War Gaming - Part 2: Cyberwarfare & Disinformation

Tyler Durden's picture

Submitted by Bill O'Grady via Confluence Investment Management,

Yesterday, we began this two-part report by examining America’s geographic situation and how it is conducive to superpower status. This condition is problematic for foreign powers because it can be almost impossible to significantly damage America’s industrial base in a conventional war with the U.S. In addition, it would be very difficult to launch a conventional attack against the U.S. (a) with any element of surprise, and (b) without significant logistical challenges. The premise of this report is a “thought experiment” of sorts that examines the unconventional options foreign nations have to attack the U.S. Although these may not lead to regime change in America, such attacks may distract U.S. policymakers enough that foreign powers could engage in regional hegemonic actions that would otherwise be opposed by the U.S.

In Part I of this report, we discussed two potential tactics to attack the U.S., a nuclear strike and a terrorist attack. Today, we will examine cyberwarfare and disinformation. We will conclude with market effects.

#3: Cyberwarfare

Cyberwarfare is a broad tactical category, ranging from the use of computer technology in conventional warfare to hacking enemies’ industrial, financial, media, utility and social networks to gain information, monitor behavior, spread disinformation and disrupt operations of these networks. Both state and non-state actors are active in cyber activities. There is a significant criminal element as well.

The best known cyberattack was allegedly jointly created by Israel and the U.S. Dubbed “Stuxnet,” it was a computer virus which took control of systems that monitored Iran’s nuclear centrifuges. The virus returned information to its handlers and eventually was able to adversely affect the operation of the machinery itself, causing some of the centrifuges to spin out of control. Although Iran’s nuclear facilities were not directly connected to the internet, the bug was apparently introduced through a flash drive. This means that either a spy plugged a drive into Iran’s system or an innocent Iranian did it by mistake.

Initially, as reports from Iran began emerging about problems in its nuclear facilities, it was generally assumed that the Persians simply didn’t know what they were doing or had purchased faulty equipment. Eventually, Stuxnet ruined about 20% of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges. The virus turned out to be rather pervasive, spreading to Indonesia, India, Azerbaijan and Pakistan, and, interestingly enough, also infecting about 1.6% of American computers.

There are numerous other examples of cyberwarfare. The U.S. hacked insurgents’ cell phones in Iraq, allowing the American military to track their movements and even send them texts with false orders that may have led to their capture or demise. China has become notorious in its hacking of U.S. government and defense sites. Criminals routinely use “phishing” emails to gain control of individual and business computers, sometimes to “kidnap” their data (ransomware) or to simply gain their information.

Cyberwarfare carries numerous risks. As seen with Stuxnet, once released, a virus can become uncontrollable, harming friends and foes alike. It is relatively easy to conceal as it can be difficult to determine where an attack originated. In other words, a state actor could make it appear that a criminal group was responsible for the hack. Or, the criminal group could act as a mercenary for a state, giving the government plausible deniability. Governments have an incentive to co-opt and coerce technology firms to build in “back doors” that allow them to monitor information from citizens. This deliberate defect makes the product less attractive to consumers. On the other hand, an impregnable information system would be a very attractive tool for terrorists and criminals. Essentially, personal privacy is always at risk in a world where cyberattacks are possible.

Technology, for the most part, improves efficiency. Recently, my family traveled to the Caribbean which required a tour through U.S. Customs upon our return. We were checked into the country using an automated kiosk that scanned our passports, took a picture and sent us to a border agent. The following day the system crashed and what took us about 45 minutes to navigate took others up to six hours to clear. Payment systems have become increasingly electronic. This allows households to carry less cash and lets banks and other financial institutions move funds more easily through the economy. However, it also makes the system vulnerable to hackers. Banks are constantly facing threats from criminals trying to gain access to accounts.

Fraudulent purchases on credit cards are common. These acts are more easily facilitated due to technology.

In financial services, technology has changed how orders are handled. Trade execution is nearly instantaneous. The futures pits used to be populated with wildly waving traders in colorful jackets; now, these trades are executed via terminals and, in many cases, ordered by algorithm. Although this has lowered execution costs, it also makes financial markets susceptible to “flash crashes” that occasionally roil the markets.

