This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Why We’re Drifting Towards World War 3
The Economist argues that there are ominous parallels between the conditions which led to the first world war and today:
The United States is Britain, the superpower on the wane, unable to guarantee global security. Its main trading partner, China, plays the part of Germany, a new economic power bristling with nationalist indignation and building up its armed forces rapidly. Modern Japan is France, an ally of the retreating hegemon and a declining regional power. The parallels are not exact—China lacks the Kaiser’s territorial ambitions and America’s defence budget is far more impressive than imperial Britain’s—but they are close enough for the world to be on its guard.
Which, by and large, it is not. The most troubling similarity between 1914 and now is complacency. Businesspeople today are like businesspeople then: too busy making money to notice the serpents flickering at the bottom of their trading screens. Politicians are playing with nationalism just as they did 100 years ago. China’s leaders whip up Japanophobia, using it as cover for economic reforms, while Shinzo Abe stirs Japanese nationalism for similar reasons.
The New Republic points out that global downturns can lead to war:
As the experience of the 1930s testified, a prolonged global downturn can have profound political and geopolitical repercussions. In the U.S. and Europe, the downturn has already inspired unsavory, right-wing populist movements. It could also bring about trade wars and intense competition over natural resources, and the eventual breakdown of important institutions like European Union and the World Trade Organization. Even a shooting war is possible.
The Telegraph notes that the economic crisis in Europe is increasing tensions:
Tensions between European countries unseen in decades are emerging.
(Indeed, Europe is stuck in a downturn worse than the Great Depression.)
Well-known economist Nouriel Roubini tweeted from the gathering of the rich and powerful at the World Economic Forum in Davos last year:
Many speakers compare 2014 to 1914 when WWI broke out & no one expected it. A black swan in the form of a war between China & Japan?
And:
Both Abe and an influential Chinese analyst don’t rule out a military confrontation between China and Japan. Memories of 1914?
Paul Craig Roberts – former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury under President Reagan, former editor of the Wall Street Journal, listed by Who’s Who in America as one of the 1,000 most influential political thinkers in the world, PhD economist – wrote an article about the build up of hostilities between the U.S. and Russia titled, simply: “War Is Coming”.
Similarly, Ronald Reagan’s head of the Office of Management and Budget – David Stockman – is posting pieces warning of the dispute between the U.S. and Russia leading to World War 3.
Trend forecaster Gerald Celente – who has been making some accurate financial and geopolitical predictions for decades – says WW3 will start soon.
Investment fund manager and adviser Martin Armstrong has charted the “cycles of war” back to 600 BC … and says that we’ll have major wars between now and 2020. He has written pieces recently entitled, “Why We will Go to War with Russia“, and another one saying, “Prepare for World War III“.
Investment adviser Larry Edelson – who has long studied the “cycles of war” – wrote last month:
This year … we will also be hit by another ramping up of the related war cycles.
***
All part and parcel of the rising war cycles that I’ve been warning you about, conditions that will not abate until at least the year 2020.
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 – says there will be “a major war”, which will drive the Dow to 5,000.
Veteran investor adviser James Dines forecast a war as epochal as World Wars I and II, starting in the Middle East.
Bad Economic Theories
What’s causing the slide towards war? We discuss several causes below.
Initially, believe it or not, one cause is that many influential economists and talking heads hold the discredited belief that war is good for the economy.
Therefore, many are overtly or more subtly pushing for war.
Challengers Give Declining Empires “Itchy Fingers”
Moreover, historians say that declining empires tend to attack their rising rivals … so the risk of world war is rising because the U.S. feels threatened by the rising empire of China.
The U.S. government considers economic rivalry to be a basis for war. Therefore, the U.S. is systematically using the military to contain China’s growing economic influence.
Competition for Resources Is Heating Up
In addition, it is well-established that competition for scarce resources often leads to war. For example, Oxford University’s Quarterly Journal of Economics notes:
In his classic, A Study of War, Wright (1942) devotes a chapter to the relationship between war and resources. Another classic reference, Statistics of Deadly Quarrels by Richardson (1960),extensively discusses economic causes of war, including the control of “sources of essential commodities.”A large literature pioneered by Homer-Dixon (1991, 1999) argues that scarcity of various environmental resources is a major cause of conflict and resource wars (see Toset, Gleditsch, and Hegre 2000, for empirical evidence).
***
In the War of the Pacific (1879–1884), Chile fought against a defensive alliance of Bolivia and Peru for the control of guano [i.e. bird poop] mineral deposits. The war was precipitated by the rise in the value of the deposits due to their extensive use in agriculture.
