidence in support of the Celente thesis, and the man who predicted the 1987 stock market crash, the fall of the Soviet Union, the dot-com bust, the gold bull market, the 2001 recession, the real estate bubble, the “Panic of ‘08,” and now is talking about the inevitable popping of the "bailout bubble," has more bad news:
"Given the pattern of governments to parlay egregious failures into mega-failures, the classic trend they follow, when all else fails, is to take their nation to war."
As the economic crisis escalates and the debt-based central banking system shows it can no longer re-inflate the bubble by creating assets out of thin air, an economic and political rationale for war is easy to come by; for if the Keynesian doctrine that government spending is the only way to lift us out of an economic depression is true, then surely military expenditures are the quickest way to inject "life" into a failing system. This doesn’t work, economically, since the crisis is only maksed by the wartime atmosphere of emergency and "temporary" privation. Politically, however, it is a lifesaver for our ruling elite, which is at pains to deflect blame away from itself and on to some "foreign" target.
It’s the oldest trick in the book, and it’s being played out right before our eyes, as the U.S. prepares to send even more troops to the Afghan front and is threatening Iran with draconian economic sanctions, a step or two away from outright war.
A looming economic depression and the horrific prospect of another major war – the worst-case scenario seems to be unfolding, like a recurring nightmare ...
Forecaster Celente has identified several bubbles, the latest being the "bailout bubble," slated to pop at any time, yet there may be another bubble to follow what Celente calls "the mother of all bubbles," one that will implode with a resounding crash heard ’round the world – the bubble of empire.
Our current foreign policy of global hegemonism and unbridled aggression is simply not sustainable, not when we are on the verge of becoming what we used to call a Third World country, one that is bankrupt and faces the prospect of a radical lowering of living standards. Unless, of course, the "crisis" atmosphere can be sustained almost indefinitely.
George W. Bush had 9/11 to fall back on, but that song is getting older every time they play it. Our new president needs to come up with an equivalent, one that will divert our attention away from Goldman Sachs and toward some overseas enemy who is somehow to be held responsible for our present predicament.
It is said that FDR’s New Deal didn’t get us out of the Great Depression, but World War II did. The truth is that, in wartime, when people are expected to sacrifice for the duration of the "emergency," economic problems are anesthetized out of existence by liberal doses of nationalist chest-beating and moral righteousness. Shortages and plunging living standards were masked by a wartime rationing system and greatly lowered expectations. And just as World War II inured us to the economic ravages wrought by our thieving elites, so World War III will provide plenty of cover for a virtual takeover of all industry by the government and the demonization of all political opposition as "terrorist".
An impossible science-fictional scenario? Or a reasonable projection of present trends? Celente, whose record of predictions is impressive, to say the least, sees war with Iran as the equivalent of World War III, with economic, social, and political consequences that will send what is left of our empire into a tailspin. This is the popping of the "hyperpower" bubble, the conceit that we – the last superpower left standing – will somehow defy history and common sense and avoid the fate of all empires: decline and fall.
I certainly hope Faber and Calente are wrong. But they are both very smart guys who have been right on many of their forecasts for decades. Even when their predictions have been viewed as extremely controversial at the time, many of them have turned out to be right.
Yesterday, former Goldman Sachs technical analyst Charles Nenner - who has made some big accurate calls, and counts major hedge funds, banks, brokerage houses, and high net worth individuals as clients. - told Fox News that there will be “a major war starting at the end of 2012 to 2013”, which will drive the Dow to 5,000.
Therefore, says Nenner:
I told my clients and pension funds and big firms and hedge funds to almost go out of the market, almost totally out of the market.
As I have repeatedly documented, influential Americans are lobbying for war in order to save the American economy - what is often called "military Keynesianism". But as many economists have shown, war is - contrary to commonly-accepted myth - actually bad for the economy.
Of course, someone other than the U.S. might start a war.
Given that bad economic policies are leading to unrest globally, it is impossible to predict where a spark might land which leads to a wider conflagration.
»
- advertisements -
As a matter of fact, I know a bit about Iran. Have I ever lived there? Well, no, but I've spent a great deal of time in the region just offshore. Do I speak Farsi? Outside of pleasantries, no I don't.
I've had some fairly high level of contact with some Iranians though; running off some of their nosy aircraft that came closer to the fleet than command chose to allow. These all happened around 3 miles up, so, that's pretty high level I'd say.
