China or Russia? Vote for the New Enemy!

[JackRiddler]

Stateless terror has run its course! The U.S. is taking on a new enemy. But who will it be?!

[IanEye]

Could be Iran.





Could be Pakistan.




in the eyes of some, toppling either of those doesn't directly threaten the current Saudi/Petro dollar status quo.
I don't think the U.S. or Russia wants an Iranian dollar.





As a Panama style warm-up, Venezuela could be a quick practice run.



.

[dada]

Why choose? Can't we just not trust anyone.

Wherever a domino looks like it might tip over, we blow it up. If the dominoes are all secure, we may have to tip one over ourselves first. Then blow it up.

This way, we aren't limiting ourselves. Instead of remaking, rebooting, rehashing all of our same old dull enemies with our boring, tired narratives. What are we, the movie industry?

This is the future. This means we don't want to think in outdated modalities. I believe it was Deleuze that said something whatever and who cares. You can quote me on that.

The battlespace is the planet. Urban centers in particular. And the battlespace is the mind. Your mind, my mind. You lose the tactical advantage when you're convinced you've lost it. Have you?

The new enemy needs a war with a catchy name. War on chaos, maybe. Or this time we could have a defensive war. War to protect the peace. We must protect world peace from value sabotage.

[JackRiddler]

The new enemy needs a war with a catchy name. War on chaos, maybe. Or this time we could have a defensive war. War to protect the peace. We must protect world peace from value sabotage.

All true, and yet the abstract enemy seems to have turned into a hard sell. Also, it's so confusing telling the jihadis from the moderate rebels, you know? We also seem to be entering a phase of relative de-globalization. This thing needs strong new and recognizaable branding, which is to say, old branding. Russians or Chinese are the only ones to fit the bill. Chinese of course pay the damn bills, went and made themselves indispensable. So Russia clearly makes geostrategic sense (an oxymoron, I assert). But Trump prefers China/Mexico as the enemy. So we're seeing a kind of internal negotiating process. I'm sure they'll find their new consensus!

[Novem5er]

Trump is cozy with Russia and Russia is cozy with Iran, so Iran is off the table.

We still do too much business with the Chinese, and sure Trump will talk tough when it comes to trade, but we have no reason to engage them militarily.

I see three possibly scenarios:

1) Trump decides it's time to topple North Korea. Its people are in poverty, so it's an easy sell that we need to introduce capitalism, expand markets, and save all those poor Koreans. Combine that with Kim Jung Un's supposed unstable nature and his lust for nuclear weapons and it's a no brainer. Now, throw in Trump's ego and it's a tempting target. He'd accomplish something that has been plaguing US presidents for 60 years now. Plus, it might piss off the Chinese that we're playing in their neighborhood, but what are they going to do about it, amiright?

2) Saudi Arabia. This will be a curve ball to the Washington crowd, but Trump could be the one to throw it. First, they sponsor terrorism. Second, destroy OPEC as an organization and both the US and Russia will come out as big energy winners. Prices will go up, which will start making all the fracking and tar sands profitable again, and the US economy will stop shedding oil jobs like it has the last 2 years and Trump can claim it's a job creator. This helps the economy (other than increased oil prices, hah!) and it also cuts the head of the radical Islam snake. What's to lose?

3) Mexico. It seems like little old Mexico is in the news a lot lately, whether its immigration, the Wall, or companies moving jobs there (or keeping them here). I want to say Trump even tweeted about stopping illegal immigration via military force. Think about it. I believe it is illegal for US military to conduct law enforcement operations within our borders (other than martial law, etc), BUT occupy a 10 mile line inside Mexican territory and we're golden. We can fight the war on drugs, stop illegal immigration, and even stop terrorists from entering our porous southern border AND Mexico will pay us to do it (somehow). Plus, I believe we have some unfinished business regarding a certain Alamo and Davey Crocket! USA, USA!

I'm being tongue in cheek, here, but all three of these possibilities are very real in my mind. The Mexican scenario is actually the least likely to create a multi-national conflict and probably wouldn't even require congress to approve, as Trump could sell it as 9/11 related with border security or Law & Order related with the War on Drugs.

[JackRiddler]

Sick shit, Novem5er. And your scenario of occupying the border region is probably cheaper than the Wall.