Essentially, technology has been eliminating the number of people directly involved in processing transactions, everything from financial markets to retailing and government services. Although this makes the economy more efficient, it also makes it more fragile. If a system crashes, it can cause widespread disruptions and close firms, government agencies and markets. The U.S. economy, due to its technological advances, may be more vulnerable to cyberattacks than other nations.

Although cyberattacks won’t likely cause regime change in the U.S., it could seriously disrupt the American economy, giving a foreign power time to use conventional military means to establish regional hegemony. Thus, if China wanted to capture Taiwan or if Russia wanted to invade the Baltics, a major cyberattack, such as bringing down the electrical grid, causing dams to malfunction or disrupting air traffic control, may be enough to shift security and other officials’ attention in order to improve the odds of a successful attack.

Cyberwarfare is a significant threat to U.S. security and has very attractive characteristics. It is stealthy; the origin of the attack can be disguised and it can cause significant damage to an economy. Although the U.S. may be vulnerable to such an attack, it should be noted that American intelligence agencies and the military have significant firepower in this area as well. The difference is that disrupting the Russian economy might not matter all that much because it’s already in poor shape. But, in the U.S., shutting down the electrical grid for several days would be considered catastrophic; in fact, simply bringing down the internet might be just as bad. The U.S. faces a constant threat from cyberattacks. The key concern is what a foreign power would do with a disruption. China has already captured defense plans and personal information. So far, it has used this information to improve its own defense materials and to create countermeasures to U.S. defense goods. But the threat of a cyberattack as cover for a regional military operation is perhaps the greatest threat the U.S. currently faces.

#4: Disinformation

Disinformation is nothing new. From time immemorial, governments have tried to fool their adversaries. From America’s perspective, Radio Free Europe was broadcasting the truth to those behind the Iron Curtain. To the communists, it was pure propaganda.

There are two changes that make disinformation more dangerous. First, the technology behind news flow has changed dramatically. During the era of print media, disseminating news was rather expensive. Printing needed to occur. Journalists needed to be hired. The journalists were usually trained and there were standards of conduct that acted as a screen for reports. Although there was a “yellow press” in American history, the Cold War period was probably the golden age of journalism.

By the 1980s, cable news became an alternative to the major networks. The cable news companies discovered that they were able to capture a more reliable viewership by taking a definite slant toward the news. AM radio, as an older technology and because of its low cost, became an avenue of more extreme views. But the real change agent was the internet and social media. The internet allowed for news to be disseminated almost instantly. Social media allows common citizens to post items and videos for all to see. Regular media companies suddenly found themselves competing with citizens and their cell phones. From 1981 to 2014, the number of daily newspapers declined by 25.3%. Social media and news aggregators have the ability to screen news flow based on the viewing habits of the reader. Essentially, if one reads off the internet uncritically, they can live in a virtual news echo chamber. Thus, news, “facts” and viewpoints become hardened.

The changes in news dissemination dovetailed with changes in political polarization.

This chart is a measure of party polarization; essentially, it measures partisanship. The higher the reading on the chart, the more the political structure is partisan and polarized. Before the U.S. emerged on the world stage, there were strong disagreements on policy. There was less polarization by WWI, and during the Cold War the degree of polarization reached historical lows. In other words, regardless of political party, there was a high degree of bipartisanship.

When the Cold War ended, bipartisanship also deteriorated. Currently, the country is probably the most polarized it has been since the Civil War. Unfortunately, this degree of disunity is dangerous for a superpower because it creates conditions that can distract policymakers from global concerns.

Perhaps the greatest risk to the evolution of American hegemony was the Civil War. Although the British were the undisputed global superpower at the time, the leadership of that nation was watching the explosive economic growth in the U.S. warily. The British probably made a strategic mistake in not supporting the Confederacy because if it had survived the U.S. would have been divided and would never have achieved the same degree of power. According to historians, the political elites favored supporting the South but the public opposed it because of slavery. In addition, Queen Victoria also supported abolition and opposed the Confederacy. The British did offer some support but never enough to turn the tide.