***
Westing (1986) argues that many of the wars in the twentieth century had an important resource dimension. As examples he cites the Algerian War of Independence (1954–1962), the Six Day War (1967), and the Chaco War (1932–1935). More recently, Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1990 was a result of the dispute over the Rumaila oil field. In Resource Wars (2001), Klare argues that following the end of the Cold War, control of valuable natural resources has become increasingly important, and these resources will become a primary motivation for wars in the future.
Former Federal Reserve chairman Alan Greenspan (and many world leaders) admitted that the Iraq war was really about oil, and former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. And see this and this. Libya, Syria, Iran and Russia are all oil-producing countries as well …
Indeed, we’ve extensively documented that the wars in the Middle East and North Africa are largely about oil and gas. The war in Gaza may be no exception. And see this. And Ukraine may largely be about gas as well.
And James Quinn and Charles Hugh Smith say we’re running out of all sorts of resources … which will lead to war.
Central Banking and Currency Wars
We’re in the middle of a global currency war – i.e. a situation where nations all compete to devalue their currencies the most in order to boost exports. Brazilian president Rousseff said in 2010:
The last time there was a series of competitive devaluations … it ended in world war two.
Jim Rickards agrees:
Currency wars lead to trade wars, which often lead to hot wars. In 2009, Rickards participated in the Pentagon’s first-ever “financial” war games. While expressing confidence in America’s ability to defeat any other nation-state in battle, Rickards says the U.S. could get dragged into “asymmetric warfare,” if currency wars lead to rising inflation and global economic uncertainty.
As does billionaire investor Jim Rogers:
Trade wars always lead to wars.
Given that China, Russia, India, Brazil and South Africa have joined together to create a $100 billion bank based in China, and that more and more trades are being settled in Yuan or Rubles – instead of dollars – the currency war is quickly heating up.
Indeed, many of America’s closest allies are joining China’s effort … which is challenging America and the Dollar’s hegemony.
Multi-billionaire investor Hugo Salinas Price says:
What happened to [Libya’s] Mr. Gaddafi, many speculate the real reason he was ousted was that he was planning an all-African currency for conducting trade. The same thing happened to him that happened to Saddam because the US doesn’t want any solid competing currency out there vs the dollar. You know Gaddafi was talking about a gold dinar.
Senior CNBC editor John Carney noted:
Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.
Robert Wenzel of Economic Policy Journal thinks the central banking initiative reveals that foreign powers may have a strong influence over the rebels.
This suggests we have a bit more than a ragtag bunch of rebels running around and that there are some pretty sophisticated influences. “I have never before heard of a central bank being created in just a matter of weeks out of a popular uprising,” Wenzel writes.
Indeed, some say that recent wars have really been about bringing all countries into the fold of Western central banking.
Debt
Martin Armstrong argued that war plans against Syria are really about debt and spending:
The Syrian mess seems to have people lining up on Capital Hill when sources there say the phone calls coming in are overwhelmingly against any action. The politicians are ignoring the people entirely. This suggests there is indeed a secret agenda to achieve a goal outside the discussion box. That is most like the debt problem and a war is necessary to relief the pressure to curtail spending.
The same logic applies to Ukraine and other countries.
Billionaire hedge fund manager Kyle Bass writes:
Trillions of dollars of debts will be restructured and millions of financially prudent savers will lose large percentages of their real purchasing power at exactly the wrong time in their lives. Again, the world will not end, but the social fabric of the profligate nations will be stretched and in some cases torn. Sadly, looking back through economic history, all too often war is the manifestation of simple economic entropy played to its logical conclusion. We believe that war is an inevitable consequence of the current global economic situation.
Runaway Inequality
Paul Tudor Jones – founder of the Tudor Investment Corporation and the Tudor Group, which trade in the fixed-income, equity, currency and commodity markets – said this week:
This gap between the 1 percent and the rest of America, and between the US and the rest of the world, cannot and will not persist.
Historically, these kinds of gaps get closed in one of three ways: by revolution, higher taxes or wars.
And see this.
Distraction
Billionaire investor Jim Rogers notes:
A continuation of bailouts in Europe could ultimately spark another world war, says international investor Jim Rogers.
***
“Add debt, the situation gets worse, and eventually it just collapses. Then everybody is looking for scapegoats. Politicians blame foreigners, and we’re in World War II or World War whatever.”
Economist and investment manager Marc Faber says that the American government will start new wars in response to the economic crisis:
Martin Armstrong – who has managed multi-billion dollar sovereign investment funds – wrote in August:
Our greatest problem is the bureaucracy wants a war. This will distract everyone from the NSA and justify what they have been doing. They need a distraction for the economic decline that is coming.