[dada]

The new enemy needs a war with a catchy name. War on chaos, maybe. Or this time we could have a defensive war. War to protect the peace. We must protect world peace from value sabotage.

All true, and yet the abstract enemy seems to have turned into a hard sell. Also, it's so confusing telling the jihadis from the moderate rebels, you know? We also seem to be entering a phase of relative de-globalization. This thing needs strong new and recognizaable branding, which is to say, old branding. Russians or Chinese are the only ones to fit the bill. Chinese of course pay the damn bills, went and made themselves indispensable. So Russia clearly makes geostrategic sense (an oxymoron, I assert). But Trump prefers China/Mexico as the enemy. So we're seeing a kind of internal negotiating process. I'm sure they'll find their new consensus!

This is for the newscycle though. What narrative will hold the attention of the American public. I don't know, just tell them anything. Make some shit up. They'll stay tuned. We can make a show of being enemies with Russia and China at the same time, can't we?

I think abstract enemy is still a useful foil. Maybe a hard sell currently, but that's because of market saturation. Abstract enemy has much potential. The urban environment is the primary war-stage. Abstract enemy is necessary. Doesn't have to be jihadi or rebel. Could be anarcho-hackers with weapons cache, anti-corporate cult, financial terrorist cell. Property is sacred, these are the enemies. Maybe there's where the branding budget should be spent.

[peartreed]

The best way to attempt a prediction about the new president-elect’s probable priorities is to portray and project his present personality and pedagogy onto a big picture projection.

A recent interview with four of his biographers unveiled a consensus view that his prime motivation is drawing attention to himself.

That is why the twit twitters and tours to thank the ranks and yank the chains that used to bind him. His craving for the limelight explains his orange makeup and dyed mop while posing and posturing for pictures. Suffice it to say this spoiled but starving ego is ever seeking satisfaction despite all the strokes to an elusive climax.

His psychological profile includes narcissism, megalomania and arrogance beyond belief. He is also a certified demagogue, xenophobe and totalitarian with the immature morality of an alpha beast constantly on the prowl for conquests. But most of all he likes starring in drama. And don’t forget his propensity for insult, revenge and retaliation – especially directed at minorities of other ethnic, religious or gender persuasions.

Given all these fine attributes and qualifying skills for the highest office in the world, the morons who elected him need only look at the world map, likely for their first time, and plot a path that a president with a propensity for publicity, premised on himself being the savior of mankind from all the evil that un-American diversity dares deliver, and see where his trumpeting tenure will take us.

Also factor in his ignorance of history, his idolization of Putin pomposity and his dismissal of his own intelligence gathering networks and strategy debriefings.

You see, this guy is the world’s best deal maker and negotiator extraordinaire.

Trouble is, he is also unaware of his own ignorance and thinks he’s omnipotent.

(The following is formulated with tongue firmly in cheek while imaging the wonky workings of this wunderkind's mind.)

I agree he’ll go after North Korea because it is an easy target with a rival jackass head similarly bent on upstaging and confronting enemies it imagines are weaker. If that upsets China as much as his dalliance with Taiwan, then cut the tea trade too. After all, they already built a wall and he can negotiate the hiring of their cheapest labor for Mexico’s side of the new immigration barrier. Japan is a joke because it’s already melting down with Fukishima and it’s too busy building small cars with steering wheels on the wrong side. And Europe will be easy pickins since Brexit already broke the EU and it all now can be dismantled into dependent, weaker in-fighting dynasties with golf courses. Canada will cave with the trade deals nixed and their influx of fleeing US left wing liberals seeking asylum. Saudia Arabia will be targeted because it hoards oil and has rival and royal multibillionaires embarrassingly dressed in sheets. Africa and South America are write-offs because who knows who those people are or what they do? Same with the rest of the Orient, Asia and all the confusing regimes who make tourist souvenirs. Australasia might be a takeover target because Trump has heard that kangaroos have hops, and he needs those for making more beer. Besides, aren’t all Aussie women lonely down under?

The point of the above forecast farce is that, with President Trump, there’s no precedent. The country has elected a clown and he will create his own circus. Reason was lost with his election and so were the country’s role, reputation and its former influence - as long as he and his incompetent cronies rule the roost.