An America divided is susceptible to disinformation. We are living in an era where “false news” is routinely disseminated. In addition, facts have become increasingly tied to social and political positions; in other words, no fact seems to exist outside a social and political context. During the Cold War, the losing political party in an election was in opposition but did work with the winner; in the current environment, the losing party believes catastrophic events are likely and the only way to ensure a better future is to resist the policy goals of the other party.

This environment allows foreign powers to influence social and political beliefs. It is clear the Russians tried to influence the U.S. presidential election. This should not come as a shock to anyone. The U.S. has done this for years; what Americans see as supporting democracy-loving activists in foreign nations looks much like meddling to foreign governments. In addition, it is routine for other nations to have lobbying efforts in the U.S., ostensibly to affect American policy.

What is surprising is that the Russians seem to have had some success, although we would argue that it probably wasn’t as significant as the media is suggesting. We believe the reason the Russians were able to find some traction with the leaks and its behavior is that the political environment allowed it to occur. A political environment in which the other party isn’t seen as merely an American with a different political position but one that is perhaps evil allows leaks and disinformation to have power.

Essentially, it appears that our current highly partisan climate has created an environment where disinformation is more likely to be accepted. If this process makes America more divided, it will reduce our ability to project power and exercise hegemony. Although disinformation probably won’t bring regime change, it can create conditions under which an aspiring regional hegemon can try to influence American public opinion in a fashion that will reduce the likelihood that the U.S. responds negatively to the aspiring regional hegemon’s encroachment. In other words, if Russia wanted to take the Baltics, it may try to use false news and internet dissemination to sway Americans to oppose U.S. and NATO intervention.

Ramifications

This report is something of a thought experiment about how foreign nations can attack a hegemon with extraordinarily favorable geographic conditions. We identified four primary methods—a nuclear strike, terrorism, cyberattack and disinformation. These are not the only methods, but we suspect these are the most likely. Two others that deserve mention are biological/chemical warfare and space. The reason we didn’t explore the former is that it is probably similar to a nuclear attack if done in scale; we would know who did it and we would not be surprised to see a state-sponsored biological attack met with a nuclear strike or a massive conventional attack. Of course, a terrorist attack using these methods could be effective but these weapons are notoriously difficult to deploy effectively. And, the U.S. has an advanced medical sector that would probably be able to cope with a small biological attack. A space attack, which could range from attacking satellites to launching weapons, is possible. However, the U.S. is probably as well prepared as any nation for such conflicts and so a pre-emptive strike would probably be met in kind. Thus, for considerations of length, we didn’t explore either of these methods in detail.

We are not likely to face a nuclear attack but the other three are quite likely and, in fact, have occurred and will likely continue to occur. Of the remaining three, we are most worried about the two discussed this week. Computer hacking by China and Russia is common; although it hasn’t led to anything that threatens civil order, the potential does exist that it could at some point.

Disinformation is another rising concern. Although this method has existed for centuries, the internet allows dissemination without filters. Thus, the ability to affect the unity of the nation and America’s capacity to mobilize against enemies to support allies could be compromised.

As noted, we believe a conventional military attack on the continental U.S. is highly unlikely. However, that doesn’t mean that aspiring regional hegemons won’t use the last three methods to improve their odds of success in local actions. The Russian concept of “hybrid war” uses the last three in combination to undermine nations in its near abroad and weaken any opposition to Russian goals of regional domination. The U.S. may become a more likely target of similar actions in order to distract America from opposing the aims of aspiring regional hegemons to expand their areas of control.

The market ramifications are complicated. Technology security firms should find steady business from the private and public sector. Media companies may face additional burdens of screening news for potential “false news” stories. Overall, though, the biggest impact may be that these factors are part of a trend where the U.S. continues to move away from the superpower role it has played since the end of WWII. We have documented and discussed these issues at length. The bottom line is that a G-0 world is one that is negative for foreign investment but probably bullish for commodities. The dollar and U.S. financial assets will likely benefit relative to foreign assets.
 

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
CunnyFunt's picture

Right, Bush was correct. Saddam Hussein had WMDs.

