War is coming, but military power is also more asymmetric than ever. The US fared relatively poorly in the skirmish-like proxy wars of the last 50 years, but that's a different type of warfare than another world war would be. The goals aren't to win and hold territory, the goals are to create a stable environment. All the opponent has to do is create chaos with guerrilla warfare and the US loses.<p>When you're talking about a total war scenario, the US is effectively unbeatable for a lot of reasons. Ignoring the amount we spend (much of which is wasted on graft and ineffective procurement), we hold the distinct advantage of geography. We're fully capable of building a war machine all by ourselves -- we have the raw materials, the industry, and most important of all: a several-thousand mile long buffer zone between the US and any potential enemy looking to disrupt production.<p>China is the only real rising threat, and even then, they have two or three decades of catching up to do. And ultimately, I'm not convinced there are any resources that China and the US both covet so much as to go to war with each other: both are large, geographically diverse countries with a wide range of natural resources. The Chinese also have very little to gain by a shooting war: they will naturally eclipse the US in a global economy in the next 100 years anyway, so why bother fighting a dangerous enemy on the battlefield when you have better economic weapons?
James Allworth wrote something similar that made the case better:<p><a href="https://medium.com/@jamesallworth/brexit-trump-and-the-ultimatum-game-2237e17de71c#.p8h2i1psh" rel="nofollow">https://medium.com/@jamesallworth/brexit-trump-and-the-ultim...</a>
Not sure I understand, war never stopped: <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflict...</a>
So this anonymous person (seriously: do a whois on the domain) posts a list of vague conspiracies and ... we're supposed to do what? Tremble? Change?<p>How is this on Hacker News?
As long as the world is looked this way:
Socialism is still an enemy which talks about income equality (Fair share of goods and services)
Capitalism is still a friend which brings the income inequality (Winner takes it all)<p>We are not human anymore. We are the crazies who put end to a planet much faster than any other animal can do. may be thats what human really means.<p>Find the planet faster which is immune from crazies
Build those rockets quicker which can fly my kid to a safer place.
Let's take one of the 'signs', taken to be 'Brexit in the UK'. For most people the issue came down to asking that vital political question that has to be considered in any country: who has the power and how can it be removed if the demos so decides?<p>Brexit concluded (among other issues) that letting 28 un-elected commissioners decide EU law and preventing elected members of the European parliament (MEPs) from initiating new legislation or repealing existing law was not acceptable. As to removal of the governing body, unless I'm mistaken that's not possible. You can only vote for MEPs. Thus, UK citizens opted by a majority for control returned to Britain.<p>Was nationalistic xenophobia on display? Short answer, no! New research from ICM for British Future finds that 84% of the British public supports letting EU migrants stay – including three-quarters (77%) of Leave voters. Among Conservatives, support for protecting the status of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in Europe is even higher at 85%, with 78% of UKIP supporters in agreement.<p>Aggrieved peoples within a trans-national entity may not contribute towards a recipe for a peaceable environment.
Well, of course the war is coming. The reasons are purely economical. When there are too many hands and too few jobs, war is inevitable. There are no unemployed at war, and after the war too, when those survived gather to rebuild their homelands.<p>Political implementations may vary, but the world is driven by economy.
"Technology and globalization radically expanded the pie, but they also shrank the number of people who got the big pieces."<p>All this talk of US income and wealth inequality... First of all, global inequality is falling. This is indisputable! Secondarily, the pie should be measured in actual consumption, not in income or wealth. Look at what Mark Zuckerberg consumes, not what he earns!
This analysis doesn't seem to take into account the existence of nuclear weapons. Military escalation has a very definite endpoint. Use of nuclear weapons is not unthinkable if a nation feels genuinely threatened. Wars will remain limited and proxy until there is an effective counter to nuclear weapons.
As a nationalist, I can certify that the author gets their understanding of our motivations completely wrong. Indeed, every time Trump or Le Pen are dismissed as "crazies", our resolve only gets stronger.<p>The abject refusal of the Left to even so much as <i>attempt</i> to understand this incipient uprising is shocking.
i wish i could live in as simple a universe as this person. maybe our anger stems from boiling down the "other" to "crazy" and "stupid" and "ignorant" rather than giving them the benefit of the doubt and making an honest attempt to understand them.