World War III: Are We Being Manipulated Into A Fight We Can't Win?

Authored by Daisy Luther via The Organic Prepper blog,

Everyone is talking about World War III right now, and I hate to be the one to say this, but... all I can wonder is whether we’re being manipulated into a fight we can’t win. This is probably going to make some folks mad, but there are some facts, statistics, and unanswered questions that support my premise.

Picture this.

A clean-cut athlete from a wealthy family sees a skinny, underprivileged kid. The athlete wants to blow off some steam and look cool to his prep school friends, so he punches the skinny kid right in the face.

Later, when the athlete is questioned by the school, he says that the skinny kid did something horrible, and thus, deserved the punch in the face.  Because the athlete is rich, well-connected, and the star of the football team, the administration and the cops opt to believe him because it makes it a whole lot more acceptable that he punched the skinny kid.

But when the skinny kid gets home, he talks to his big brother. His brother may not be from an elite background like the athlete, but he is just as big and just as athletic. He has grown up hard, so he is way, way more aggressive. And he has friends. Big, aggressive friends who are willing to fight viciously and who have the skills to back it up.

The big brother contacts the athlete and his prep school friends. He warns them that his skinny little brother has had enough. He is angry that they lied about his brother and that everyone pretended to believe them. He tells them that if they ever pick on his brother again, they’ll be answering to him and his badass friends.

If the athlete has any common sense, he’s going to see that he and his friends are outnumbered, outgunned, and outmatched. No matter how “special” they think they are, how can they possibly win a fight against more numerous opponents that have the same skills and the same weapons, but more – many more – people to wield them?

If you were the athlete, what would you do in this situation? 

If you’ve been following the Syria situation, you probably understand who is represented in the cast of characters above.

I don’t have a background in military strategies. I’m not a politician with special clearance. This may make me seem like the wrong person to assess the looming World War III we’re about to get ourselves into. But humor me while I share some of my research and tell me your thoughts in the comments below.

This goes all the way back to President Obama.

Back in 2016, I wrote an article titled, “Why Is Obama Doing Uncomfortably War-Like Things to Syria and Russia?” In that article, I wrote:

You CANNOT just show up in another country and start calling the shots because you don’t like the way they do things.

I have questions.

  • Is this just saber-rattling or does Obama really think he has the right to invade a foreign country, shoot down the aircraft of that country, and also shoot down the aircraft of an invited guest in that country?
  • Does he really think he would get away with it?
  • Is he deliberately trying to provoke other world leaders?
  • Does Obama actually want a war? Because this is how you get a war.
  • Is he totally insane?
  • Does he really think Vladimir Putin will sit back and say okay, fair enough, Barack, no biggie?
  • And getting into a p*ssing contest with Russia? What is he thinking?

Provoking Putin takes things to a whole new level. It puts millions more lives at risk because what is currently a civil war could easily escalate into an international conflict with two superpowers on different sides. (source)

And that was two years ago. What’s going on now is no different, except that China has Russia’s back who has Syria’s back.

Trump is doing the same stuff as Obama.

Remember how we all thought that Hillary Clinton would immediately get us into a war with Russia if she had been elected? Remember how we thought that Trump would actually be able to get along with Vladimir Putin?

I think any of us who thought that Trump might be more anti-interventionist than the presidents who preceded him or the opponent against whom he ran have to admit that we’ve all been duped. Trump is just like every warmongering president before him.

And for those who are still defending him: don’t you realize that your bias is just as bad as the one you blamed the Democrats of having when they supported Obama droning the crap out of the Middle East? Stop it. President Trump isn’t playing “4-D Chess.” He doesn’t have some wise plan to which the rest of us are not privy. He is just like the rest of them. Maybe someone else is pulling the strings, but the end result is the same.

By making these ridiculous statements and trying to find the positive in a situation that has clearly gone straight to heck, perhaps you’re really trying to justify having voted for him. My friends, a lot of people voted for him and they all feel this way, but there comes a time when you have to see that wrong is wrong and call it out.

There was no hard evidence that Assad gassed his people in 2017.

Last time the media said that President Assad gassed his own people, there was no evidence. Just heart-wrenching, horrifying videos of little children foaming at the mouth and writhing in agony. I was sickened by those videos just as much as anyone else who watched them.