FFS, get a grip, man, and cut out the party hack crap. Both are reprehensible.

philipat's picture

Unsurprisingly from within the establishment echo chamber, the article "forgets" to mention that the single largest source of misinformation/disinformation (a/k/a "fake news") in the US is Washington DC and its MSM Agents.

weburke's picture

too easy, just disrupt the snap electronic food stamp program. There is no back up plan, and the grocery stores would all be destroyed by the thievery.

lucitanian's picture

How right you are! And this whole article sees the US as the victim defending itself from foreign hegemony by conventional military or other means. Whereas in fact the US hegemonic power has had no border and is maintained only by usurping the powers abroad, be it through the maintenance of the petrodollar or the thousands of military installations globally.

In short the US is not the defending victim but the threatening aggressor with an insatiable apatite to gobble up resources and power from any and all weaker nations. Asides from the invasion of Tibet under the Mao regime, China has not looked to expand territoriality in any hegemonic manner, despite containing one quarter of the world's populace. Sure, investments, and partnership with developing and developed counties, including the US, have marked an outward looking globalization of purely "economic" endeavor. As for Russia the annexation of Crimea and its determined protection of its western boarders from an obvious aggression and deliberate destabilization of its immediate neighbors by US interference are reactions, but can hardly be seen as aspirations of aggressive hegemony.

This whole idea of competitive confrontation is a specter somehow instilled in the minds of USns, who have been indoctrinated to xenophobia, and is core to this article. In short what is out there is a threat and on which point the present administration has largely played to gain control. Mexicans, illegals, Muslims, especially from countries destabilized by US intervention and military aggression, and any other bloody foreigner, are all to be feared.  Whereas in fact what is to be feared is this idea as a whole.

Most countries naturally have differences and diverse interests but find areas of cooperative trade and development, independent of their ability to usurp, threaten, regime change, or destroy the other. Is it not the last stand of a dyeing militaristic and hegemonic empire, when it can only see it's continuation, not in a cooperative or constructive interaction with neighbors and a community of states at large, but only as a potential victim or dominate hegemony? And all this while in fact the social, economic and financial fabric of the US is actually disintegrating from within by excesses.

Rome was successful as an empire covering most of the known world at that time because it brought with its legions, equitable laws, regional diplomacy which ended deadly local squabbles, as well as infrastructures like roads, enhancing trade, enabling means of global exchange, etc.. But as in the US, Rome was destroyed by the corruption within. It was the excessive taxation of their minions, and the consequent self fulfilling spiral of devaluation of their coin to maintain an army of oppression that did the empire in. Obvious parallels.

And so the US is facing its decline into irrelevance as it builds physical, political and economic ramparts borrowing liberally from over the wall to fund an offensive military to protect itself from what it sees as foreign aggression, while a community of nations out there is getting on with the business of survival and not interested in living by the dominance of the sword, or the economic hegemony of a corrupt tyrant, but in general that diverse group of other powers prefer to put their efforts behind, and to be guided by, shared cooperative values of mutually beneficial and ratified treaties, laws and trade, peaceful exchange, and hopes for prosperity.

Et tu Brutus.

nmewn's picture

We hereby pass the baton of Superpowery to...France.

Good luck wid dat and thanks a heep for Nam ;-)

TeethVillage88s's picture

Recruit our Elites/our very wealthy to be part of some big plan... maybe a plan that allows them great power or positions them for oversized profits.

- Jim Cramer, Mad Money (Never really said that)
- Aaron Russo (really said this)

yeah, recruit:

- Zuckerman
- Zuckerberg
- Apple Cook
- Yahoo CEO
- Google
- Facebook
- Ashley Madison
- Backpage
- Craigslist
- AT&T, Verizon, Sprint, T-Mobil, T-Gerbil, all telecons

ISEEIT's picture

It is not a nation attacking 'America'. It is an organization.

This organization is either now crumbling much as did the soviet empire, or else humanity is simply being forcibly marched into chaos.

To think we are headed truly to the promised land is absurd and likely indicates an as of yet unrecognized mental disorder.

Pragmatophobia??

From an Anthropological perspective I suppose the similarity to Farcism would be apropos?

