11-18-2011, 06:40 PM
Our discussion has taken an interesting turn, but one that is really difficult to ignore.
I'm not sure the gated community folks really understand that their "hired guns" will more or less disappear when the shtf -- they have families to protect too.
The good news is that most, not all, of them will be reminded of this when the first few are destroyed. They might have the wherewithal to make the changes needed to survive, but the need for food and water may still make them not viable in those scenarios.
Regarding China, another truism is that all empires must grow or die. We saw the culmination of this with the Tsars, the British, empire, followed by the Soviets. The Spaniards and Romans, etc., also experienced the expansion, stagnation, and collapse cycle -- some more gently that others, but it still happened The Chinese have a much longer history and only partly prove the exception unless one understands that the form of government changed as a result of loss of territory. That change was frequently imposed by invaders.
The current form, which we label as Communist, has been steadily adding territory since the mid-50's. Further, the culture and long recorded history encourages long-term planning. The trend has largely been focused on immediate neighbors and those one or two countries removed.
Does this mean the Canal and Cuba are part of the plan? Could be, to the extent that closing the canal and shipping provocateurs into the mainland causes distractions from events in Myanmar (Burma), Laos and Vietnam, followed by Cambodia and Thailand. A direct threat to US territory, probably not on their immediate planning horizon -- 20 years or so.
For an alternative view, look at George Friedman's The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century and The Next Decade: Where We've Been . . . and Where We're Going . His point of view is that China will soon be seriously distracted by the polarization of the coastal communities and the interior (meaning Beijng). That by no means rules out the kinds of distractions described in the last few posts.
I'm not sure the gated community folks really understand that their "hired guns" will more or less disappear when the shtf -- they have families to protect too.
The good news is that most, not all, of them will be reminded of this when the first few are destroyed. They might have the wherewithal to make the changes needed to survive, but the need for food and water may still make them not viable in those scenarios.
Regarding China, another truism is that all empires must grow or die. We saw the culmination of this with the Tsars, the British, empire, followed by the Soviets. The Spaniards and Romans, etc., also experienced the expansion, stagnation, and collapse cycle -- some more gently that others, but it still happened The Chinese have a much longer history and only partly prove the exception unless one understands that the form of government changed as a result of loss of territory. That change was frequently imposed by invaders.
The current form, which we label as Communist, has been steadily adding territory since the mid-50's. Further, the culture and long recorded history encourages long-term planning. The trend has largely been focused on immediate neighbors and those one or two countries removed.
Does this mean the Canal and Cuba are part of the plan? Could be, to the extent that closing the canal and shipping provocateurs into the mainland causes distractions from events in Myanmar (Burma), Laos and Vietnam, followed by Cambodia and Thailand. A direct threat to US territory, probably not on their immediate planning horizon -- 20 years or so.
For an alternative view, look at George Friedman's The Next 100 Years: A Forecast for the 21st Century and The Next Decade: Where We've Been . . . and Where We're Going . His point of view is that China will soon be seriously distracted by the polarization of the coastal communities and the interior (meaning Beijng). That by no means rules out the kinds of distractions described in the last few posts.