But it was never proven that President Assad made the call to do this. I don’t know President Assad, but it sure doesn’t make sense that he’d gas a bunch of little kids to death, does it? I mean, what would he gain from that?

Those who weren’t convinced were called conspiracy theorists and cast into a bucket with a bunch of unsavory Alt-Right types. But even in this critical article, I ask you, where is the proof? Senator Ron Paul produced this video at the time.

As Dr. Paul said in the video, things were getting peaceful and someone didn’t like that.

So, despite this lack of proof, Trump bombed them anyway.

Then it was like deja vu all over again.

Let me provide a list of facts:

April 3: President Trump said that he was pulling American troops out of Syria.

April 8: A gruesome gas attack was allegedly executed on Syrian civilians, complete with gruesome videos of suffering toddlers. Trump decides not to pull the troops just yet.

April 9: Sen. John McCain blames Trump and says Assad was “emboldened” by his call to pull the troops. (But wait – wouldn’t Assad mind his manners until the US got out of his country? Why would he give them an excuse to stay?) In a series of tweets, Trump said:

Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria,” Trump tweeted. “Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world. President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price to pay. Open area immediately for medical help and verification. Another humanitarian disaster for no reason whatsoever. SICK!”

April 11: Russia warns the US against striking Syria. Moscow’s UN envoy Vasily Nebenzia warned Washington that it will “bear responsibility” for any “illegal military adventure” it carries out. (source)

April 12: Sec. of Defense Mattis said there was “still no evidence” to confirm the gas attack but he believed there was one anyhow.

April 13: So, without evidence, the US military bombed Syria in retaliation for the alleged gas attack. They struck 3 different sites.

April 14: Russia was ticked and warned, “Such actions will not be without consequences.”

April 16: Russia presented “proof” that the UK actually carried out the gas attacks. But we didn’t hear much about that, did we?

Just so we’re clear, there was NO EVIDENCE that Assad gassed his own people but we bombed them anyway. In fact, we bombed them right before the investigators arrived to confirm or deny the claims that they had these chemical weapons. That’s not suspicious at all.

Here’s Ben Swann with a full rundown of the gas attack.

The US is drawing us into a massive conflict without any evidence. In fact, it seems like they may be hiding the evidence that would keep us OUT of a war.

And this is what COULD happen next.

Now, I haven’t got a crystal ball, but I have a few thoughts on what kind of Gordian knot the US government is pulling us into.

And that is World War III – a WWIII it would be very difficult for the United States to win.

I’m not being unpatriotic by saying that. We do have a very strong military, advanced technology, and billions of dollars to spend in the military-industrial complex. Heck, a lot of rich people would get a whole lot richer if a war happened.

But here’s the problem: I’m being realistic and reality isn’t always pretty.

China has said that they will be backing Russia, who will be backing Syria.

Let’s look at the numbers:

These numbers don’t include people who could be drafted – just the people who are already trained and in the military.

In Global Firepower’s military strength index, which takes into account technology, watercraft, aircraft, and weapons, the United States is in first place. We have the strongest military in the world.

However, 2nd place is held by Russia and 3rd is held by China. If they combined their resources, they’re far and away ahead of the United States. Our allies, France and the UK, are a distant 5th and 6th. Israel is way down the line at #16.

I think you can see where this is going. It’s entirely possible that our government is picking a fight they can’t win. And of course, they won’t be the people sent to the front lines to defend the country, nor will their children. That will be what happens to the rest of us, who had nothing to do with bombing Syria in the first place.

Maybe losing an ill-advised war is the SHTF we need to worry about.

Maybe the real SHTF we need to worry about is getting involved in a World War III that we can’t win. That’s not on most people’s list of TEOTWAWKI possibilities.  It’s pretty much unfathomable that we would lose a war – it’s never “officially” happened in our history, although there are some hushed conversations about certain conflicts in which we certainly didn’t win.

There aren’t very many scenarios we think about in which we wouldn’t eventually be the victor, and if we end up in this war, we may still “win” due to advanced technology and strategies. But the losses would be great as far as human life is concerned and things would always be different in the future.