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) ISEEIT Jan 27, 2017 8:43 PM

+ for using the word "apropos." One of my all time favs.

lucitanian's picture

Right again, but the organization is from within and throughout, and is predicated on a misinterpretation of "the survival of the fittest" which by the way was coined by Herbert Spencer, not Darwin.

It may be relevent to quote from:

Evolution myths: ‘Survival of the fittest’ justifies ‘everyone for themselves’

" What we see in the wild is not every animal for itself. Cooperation is an incredibly successful survival strategy. Indeed it has been the basis of all the most dramatic steps in the history of life. Complex cells evolved from cooperating simple cells. Multicellular organisms are made up of cooperating complex cells. Superorganisms such as bee or ant colonies consist of cooperating individuals.

Suicidal cells

When cooperation breaks down, the results can be disastrous. When cells in our bodies turn rogue, for instance, the result is cancer. So elaborate mechanisms have evolved to maintain cooperation and suppress selfishness, such as cellular “surveillance” programmes that trigger cell suicide if they start to turn cancerous."

There always has been a world order, but then there was a "NWO" and although its the same world in which their effects are realized, the reality of the difference is oft confused. The natural world order will always predominate.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13671-evolution-myths-survival-of...

ebworthen's picture

The Chinese do more hacking than the Russians.

They've been in our .gov, corporate, and personal systems for decades.

NOTHING on the Internet is secure, NOTHING!

yellowsub's picture

I guess you don't recall how the NSA had CPU mfg and other networking devices embed their backdoor into the chip.

Why would you need to hack anyone when you control the devices as well as filtering every major internet backbone facility.

Son of Captain Nemo's picture

And the United States of America has got some well deserved "pain" coming to it for everything it's done and does everywhere else!

A note to the PRC and Russian Federation... Never mind.

When the moment is right you no doubt will know "what" to hit in this read and "when" to hit it!

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) Jan 27, 2017 10:05 PM

In the current era technology is a blessing and a curse. Certainly it makes our lives easier in many ways. That is the curse of technology, that life become too easy, that people neglect learning things that are necessary if that technology is snatched away, for whatever reason. (Natural disaster, EMP, Internet kill switch, sabotage are a few examples as to why the Internet / electrical grid might go down).

GPS is great as long as you have a working cell phone or computer. What happens when that goes blank? Can you read a map? Do you have a paper map for your area? Do you have a compass? Do you know how to use a compass? What about telling time? Can you tell time without a cell phone or watch? Do you know how to tell time by the stars? http://www.shepherdswatch.com/aquitaine-silver/
http://www.shepherdswatch.com/nocturnal-celestial-stardial-silver/

I am a big fan of DeLorme maps. Best paper maps out there for general usage combined with the cost. I wouldn't be caught without out a state map for my area. And all of the surrounding states. http://www.maptown.com/Delorme_Road_Atlases_s/1968.htm

MASTER OF UNIVERSE's picture

Bill O'Grady is obviously a retard, and if the MIC pays him to analyse thresholds of threat to the USA they should stop. Moreover, I already eviscerated the USA on the bear raid of Bear Stearns March 10th 08 around 11:00am time New York shitty, so you don't have to worry about having an 'American Hegemony' anymore because it took an engineered dirt nap, BuckO.

 

Welcome to the New World Disorder, fuckwad.

 


Dragon HAwk's picture

I want the entire internet to go down for one week one week only, just so everyone wakes the fuck up and remembers there is a world out there..  use the words " Before the Internet " and people look at you like you are Crazy.

  Things are going to get real real interesting, when all the chickens start running around with no heads

ILIKEMITTENS's picture

Yea, or even if they only come home to roost. I think its coming. Within our lifetimes.

besnook's picture

financial warfare is what will kill the usa. the question is the source of th eattack. in the past it has been from inside. the fed has destroyed the usa. the ponzi scheme is dead and the only way to resurrect it for another run is to kill millions of people and destroy a lot of stuff. it is on the way.

china just has to sit back and wait. they are probably reviewing sun tzu chapter on letting the enemy destroy itself and take over the remains.

GraveDancer's picture

What about blocking trade routes far away from US mainland. Trade wars? Debt bomb?