War Is Destroying Our National Security, Our Democracy and Our Economy
We spent trillions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Yet a top Pentagon official say we’re no safer – and perhaps less safe – after 13 years of war. Indeed, war only PROMOTED the dramatic expansion of even worse terrorists.
Never-ending wars are also destroying our democratic republic. The Founding Fathers warned against standing armies, saying that they destroy freedom. (Update). Perversely, our government treats anti-war sentiment as terrorism.
The Founding Fathers – and the father of free market capitalism – also warned against financing wars with debt. But according to Nobel prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz, the U.S. debt for the Iraq war could be as high as $5 trillion dollars (or $6 trillion dollars according to a study by Brown University.)
Indeed, top economists say that war is destroying our economy.
But war is great for the bankers and the defense contractors. And – as discussed above – governments are desperate for war.
So it’s up to us – the people – to stop wider war.
»
- advertisements -
well Sir Smedster, you can look offshore of gaza and syria, energy deposits that doomed the gaza folks to eviction when that can be arranged, and toppleing syria eliminates them from the offshore fields, if only the damn crimea plan worked ! Keep russia from the mediteranean, and its navy in the arctic east. Now, the dang syrians have the russians backing up their offshore energy claims, although, the war is not over ! Not the only reason for all that mess, but add this to your list.
We do not mention -holy hell- around here much, but I am awaiting action that can trigger total religious war extending all over the planet. VERY doable !
Nice Sir Weburke but what I asked is for the decoder ring answer to the interpretation of GW's response to the question. Specifically - how does #15 constitute an answer. No agenda on my part so please drop the condescending attitude and response
"condescending" ? I will have to review to see if that is in there somehow. but, none intended ! I love the posters here !
I thought Geo Wash was saying -maybe this is my 15th time on this? referring to the posters claim that it is a repeat.
Click the 15
Troll tactic 15
15. Associate opponent charges with old news. A derivative of the straw man usually, in any large-scale matter of high visibility, someone will make charges early on which can be or were already easily dealt with. Where it can be foreseen, have your own side raise a straw man issue and have it dealt with early on as part of the initial contingency plans. Subsequent charges, regardless of validity or new ground uncovered, can usually them be associated with the original charge and dismissed as simply being a rehash without need to address current issues — so much the better where the opponent is or was involved with the original source.
wow your beyond me.here is my offering. cool. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w25xghugIdg I would say the m is a w,or reverse ! depends, I cant remember !
DRIFTING? we've got the sail out full and we're running with the wind!
It looks like the chances are even greater with the stunning victory of Netanyahoo the chances of Isreal getting the Heart of Darkness Rabbit bomb blues just went expotential.
there is no chance of a war between china and japan. they are allies underneath all the rhetoric.
the war will start in the uncivilized west over money and resources as a cover for a fundamental change in the financial system. the problem this time is the swap in power will move to asia, a still very foreign place to westerners(bush puking up his sushi on the japanese pm is my favorite). china will not let them in except in a very inferior position(200 year old scars are a constant reminder. nanking pales in comparison). this is casus belli for the western bankers. they will take on the picketts charge to their slaughter. trying to challenge russia and china at the same time is almost too funny for the onion.
I remember reading that economic moves by USA, adverse to Japan, figure to have contributed to WW II.
Here are some current economic 'big lies'.
"Stop whoring for Wall Street."
http://www.showrealhist.com/yTRIAL.html
http://patrick.net/?p=1223928
We need a more true democratic system like Switzerlands, with 1.2% of the population allowed to create a referendum on an issue.
Maybe then we the people of the planet who are the ones who will reallly have to pay the price can live a happy life, without these foolish so called leaders we have elected into majority gov;s (dictatorships) or two party gov;s that are really the same party!
But this all starts with education! Education of how fraudulent the money systen is and how that our elected leaders really dont have our interests at heart only their advance in power and personel wealth.
So come everyone let's start educating the masses! Heck what do we have to lose if we don't!
Hi FIAT CON,
See my Comment following yours, please. With the histories being kept out of sight, I like to write that this is consistent with 'education' as a four letter word.
it will be a global false flag, all America's fading allies will join BRICS, trash the USA in a short sharp merciless attack and after write how it was the cancer of the panet & had to be done, now the world will know the peace we have created..... the same peace we've lived under for 2000 years at least. Same old scam, different faces at the helm
Yes, we create this feeling or vision of Universal Peace every Christmas time. But we don't work toward it in the USA. The Reality is that the USA, NATO, EU... work toward Tension, Friction, Chaos,... and toward exploitation of Energy and National Income... i.e. Indonesia.