Hopefully, cooler heads will prevail. Hopefully, the fact that more of the public is beginning to see through the machinations of those who will profit from war will slow down the wheels that are already in motion. Hopefully, we can live in peace and let others do so as well. Hopefully, we can stop intervening in other country’s civil disputes and work on cleaning up our own house.

But, historically, that seems unlikely.

The information in these articles will help you to get prepared for World War III, however it ends up happening.

Check out the classes by Selco, because he is one person who has lived through a nightmare like this. Stock up on emergency food, figure out what you’ll do about water, learn about nuclear survival (there’s a whole chapter in my newest book) hope for the best, and plan for the worst.

All we can do to try and prevent this nightmare is to be vocal about the fact that we DO NOT want war with Syria. Because Syria has a big brother and that big brother has big friends.

Tags

Comments

Truther Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:02 Permalink

Neocons and the deep state will make sure we have a WWIII to cover up the coming depression for one and to defend the $fiat for the other. Fuck the money changers.

J S Bach 07564111 Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:16 Permalink

Even the (((parasite))) that is behind all of this strife cannot win.  Once all of the hosts die off, they, too, will suffer the same fate.

The ageless fable states:

"A scorpion asks a frog to carry it across a river. The frog hesitates, afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, they would both drown. Considering this, the frog agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When the frog asks the scorpion why, the scorpion replies that it was in its nature to do so."

In reply to by 07564111

Jeffersonian Liberal J S Bach Fri, 04/20/2018 - 08:25 Permalink

Yes. That is the goal.

But not only to lead us into defeat, but to lead us into a Germany WW I-level defeat, where we sign any treaty they put before us just so that stop bombing and shooting the hell out of us and promise to feed us.

We will sign away our freedoms and national sovereignty and sign on with the global government.

They will take from us our resources and our capital, because, they will claim, we stole them from all the other people on the planet.

That is their dream.

In reply to by J S Bach

TechnoCaveman haunebu Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:25 Permalink

   What if their plans go awry? India is 1955 America: nuke missiles, nuke subs, nuke bombs on planes and building public fall out shelters because Pakistan has nuke subs and missiles. 
   WW-III as a spectator sport is scary when someone else drops the bomb. 
   Then the old money gets to clean out "Nouveau riche" and still stay on top. 
   Yea keep the war machine running - a tad more than ideling. When the tech spills over to other players - well control is lost. "They" find themselves downwind of the mushroom cloud.

In reply to by haunebu

Chaotix TechnoCaveman Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:36 Permalink

Agreed. There are hundreds of 'War Games' scenarios. The skinny of it is China/Russia/Iran are allies of Syria. Even a wide border skirmish between India and Pakistan could light off the fuse and they haven't been playing nice as of late.

With talk of Russia considering a Yellowstone strike or 100Megaton manufactured tidal waves, not many missiles would be fired initially. But since the 50's the Dead Hand Protocol will inevitably come in to play. Exchanging tank fire is one thing, but when the deep bunker buttons get pushed, we're all downwind of the blast wave.

In reply to by TechnoCaveman

Give Me Some Truth haunebu Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:44 Permalink

Long,  but I read almost all of this and can’t find a point I would dispute. Kudos to Tyler for running this given its length. This says ZH trusts its readers to comb through analysis that takes a little time to filter.

A lot of big-time geopolitical and economic events are happening RIGHT NOW. I hope some of us are keeping up and willing to think about what really is happening. Not just accept the meme we are being fed by people/organizations/nations who might, in fact, be the “bad guys,” the people who have made things worse, and who will assuredly make things even worse if given the opportunity.

In reply to by haunebu

TechnoCaveman rubiconsolutions Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:30 Permalink

  M.A.D. has kept the peace. 
  Hope the new kids with nukes have been brought up to speed 
  "The only winning move is not to play" - but if we only use one tactical nuke ? 
  Mistakes and misinterpretations have almost started "a hefty exchange" 
   Sadly even the southern hemisphere is not safe during a northern hemisphere "exchange." That fancy New Zealand bunker is big mausoleum waiting to happen. 

In reply to by rubiconsolutions

kellys_eye rubiconsolutions Fri, 04/20/2018 - 03:00 Permalink

It's the level of dis-information and the demonizing of Russia/Putin that is the important fact here.