And I've known quite a few Iranians that fled in the 70's. You know what Confuscious? They chose to call themselves Persians and refer to Iran as Persia as well. And all educated people are aware of their long history.
But many thinking people realize what would be the ramifications of their acquiring nuclear weapons. You see Confuscious, they'd most likely use them. Ah-My-Dinner-Jacket thinks he's the 12th Imam, or something, and believes he's going to usher in the new caliphate. And here's the punchline Confuscious; they have no problem absorbing any retaliatory strikes because they believe that martyrdom will be just dandy. Never mind the poor schmucks that have to go on living...
So let me ask you Confuscious. What do you know about Iran/Persia? What do you know about Ahmadi-Nejad? Can you say with metaphysical certitude that they won't nuke their neighbors to win quick and dirty? What do you know about national security?
And, what exactly is your point?
The danger of the US geting nukes was obviously that they would use them -
History bears that out - i see only one nuke happy mass murderer on the block so far - put it back in your pants, top gun
So Raphio, what would have been the preferrable outcome? An amphibious assault where 1 million US soldiers perished, and upwards of 28 million Japanese soldiers and citizens?
Or perhaps we should have just surrendered...
Was forcing a Japanese surrender immoral somehow? Please explain. I'd especially like you to justify their brutal subjegation of Chinese, Korean, Phillipino, Vietnamese, and other peoples of nations they conquered.
And tell me how that makes us a nukes-happy mass murderer as well, if you don't mind.
Oh, for your edification, the proper way to write the nickname of the Navy Fighter Weapons School is as one word, all caps; TOPGUN.
Do you have an informed opinion, or were you just trying to be insulting?
Rocketman, I am not interested in debating WWII tactics, I am merely stating that there has been only one country that has nuked an adversary thus far - the US. I am appalled by how many posters actually consider an American nuclear attack as a feasible option, and for what, defense? No, for stealing resources. I am aware that you did not advocate a US nuclear strike. You did however advocate an attack on Iran stating that if they had nukes they would use them... I disagree. If they are developing nukes, I see them as developing a nuclear detterent. They are no doubt scared shitless of the West, seeing what happens to neighbors of theirs that are resource rich and not US compliant.
It is a very complex issue.... I do, however, disdain miltaristic jingoism. You are advocating attacking a sovereign nation which poses no threat. Iran is so out gunned in the ME that IMO they pose no threat to Israel. Their current regime is ridiculous, but maybe if the US hadn't engineered a coup against their democratically elected gov't in the 50s and installed the brutal Shah, their recourse wouldn't have been an Islamic revolution. But that is what you get, in this world, for nationalising your own resource base in opposition to the Western Powers That Be.
PS.... I am a white western male
You overestimate the reality of Iran's nuclear capability. You over estimate Ahmed-nijad as the voice of Iran. He is not a Hitler in terms of carrying real punches. Don't take rabid diatribe for real meaningful action plans...unless you are itching to pull your Wyatt Earp gun, as surrogate Pinkerton agent of 'Big oil'.
That "They have no problem absorbing retaliatory [nuclear] strikes" is the same racist crap said about the N. Vietnamese when they were fighting to unite their country -- "Oh, those Asians, life is cheap to them."
Demonizing others of a different color has been a way of American war propaganda for years.
Your "punchline" is just as disturbing as anything any Iranian leader has ever said.
Same old racist crap? Playing the race card on me? That's pretty funny considering my lineage...
Have you ever listened to Admadi-Nejad talk about the 12th Imam? Do you deny the propensity for Jihadists to resort to suicide attacks? Or are all those reports fakery?
Perhaps you should consider reading up a bit about the folks controlling that regime. The best thing that could happen for the rest of the world, especially the middle east, would be for there to be an organic revolution in that country.
Or maybe not. I mean, it's just as easy to blame inherently-evil-imperialistic-America, and war propagandists, than to face facts; and play the now-dog-eared race card on folks who's worldview you disagree with.
An organic revolution would never work there.
I just watched that power of nightmares film linked above. I am wondering if the next big thing will be a "War on Sovereign Debt" /sarcasm off ha ha
Faber's "doom" is based on history. Money printing leads to inflation and inflation leads to war. The money printers find an internal or external enemy to blame for the inflation. In Yugo they went from a relatively modern country, had bad inflation which lead to hyperinflation and then they started fighting with one another based on grounds that were unimportant when people had money/jobs/pensions etc. but somehow became worth killing each other for. This is why many people are so disgusted with this plan of Bernanke. We already are seeing a surge in global civil unrest (what do you expect when food prices double) and I think that we are just in the first inning of that ball game.