YHC-FTSE's picture

This series of articles was as much about paranoia and projecting as it was about analyzing imaginary threats. For as long as I have been on the internet, long before Tim Berners-Lee started to create hypertext linked pages at Cern that became the world wide web we use today, there has only been one country with the infrastructure, resources and the policies to initiate this so-called cyber warfare. The entire history of computing is littered with users and programmers fighting against viruses, malware and backdoor controls that the Pentagon and the spooks have forced on the world, before Stuxnet was even on the drawing board. It is the same story told in a hundred different ways - "Do as we say, not as we do". 

As for Disinformation, that is an interesting aspect of tactics an enemy might utilize to cause division. How does it differ from disinformation and propaganda that sets the narrative for those in power? The attacks on President Trump during the elections came from within. Clinton had to resort to archive footage from 16 yrs in the past to force the narrative that Trump was a mysogenist and rapist. The entire MSM repeated these accusations ad nauseum until it became so ingrained, those labels on Trump may never be erased from the minds of the public.

Until recently I was a victim of one of the largest disinformation conspiracies by the American government. I honestly believed that the US had won WWII in Europe - it was repeated to me in all the books I read while I grew up and there are hundreds of films that show how I would be speaking German if it weren't for the yanks - but when I looked at the real stats, it quickly became clear it was the Russians who had defeated Nazi Germany and all the propaganda that was stuffed into me were complete bullshit. It was an object lesson. No matter how old the information or how widespread, if the information is from the government, I take it for granted that it is tainted with lies.

For example, when the author wrote last week that "Britain has not been invaded since 1066", I knew I had to correct him with the story of the "Glorious revolution of 1688" that was a successful invasion of Britain which had almost been erased from history by disinformation and propaganda. It goes to show they can last for centuries until somebody actually looks it up, verifies it and has the courage to speak the truth against a sea of misinformed people.

 

HRH Feant's picture
HRH Feant (not verified) YHC-FTSE Jan 28, 2017 1:23 AM

I guessed, many moons ago, that sites like this are honeypots.

Predictive programming is amazing. Hollywierd and Bollywood and now Chinawood have various movie studios to promote various agendas to the masses.

People are cutting the cable cord and finding the news sources they trust.

Utube is full of reality shows. You can learn any skill. You can watch people doing various tasks around the world.

The Internet has turned out to be more amazing than I ever thought it could be. I can't wait until we enter the space travel era and are able to create products using nano technology!

The future is here and we are creating it! I love it! With all of the gollums and horrible people out there the human spirit, the breath of life, is there. That spark of life shines brightly, still.

falak pema's picture

Moral of the story : when you can beat the Habsburgs at home you can beat anybody!

But like you said The Dutch were just as British as the Stewarts who were Scots! 

And the George's were Hanoverians! 

Royalty games are such scams anyways! 

pipes's picture

The article itself counts as disinformation.

 

The premise is shit. Woefully incomplete, and spectacularly shallow.

 

Shit premise = worthless body, which dictates worthless conclusions - correction - DANGEROUSLY WRONG conclusions.

 

Part 1 was shit.

 

Part 2 is shit.

francis scott falseflag's picture

 

1)  "four primary methods—a nuclear strike, terrorism, cyberattack and disinformation."

2)  "We are not likely to face a nuclear attack"

 

You mention 'a nuclear strike', then you eliminate its possibility by your own "disinformation'.

Your own 'denial.'  What you know about 21st century hegemony would fill a thimble.

 

Very classy.

falak pema's picture

Rome : Became hegemon in 146 BC when it won the third Carthiginian war. Not only did it destroy Carthage but also Corinth the hub of Greek commerce. Mare Nostrum was now Rome's both militarily and commercially and Egypt and the golden crescent of Syria/Anatolia provided subsequently the grain, silk and spices to Rome. 

By analogy, If Julius Caesar was Reagan, Bush Snr won the new carthginian war in 1991 and declared NWO...

But what happened in Rome from 146 BC onwards?

1° Its population tripled as the slaves from Empire poured in. The Roman aristocrats (Optimates) started leading leasurely lives. bunga Bunga and speculation to the Moon !