If enough (fabricated) evidence is provided to satisfy a gullible world that Putin/Russia are the devils incarnate and capable (note - 'capable' not 'guilty') of perpetrating even more so-called mass murder/gassing then it gives the neocons all the excuse they need to launch a PRE-EMPTIVE nuclear strike.

It's no co-incidence that the US has moved anti-ballistic (or 'offensive' as the Russians correctly state) weapons close to every Russian border the West has access to.   The very second the US thinks it has the upper hand it WILL launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike.

Their efforts to create a ground-based war have all failed miserably so far and the 'enemy' is giving the USA enough rope to hang themselves - hopefully exposing them for all to see.  Well, all those who WANT to see.......

In reply to by rubiconsolutions

True Blue Truther Thu, 04/19/2018 - 22:42 Permalink

Nope.

The point of this War will be to enable them to loot the last of America's corpse while they switch to a new 'Reserve Currency'; not to extend and pretend with this one any further.

Rule of 72. How long does it take to stripmine an entire nation at "2%" compounded annually?

Same upshot though -fuck the money changers.

In reply to by Truther

hector zeroni Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:06 Permalink

daisy, daisy, daisy.  firstly, you gave yourself away by censoring the word "pissing."  :)

second.  next time just boot up your photoshop software and paint us a pretty picture instead. ok sweetheart?  ZH is in the non-fiction section.  

Chaotix Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:07 Permalink

But here’s the problem: I’m being realistic and reality isn’t always pretty.

China has said that they will be backing Russia, who will be backing Syria.

Let’s look at the numbers:

 

I'm no Steven Hawking, but those numbers look pretty ominous. But those numbers are mostly irrelevant as any military conflict on a large scale will evolve quickly into an air assault via drones and cruise missiles, then escalate from there. In retrospect, them globalists and MIC pukes do enjoy a long drawn out conflict where massive ordnance is expended, resulting in higher production at the facilities they own private stock in. End result, scorched earth policy with squatters rights on the resources.

Chaotix DEMIZEN Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:20 Permalink

That's why I said they would be irrelevant. The warring factions like to boast about numbers, which most of the time, don't even come in to play lol. No nation has the capability to deploy that vast of a ground force. That's why we have our military spread out all over the world. Control and logistics :p

In reply to by DEMIZEN

DEMIZEN Chaotix Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:49 Permalink

I watch Syrian frontlines. over the years they learned how to use numbers to their advantage. they overwhelmed latest pockets in 2 days. they use pure math they lay multicriteria decision making over dems, they choke the vital points, cut the supplies with artillery just like in ww2, spread the enemy thin, they create a buffer for the tanks to come closer and control viewsheds and storm with armored infantry vehicles they know what they are doing.  

my point, Eurasians don't have to deploy, they are there and they learned how to defend the ground.  Sooner or later, the sea will be controlled by subs and sea mines if shtf the air will be controlled by ground defenses.

the only strategy left to the US will be to withdraw or create chaos from the air until someone's risk assessment decides to strike back.

In reply to by Chaotix

Cabreado Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:09 Permalink

The warmongers and their enablers are opportunistic cowards...

Among the better things about this newfound "communication" is that their every move is exposed.

The two dynamics don't mesh well.

And Putin, Xi, et al are just fine for now, watching the US implode from within.

 

Dragon HAwk Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:09 Permalink

So Plain and Simple only a Politician could not understand this.  Somebody wants a Big Ass War.

  ask yourself who would be Safe when this happens,  there Lies the true  Enemy.

San Pedro Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:14 Permalink

The Liberal allowance of "dual purpose technology transfers" to U.S. adversaries assures the U.S. will have to fight adversaries equipped with U.S. Technology.  

WTFUD Thu, 04/19/2018 - 21:45 Permalink

There's no 'Civil War' in Syria. The US & Allies fought & LOST a proxy war, recruiting the worst Jihadi Foreign Filth ( many convicts were mysteriously released from prisons all over the region - reminds me of that Lee Marvin Film where he trains/recruits dudes on death-row who receive amnesty if they come out of some adventure/suicide mission behind enemy lines ) their resources could buy.