@1_1savedbygrace Yes, that system became untenable. It was simply too much. How exactly they'll try to square that circle I don't know, but I think it was leverage for the reordering.
I'm from the coincidentalist school of international relations. When the wealthiest, most powerful people in the world want something to happen, it does so coincidentally.
The Ruling pathocracy is using the war against Iran to bring in Agenda 2030, food and fuel shortages, energy lockdowns, financial collapse and transition from the old (on life support) Fiat usury Ponzi scheme to CBDC and tokenisation (where the bankers own everything and you own nothing).
They have been de-industrialising the West for decades, decimating the middle class, culture, the sovereign nation and the final aim is to depopulate and control us completely like the cattle (goy) they think we are.
The US never had the military might to maintain hegemony. Hence the myth of US military supremacy. The real weapon was the cross-border, financialized leviathan capable of crashing the whole system. A new system is being arranged, I think.
I think they'll bring this theater to an end when the new global system is ready, particularly the financial and economic components. Until then, it's a rigged game of musical chairs for oligarchs. The losers might not have even known they were playing when the game began.
We can assume much more than that. As a purely military matter, the US/Israeli war aims were always absurd. Killing the Ayatollah was never going to topple Iran's government, and the missiles and drones Iran would fire in response were always going to cause this sort of precise, devastating damage. The Gulf Sheikdoms were always glass houses, and a real war with Iran was always going to wreak havoc on both the region and the global economy.
This should remind us of Ukraine. Kiev was never going to defeat Moscow, regardless of Western weapons and targeting intelligence, and the destruction of Nord Stream was always going to set Europe’s economy adrift (like with Net Zero). The fundamentals in each of these cases were well known—publicly known—for a long time.
Is it a coincidence that the US has been preparing National Guard quick reaction forces in all fifty states, or that these troops are to be ready by next month? Similar story with push for ID requirements, crypto, AI surveillance, and other things. The White House Press Secretary just hinted at a draft for God’s sake. Everyone knows that would cause backlash.
How many of these things can be coincidences?
At this stage, can we start to assume that the US is deliberately escalating the war? We had the attack on the water desalinisation plant, and now this. Two things almost guaranteed to garner an Iranian tit-for-tat response.
'I BOW BEFORE YOU' — Armenia's Pashinyan wishes women a HAPPY International Women's Day
He listens to Russian singer Pugacheva's 'A Million Roses'
He stares with 'admiration' for 15 seconds straight
Trump's administration is implementing a National Guard 'quick reaction force' — trained for crowd control and civil unrest — to be operational and deployable nationwide across all 50 states by April 2026. iykyk
Many are still in denial about Western defense industrial production. This piece has a longer explanation, but here are a couple of paragraphs:
"GDP is but one measure of economic mass, and often a misleading one. For instance, except in extreme comparisons between the richest and poorest nations, GDP says little about the economic wellbeing and day-to-day quality of life of a regular person. It says even less about a country’s capacity to make war. Again, what matters in combat is the force that can be brought to bear and at the specific time and place it is needed. A similar logic applies to the production and distribution of armaments. In Western nations, GDP consists largely of things like professional services, real estate, and non-military government spending. In other words, collective GDP cannot be loaded into a howitzer and fired at the enemy.
The relationship between GDP and military power exists only to the extent a nation can turn wealth into weapons. The height of America’s ability to do this was during World War II, a conflict from which incorrectly-derived lessons continue to plague us. The US turned Detroit into a massive armaments factory, and did much the same throughout the rest of the country. Not only did the US have the factories at the time to do this, it also had the know-how. With the loss of domestic manufacturing came the disappearance of many of its necessary skill-sets. Then there are the supply-chain realities, which are just as stark. Those who claim the US could fight a war against China need to explain how the country could produce sufficient weapons and ammunition while also relying on its enemy for so many of the necessary material inputs. Then, of course, there is the question of how to pay for all of this."
This blunder and all the other ones we are witnessing result from failures that were PUBLICLY KNOWN for a long time. We couldn't even evacuate our civilians from Sudan several years ago.
It was noteworthy that the general admitted publicly to real-world blunders, like in Sudan. Noncombatant evacuation operations are a "bread and butter" mission for Marine Expeditionary Units. This was a fundamental failure.
No disagreement with those who note that American civilians should have left long ago. I'm talking about an overall lack of capability, not only for noncombatant evacuation operations but for everything else the US is trying to do here.