2° A new middle class was born of professional tradesmen and magistrates called the Knights order. aH derivatives and Gordon Gekko !

3° The serfs and slaves served the empire as pennyless soldiers or house cleaners. Oh the mehicans now come in by the droves !

Then a portion of the Roman aristocracy became social oriented to get elected to office. Many came from the knights new order and started politicking the votes of the soldiers and veterans to get to Senate. The Populares class thus rose and were democrats not elitist REpublicans like the OPtimates of the original 20/30 families who ruled the Senate of which the Brutus clan. --Clinton and its the Economy stupid.

The Gracchi would head the democrat Populares requiring "power to the people". It started the Social wars in Rome that lasted a hundred years upto battle of Actium, when Octavian adopted son of Caesar, a Populares became Princeps. A bit like the Red/Blue false divide spawns the same predatorial beasts who want Empire ad vitam aeternem.

Fortunately Reagan has a son to turn the tables on you Clintonians goes the current about turn! First Bush snr and now his great grandson the Duck... Bye Bye Populares! Game over we are now Imperial again! --Oh Obama, the last of the Populares,  what a Gracchi you were with Obamacare!

The Reagan-Bush dynasty of GOP paleoconservatives cum neo-cons have a son born in purple; a new emperor in the Nerotic Duck!

Reagan like Caesar had started the Imperial order. Bush his successor abolished the old Optimate and Populares divide like Octavian metamorphosed into Augustus with NWO. Divine Emperor now ruled as Zeus's representative all dressed in purple and ruled the burgeoning empire built on shock and awe, Roman world policeman, roman law, roman nation building and wall building, roman destruction of every enemy who did not abide by the roman rule of "for me or against me" dictat. A Reagan come to judgement. The state is the problem not the solution. Believe me i'm Potus Princeps !

Being a roman dictator ruling thanks to its legions did not save subsequent Caesars avoiding their predestined fate, that Tacitus would premonitorially predict under Trajan's taking the Empire a "bridge too far"...They make a desert and call it peace... he said. --Oh GWB and the shock and awe doctrine from PAk/Afgh to Iraq! Its all been played before...

And it played out. And Italy lost its preeminence to this day...

Now to coma back to the Duck !

The Duck is now posturising with his harp at seeing a divided Rome burn under his dictat; blaming those snowflakes to crucifiction like the new Christians who sing "in love we believe, you'll never divide us"; all the while making sure his empire goes more and more militarist.

Nero died at the hands of the pretorians (or killed himself in order not to be emasculated like the pig's head).

I love the photo of Melania in Vanity Fair eating her diamonds as the new empress-mistress Acte. 

Aptly she was by his side when he died in his new palace called Domus Aurea...

Does history rhyme to the point of making her swallow her diamonds?

We'll never know for Acte if it was legend or fact !...but today with the Internet...

francis scott falseflag's picture

 

I sure hope she doesn't break one of her lovely incisors on a pear shaped 

DuneCreature's picture

~~~~<< (Puzzle Pieces To See The Pirate Ship Coming Out Of The Mist) >>~~~~

Two very good interviews in the on going George Webb investigation of CF / CIA / DynCorp / ......... / right up to The Bankster Bad Guys (or Ass Wipes Inc as I like to call them.)

Both of these add valuable pieces to the puzzle. .. Pass them on, please.

http://thephaser.com/2017/01/george-webb-braverman-black-budget-child-tr...

http://thephaser.com/2017/01/george-webb-marty-leeds-mathemagical-radio-...

(*ht* to WillyGroper for the links)

Live Hard, If You And Yours Don't Want To Become Victims To These Cut-Throat Pirates You Better Listen To These And Take Careful Notes, Die Free

~ DC v4.0

pipes's picture

The level of one dimensional, linear, and uniquely 'western' analysis regarding this subject is dis-heartening.

 

This b.s. article is just as likely to be deliberate disinfo in the vein of "Art of War" and "6th Gen War" ,as it is to be just some shallow-thinking dumbass.

 

MANY of the responses to it are correct technically and insofar as they go...but they are also inadequate, myopic, overly complex at times, and ignorant of how non-westerners plot and plan.