[Searcher08]

Alternatively, there is the question of who will choose the USA as it's main enemy this year?

Russia - nope. Iran - nope. China - nope.
North Korea - no. Trump uses a Samsung Galaxy and Kim turning Samsung into rubble would not be worth the inconvienience..


I think that the Salafist forces within the Kingdom are getting more and more extreme; the population is exploding, with a very young demographic who I think will sooner or later break the American 'deal with the devil' (being allowed to export their creed in exchange for keeping the Spice flowing).

Saudi Arabia is slowly getting ready (readied?) to be fractured - but perhaps before that goose has been cooked, we could have:

Sudan.

No one supports them; they have lots of resources,

From Wiki

Rich mineral resources are available in Sudan including asbestos, chromite, cobalt, copper, gold, granite, gypsum, iron, kaolin, lead, manganese, mica, natural gas, nickel, petroleum, silver, tin, uranium and zinc.[58]

An asshole, authoritarian, Islamist government; their open desert country would make taking their military out as easy as pie, they are very racist (black slavery being common) and China is a big trading partner - it gets about 10% of it's oil from it - so an invasion would be a method of pressuring China - but not *too* much.

[vince]

"I've seen the enemy, and it is US!"

[MacCruiskeen]

I think it's safe to say that we are and always have been at war with EastEurAsia.

[Keith Olbermann's voice barks from the wall. Four stormtroopers break down the door. O'Brien smiles sadly and boots me in the balls.]

Well, that escalated quickly. [Dies.]

[minime]

Discussing multipolarity on a bipolar forum...

http://www.4pt.su/en/content/multipolar ... s-meanings

Multipolarity – The Definition and the Differentiation Between its Meanings

From a purely scientific point of view, there still exists no full and complete theory of a multipolar world (TMW) to date, nor can it be found among the classical theories and paradigms of International Relations (IR). We will try to look for it in the latest post-positivist theories in vain. It is not fully developed in its final aspect, the sphere of geopolitical research. Time and time again this theme is openly comprehended, but still left “behind the scenes” or treated in too biased of a fashion within international relations.

Nevertheless, more and more works on foreign affairs, world politics, geopolitics, and actually, international politics, are dedicated to the theme of multipolarity. A growing number of authors try to understand and describe multipolarity as a model, phenomenon, precedent, or possibility.

[Novem5er]

Sick shit, Novem5er. And your scenario of occupying the border region is probably cheaper than the Wall.

Let's not forget that Trump repeatedly spoke out against both Saudi Arabia and Mexico on the campaign trail and in the debates. He called out both the Bushes and Hillary for having close ties with the Saudis and he even linked them to 9/11. Also, he got into a twitter fight with a Saudi prince who claimed to have bailed Trump out twice in the past by spending hundreds of millions to purchase Trump properties (and a yacht?). Trump denied he was "bailed out" and made it clear that he'd take Saudi money like anyone else's, but that he generally disliked them.

Obviously, we know everything he's said about Mexico. I think beyond anything a Mexican border campaign would help him win a second term. It could be his signature policy and would prove to his base that not only does he talk the talk, but he walks the walk. The American population is sick of foreign wars, but so many people have cried out the mantra that we need to worry about our OWN country first.

Trump could even sell it as being a compassionate move for Mexicans living along the border. Too long have the border towns been plagued by drug cartels and an inept Mexican government! Not only is he trying to kick the bad Mexicans out, he's trying to bring the good Mexicans IN. After all, he loves the Hispanics, right?



About North Korea, I think this is the least likely scenario that I outlined because it involves real risk to millions of people. North Korea has a large army, formidable terrain, nuclear weapons, and millions of civilian targets within 50 miles of the border. I think Trump would be insane to pick a fight with them when we have no real reason to do so, but we go back to that ego. If he could pull it off, then he'd go down in history and change the map forever. Reunifying the Korean peninsula? That's like a golden unicorn.

[DrEvil]

Liberalism.

[JackRiddler]

Liberalism.

Oh yeah. If you put it in quotes. "Liberalism" meaning all designated domestic enemies wrapped into a feverish projection that includes everyone from BLM to obscure Marxist professors at public universities to Chomsky to "liberal media" and the Clintonists. Maybe just short of including Andrew Cuomo and Chris Christie.