"Celente, whose record of predictions is impressive"
Those who actually follow Gerald Celente know that he does not make predictions, he only forcast trends. It is very acurate to say:
"Celente, whose record of forcasting trends is impressive"
If everything fails, don't just push the reset button, you have to re-format the hard drive!!!
Marc Faber + Gerald Celente are fucking awesome!
even if they are old enough to be my gramps :)
Ignore their predictions at your own financial, physical and psychological risk!
It is amazing to watch this video and see just how accurate Faber was on the economy. (Even bettering Jim Rogers on his Asian calls!)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAJeZaFdbJA
---------------------
Here is Celente NAILING IT on exactly what we see unfolding HERE NOW TODAY in Wisconsin!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JhaEc_4zuFI&tracker=False
Haven't you been watching the news? That new secret space platform that they have been testing is specifically designed to deploying an EMP device anywhere in the World in just an hour or two!!!
I'm with Nenner. Bullish cup-and-handle formation on proshares leveraged etf:WARZ; while a toppish right shoulder is forming on the $PEEZ index.
*Edit: sometimes you just have to resort to geek humor
The shit is going down George.
It feels like a rerun of the Edwardian era implosion as that era of Globalisation came to a end due it own internal / External contractions.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=uk37TD_08eA
It's not a plot.
When a majority of humans live for the moment the physical forces of "too much" and "not enough" come together.
Moral hazard and unforseen consequences.
We have the brain to avoid war, but live in a way that forces it to happen.
"...what is often called "military Keynesianism"."
it's often called imperialism ---and occasionally fascism.
The French move in Libya, if backed by UK, will be the match stick that sets the oil scene ablaze. Any violent retaliation on oil assets by Q would add more duress to strained inter-arab relations as oil prices would soar. Fueling more the general, smoldering intra-arab defiance between rulers and young population, penny less and hard put. Generalized conflicts even small, could spread to Iran via Bahrein, or other Gulf states now on red alert like Kuwait. From there all bets are off as Saudi unrest would directly involve USA, who is apparently letting France be initial stalking horse in Libya...So it's a very delicate stage...both Iraq and Iran troubled bystanders. This week-end, if europe's resolve to front a martial front in Libya, to then start belligerance and outside intervention in the MENA oil patch, may be a key for things to come as this dangerous summer unfolds.
WAR,...The most profitable socially constructed "business" venture in the world.
nope.. religion is.
Ah, so the End of the World, Armageddon retards are prophesying the most lucrative business venture in history?
You haven't heard? Yeah May 21st. lol....
http://tinyurl.com/4no33ut
Ow, that is painful.....
+ 1,000,000
FTW
He's not the only one commenting about a war to happen in the not to distant future. I think that many in the know have been told of a war, and the reason they are telling their people to get out of the market and such is because the country we will be going to war with. It won't be China or Russia, that is just to damn dangerous. What I think the country we will go to war with is Saudi Arabia. That country is vital to our interest, and to be blunt we don't or can't pay back any of the trillions in investment money that the Saudi's have been putting into our country over the decades. So we go into Saudi Arabia because evidence is linked that they are funding terrorism (they don't have to look hard, heck 16 of the 9/11 men where Saudi's) and then we go in to break the terrorists link and in the mean time control the flow of oil for us (even though it's peaked).
You see when we go to war with countries, we go for the low hanging fruit. In essence countries that are easy to fight and take down up front. Fighting in Iran against 75 million of a population and a country that is two or almost three times bigger than Iraq and mountainous would be nasty and we wouldn't win. It makes more logic to go against our "ally" on a charge we know they do and take the oil supplies and renige/take the trillions they have invested as possible terrorist funding etc.. By the US going into Saudi Arabi would sink the market, but it would guarantee that oil will still be priced in dollars and thats what's important. Icahn, Bill Gross and Nenner to name a few getting out of stuff and the market is telling. They know of something coming this way and it will be a surprised to even the Saudis. Thats the problem with having something that everybody wants or desires, if you don't have the capability to protect it they will take it. Even the person acting as your protector may or may not decide it's better to take it for themselves.