USA has been Global in Ambitions at least since 19th Century, United Fruit Company, Dole, and others.
It was at this time that the USA used it's military to enforce what corporations wanted.
- We have all been manipulated
- War is a Racket
- Fear is an Economic Force
- Propaganda is an Economic Force Multiplier
- Most 'Mericans are Idiots who don't have their eye on the Ball
- Capture is the Key Word for most Seminars in the USA
- We capture both Citizens/Consumers/US Opinion & Foreign Assets
Nice thought provoking article. The link to Gerald Celente is broken.
Good news and bad news.
Good News: In a world war, DC and New York are sure to be targeted.
Bad News: .... let me get back to you on that.
Badnews: Many of the Bankers in New York can work out of Connecticut and may be out of town when New York gets hit.
Finance and military targets will be what they would aim for. If we know that CT has a lot of financial stuff, so do the Russians. There is no real point in hitting everything else. What parts of the infrastructure aren't destroyed by blast and heat will be knocked out by the ground effect stuff that will send a huge surge of electricity through the power grid.
There will be no American revolution. The police have congealed and solidified their dominance, the president has an internet "kill-switch" and without communication, there is nothing to unify the populace. Sporadic, flash-in-the-pan type attacks may occur but they will be relatively meaningless. All this can only end by an invading force, a coup d'etat that first takes out the main girders that underpin the American government. That will be no easy feat as there are four layers of government that every american is subject to (Federal, State, County and Local). All of these entities have their own enforcement branches that together, are undefeatable. No, it will take a major nuclear or biological attack to take down America. Its people would have to be eliminated; its defenders. I'd give it a 10% chance to happen by 2050. I fully expect that this slog through time will continue.
"There will be no American revolution."
I am the American Revolution.
It is my right, but more importantly, it is my duty.
Whether I stand alone is up to you, not me.
Will you exercise your right, and take up your duty?
The banksters need to repay us.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
no need 'to take down america'
you're doing it to yourselves.
why would anyone invade you, when a missile or 2 will do the job.
don't needs boots on the ground, you've got a police state to control you.
2050?
by then you will all be wishing it had happened sooner
tic toc
The police state responses that you're thinking of depend on overwhelming force. We had one case here a few years ago because some drunk old guy started some shit, so they sent out 47 police officers, including SWAT and K9 units to deal with him. There may or may not have been a report of a knife, but when the cops got there, there was no knife. So they tazed him, bean bagged him, they sent the dogs in to tear him up, and a lot of this happened AFTER he had already passed out. Or you can look at the response to Dorner. Their ever present "at least I got to go home at night" meme when they shoot somebody for daring to turn around while holding a spoon (this happened too) points to them not being very brave. Present day US cops will shit their pants if they ever come up against an even bigger force. They would disappear by choice. What they are good at is making examples of individuals and putting on a show of force when it is more than just a few individuals.
Italy has just slowed payments for cattle shipped, normally farmer would get paid after 15 days. It's just blown out, banks holding the cash.
My neighbour had to drive to the merchant to demand payment today.
Many farmers are going to miss machinery payments this month.
Something smells bad! liquidity crunch in Europe.
War is the natural, normal state of man. Lots of folks are disillusioned into thinking otherwise. And all wars are about the real or perceived disparity in the allocation of things - wealth, attention, power, love, time, etc.
All wars are banker's wars.
Absolutely,Agstacker; after all, they have to be financed, somehow. Before what we know as banksters, (Snakes In Suits), there were religious snakes in suits; still are. Before that, someone always wanted someone else's cookies without working for the materials or taking the time to bake them. Usually the cookies were gold, like PBS's Rise of the Black Pharaohs. 2000BC. Still, wars first have to be financed, ALWAYS. That's were to look for the REAL enemies.
Before that, someone always wanted someone else's cookies without working for the materials or taking the time to bake them.
You just stated my point exactly. Before there were "banksters" - or banks, or currency - there was strife over disparity of allocations. And disparity of allocations is THE root cause of all conflict. And it initiates from within, not between, men.
Think it through and it will become clear that the "banksters" is simply the modern veil covering the underlying cause. It's convenient to put a label on things...much harder to recognize the truth that men are by nature at war.
GW's entire post is about indicators of war's imminence. He does not address the real "why" we are headed toward world war. He points to symptoms and trends, but misses the core issue. "Why" we are (or may be) headed to WWIII is an extension of the same human nature that has led to every single other war in the past.
The same, internal torment which leads to "road rage", and incites you to down-arrow a completely anonymous, opposing sentiment is what I'm talking about. Inability to deny one's self is man's ultimate shortcoming.
Big Bank’s Analyst Worries That Iran Deal Could Depress Weapons Sales
...except the wars that predated bankers. Try again.
a banker by any other name is still a banker.
there have always been bankers. try again
There were wars before there was currency. But you would actually have to do a little homework to know that.
Just because something ought to be the case, doesn't make it so. Lack of diligence does not ascribe merit to inane comments.
Does the Kool Aid that GW serves you have a distinct odor of ammonia?
War is the health of the state http://www.wendymcelroy.com/articles/warfreem.html — not the natural, normal state of Man. Or as Indian poet Rabindranth Tagor put it: "Men are cruel, but Man is kind." Thus are cruel men drawn to the coercive power of the state, which is everywhere and always the enemy of Man.
Who will prevail, i.e., will Man win and the state perish? Or will the state win and our species perish?
The question will be answered during the course of this century.
Unless the state is made up of something other than men (it is not), you just made my point, Jethro. Thanks. You should probably broaden your reading, tho. And then ask yourself whether you think war is something between men, or an extension of something within men.
Men war with each other because we are disillusioned into thinking we own things of which we are only stewards.
Yes, war is all about the ownership of things — of property, including and especially people — but without the state — i.e., without territorial monopolies on the initiation of violence or the threat thereof — the cruel element in human society would be too dispersed and disorganized to make the ownership of things the be all, end all of human existence. Now that it has essentially reached the full extent of its powers, however, the utter inanity of the state is increasingly on display. And while few can comprehend, or even imagine, a world without the state, its own self-destructiveness assures its ultimate demise, the question being whether Man can survive it.
I believe Man will, aided and abetted by technology that is increasingly empowering him (e.g., cryptocurrencies), but by no means do I believe the outcome is certain and can just as easily imagine that the state will destroy humanity rather than lose power over it.
"Yes, war is all about the ownership of things"
Actually war is about unaccountable aggression against people and their Property for the benefit of those in control of the aggression.
The banksters need to repay us.
"War is a racket." Zion is the racketeer.
Unless the zionist's name is Isaac Herzog, apparently. Thats a fine type of racketeering and merits Obama's main man (now two time loser) Jeremy Bird, along with a Paul Begala and his funky appendix thrown in for good measure cuz he says "its too close to a national election" to meet with a certain head of state.
XOXOX's all ;-)
You might consider counting your medications before you take them. You do realize that you contradicted your prior post right? (Maybe not.)
Interesting that you cannot get over the stumbling block of thinking that the state is an object and not an organization of people.
By all means, please explain the contradiction, as I fail to see it. Moreover, I never said that the state is "an object and not an organization of people." I merely said that because the state is a terratorial monopoly on the initiation of violence, it tends to attract the cruelest (most selfish, least honest, laziest) among us, as history makes all too clear.
Perhaps you would do yourself the favor of reading the following:
http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/1662
http://www.barefootsworld.net/nockoets0.html
This next one is a gonna be a doosie.
But: in Germany we still have only Merkel! What kind of world war should it be? Look: world wars only caused by Germany - we have the patent.
It does not have to be one or the other. It can be both. A systemic failure could trigger ethnic cleansing on a grand scale. While distracted, some foreign power could decide that the domestic chaos could be enhanced by turning the lights out. With the lights out, the gutless wonders in Washington would more than likely invite in peace keepers. Then we would get a taste of our own medicine where the U.N. would come in and restore some semblance of order while turning what is left of the country over to the control of the remaining super power.
UN Peacekeepers? Pfft. I know people who paint their targets light blue when they go out plinking.
United Jewish Nations...
Hopefully the islamic-cult-worshiping vermin & russian gangster scum at the GW-impostor anti-America propaganda site will be among the first to get recycled. I am sure that there will be a drone carrying a package with your name on it.
You forgot to name the other middle eastern/east european cult
Satan worship. Selfishite Chosenite parasites.
It takes a village of spacemonkeys to get to this place.
I can't make heads or tails of any of these damn comments.
All the more reason to
BUY GOLD
So says MR. 15 weeks and 3 days.
Because length of membership on ZH somehow equates to wisdom? Get over yourself LM. You are the epitome of a GW minion.
Edit: interesting that when GW does the same thing - attempts to discredit newbies to ZH - he gets up-arrows. Pretty good evidence that his Kool-Aid drinking followers are not critical thinkers.
No. Length of membership has nothing to do with wisdom. However, it often does have something to do with trolling, both amateur and professional.
Btw, I didn't down vote you.