Not likely. Invading the land of Mecca and Medina would be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Christians taking the Holy Land? That is a WWIII maneuver. All hell would break loose - .
+1 forgot about Medina. Indeed, an Armageddon maneuver if you ask me.
yes, i posted my previous comment prior to my refresh registering yours - synchrony
we will go to war with is Saudi Arabia
No, Mr. Johnson I think that you are quite wrong about a US/Saudi war for one reason only: Mecca.
Every Muslim in the world would attack the US en mass and immediately if we were percieved as defilers of Mecca. Our very presence in Saudi Arabia is anathema to Muslims, but war? In the land of Mecca?
I doubt the Farsi or Persian languages have words for the level of rage and horror an act of war on SA would engender.
This is yet another good reason for the NWO to manipulate us into invading Saudi Arabia. They intend to bleed us of everything- life, money, freedom, houses, even moral credibility. This is revenge for foiling the Rothschilds' evil plans many times (most recently by building the internet). I just wonder what the false flag will be, how many millions we will kill, and what new government horrors they will unleash in the name of fighting "terrorists". 401(k)s stuffed with war bonds? Starvation rations? Gitmo for Zeroheads?
What will they do, throw rocks at us? Do they have ballistic missiles? Pakistan is the only one with nukes right?
And we probalby know the serial numbers on every one of them and exactly where they are at.
Beside the point. The point of war is to win. Our non-losses in Iraq and Afganistan don't count as wins. They are holes in the desert that we throw trillions upon trillions of dollars into with no return on the investment at all.
A war in SA could only be counted as a win if we retained control of the oil fields. We could not do this without annhilating every single Muslim on this planet - 1/5th of Earth's population.
besides oil Saudi has the gold (if Another is believed from Kitco's board years ago) So oil and gold, especially with China and Russia accumulating it. Time to reload Fort Tungsten
Wow,makes sense.
Also I think one of the main reasons tha U.S. went after Sadam was because he decided to trade oil in other than $'s.
that point has been made before, but always when the experts start arguing about the real versus implied value of a reserve currency they are usually evenly divided. so they price oil in Euros? at the end of the day the US is no longer provides the bulk of demand, as that goes the countries who make the stuff we buy, so it seems like we should let them worry about it, although Obama is a statist, which means he doesn't look ahead, and the GOP likes hegemony, no reason, just likes it. guess because they won the cold war, and they want to rub it in everyones face.
lets hope its a CIVIL WAR as that is what is needed to cleanse us all
we're still fighting the last one, why can't you just be happy with that?
why?
so you can feel comfy being surrounded by people that think, act and look just like you? Why don't you go back to your friend in mirror and ask him to wake the fuk up.
I highly recommend "War Is A Racket" by Marine Corps Major General Smedley Butler. You can find a free download at www.archive.org General Butler was the most highly decorated Marine of his time - and what he had to say about war as he saw it from 1900-1935 is as true today as it was then. Convictions are one thing - information is another. Please inform yourselves.
Was about to post the same.
+1 Excellent book and recommendation. Thanks.
another improbable scenario with even less likely outcomes. Obama won't give them (the next President) a No-Fly zone over Libya, and you'll never be able to do Iran without pushing the Iranian air defenses back from Hormuz. No No-fly over Libya, doesn't bode too well for the Iranian No Fly Zone - remember Bush had a quid pro quo with the UAE port deal, we would sell them the port authority, they would allow us to put boots on the south side of the Straight. (didn't happen)
As for Dow 5000, do you suppose that what happened to the Dow at the start of the Iraq war would happen if Iran happened (cakewalk II) ? That implies Dow 25K. (I know dont' confuse me with the facts) and finally Def Sec Gates has said, we made big mistakes trying to invade Iraq and Afghanistan (he didn't say we made big mistakes bombing them into the stone age) Next time we fix it so we don't need troops.
but the one thing I will give them is the analogy to the final destruction of the US labor market, which FDR achieved in WWII, once WWII started the workers had no rights, and when WWIII starts all Unions public and private will be gone, and those who called Obama Socialist, will have their true colors revealed (Fascists) . But we're on the way aren't we? A Weimar republic printing press, a Fascist anti-union pro military political party. the American empire is just getting stronger, not better, just stronger.
Well I'm not so sure about 2012 or early 2013, but of course there will be a war. Most every country is running a massive ponzi, and they will need a way to take down the ponzi and ride the beast down. The leaders may be totally corrupt but most are not dumb. If things collapse without a war then even lone nuts might try to take shots at some of the ponzi facemen. Now if at war then can use propaganda to blame the "____________ Menace" for all the ills in society, and the mass man will fall for it the same way he always has. Hell even a civil war mostly fits the bill, just not as smooth a propaganda move as external enemy.
the more things change...
"As a result of these massive enforced financial reparations, by 1923 the situation in Germany became desperate and inflation on an astronomical scale became the only way out for the government. Printing presses were engaged to print money around the clock. In 1921 the exchange rate was 75 marks to the dollar. By 1924 this had become about 5 trillion marks to the dollar. This virtually destroyed the German middle class, reducing any bank savings to a virtual zero." (Koestler The God that Failed p 28)
According to Sir Arthur Bryant the British historian (Unfinished Victory (1940 pp. 136-144):
"It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities. They did so with such effect that, even in November 1938, after five years of anti-Semitic legislation and persecution, they still owned, according to the Times correspondent in Berlin, something like a third of the real property in the Reich. Most of it came into their hands during the inflation. But to those who had lost their all this bewildering transfer seemed a monstrous injustice. After prolonged sufferings they had now been deprived of their last possessions. They saw them pass into the hands of strangers, many of whom had not shared their sacrifices and who cared little or nothing for their national standards and traditions. The Jews obtained a wonderful ascendancy in politics, business and the learned professions (in spite of constituting) less than one percent of the population. The banks, including the Reichsbank and the big private banks, were practically controlled by them. So were the publishing trade, the cinema, the theatres and a large part of the press all the normal means, in fact, by which public opinion in a civilized country is formed. The largest newspaper combine in the country with a daily circulation of four millions was a Jewish monopoly. Every year it became harder and harder for a gentile to gain or keep a foothold in any privileged occupation. At this time it was not the 'Aryans' who exercised racial discrimination. It was a discrimination that operated without violence. It was exercised by a minority against a majority. There was no persecution, only elimination. It was the contrast between the wealth enjoyed and lavishly displayed by aliens of cosmopolitan tastes, and the poverty and misery of native Germans, that has made anti-Semitism so dangerous and ugly a force in the new Europe. Beggars on horseback are seldom popular, least of all with those whom they have just thrown out of the saddle."
"...It must be added that most of the leading revolutionaries who convulsed Europe in the final decades of the last century and the first decades of this one, stemmed from prosperous Jewish families. They were perhaps typified by the father of revolution, Karl Marx. Thus when, after the chaos of World War I, revolutions broke out all over Europe, Jews were everywhere at the helm; Trotsky, Sverdlov, Kamenev and Zinoviev in Russia, Bela Kun in Hungary, Kurt Eisner in Bavaria, and, most improbable of all, Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin.
Winston Churchill: "You must understand that this war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the German people(ie goyim), which is to be smashed once and for all, regardless of whether it is in the hands of Hitler or a Jesuit priest."
Emrys Hughes, Winston Churchill - His Career in War and Peace, p. 145
http://globalfire.tv/nj/08en/history/origins_of_ww2.htm
guess who's next?
"It was the Jews with their international affiliations and their hereditary flair for finance who were best able to seize such opportunities." I think that about wraps it up right there. They knew how to insulate themselves from German hyperinflation, they were the only ones left with money, so they went on a purchasing binge. Isn't this the goal of the typical ZH reader? This same thing will happen when the US economy crashes. A relative few will be ready to capitalize. They may trigger the same reaction from the masses as the Jews did in Germany.
The proof of your inanity is not in the fact that Jews suffered a good deal last time. It's in your trying to blame someone, to have someone on whom your fate could safely depend, someone to point fingers at. Imagine there are no Jews. Do you think you'd finally take responsibility for your own life? No. You'd find another group to blame for all your bad decisions or lack thereof.
Please either realise that you are the only creature in the world responsible for your choices, or go extinct at the earliest convenience. The world can't be upgraded to the next level till you are around.
LOL at this blinded bigotry- "heriditary flair for finance"?? the Jews were shepherds, usually living under occupation by larger neighboring empires. Read something other than hate-filled propaganda to gather facts. Mr. Rogers has some nice stuff for remedial bigots.