The Decline Of The United States of America

[conon394]

Rome also fell because of moral decay.

No it did not.

-----

Looks like the Iranians have won; we can expect to see the US return to the JCPOA and humbly abide by the stipulations therein.

More likely is the US just recorded seized assets as imports. But in any case seems a little late to bring up the policy action of a previous administration.

Other indicators of the decline of the United States is the rise in armed black militia groups, ready to carve out their own ethno-state from the carcass of the anglo empire:

You got that conclusion out a peaceful march. Dude this is America any group can probably turn a tiny armed peaceful march from the NRA - to Greenpeace - to gay pride.

[antaeus]

No it did not.

I'd query whether "Rome" ever really fell in the sense that Exarch is meaning anyway. Let alone because of some sort of moral failing.

[enoch]

If Exarch is capable of it I would love to hear a specific example of how exactly America may fall?

[conon394]

I'd query whether "Rome" ever really fell in the sense that Exarch is meaning anyway. Let alone because of some sort of moral failing.

It depends how you set up the criteria - it means you can always game toward some fall date if you really want. But given European architecture, terms, the use of Latin in either it original or derivation form and all the classical and Hellenistic world stuff in cargo culted into the modern and how that than was handed out to the word at European gun point err Roman Catholic Church... Yep I say not fall just change of management but still kicking in ways large and small.

But it certainly did not 'fall' from the easily googled map of it greatest extent because of moral decay no matter what Gibbon says.

[enoch]

You misunderstand my post Conon, my point is Exarch is incapable of such articulation, not that it can’t be done.

[conon394]

Ahh I do not disagree. Its just when I have the time I find the responses amusing. Also given his tendency to cite RT or worse links its worth a little effort to parry them.

[skh1]

In yet another sign of the decline of the United States of America, the fighting forces have been replaced by transgender effete weaklings; why, look at the military recruitment ads pushed out by the "woke" Pentagon compared to the militaries of China and Russia who are focused on killing Americans.



I wonder if Romans also believed that woke vaginas would help defeat the Goths or the Sassanids.

It is never wise to underestimate one's opponent.

China is a bad joke militarily. All show and no substance whatsoever. Russia or India could fold it like a napkin in case of a war. Let's not even discuss the US.

Ditto.

[antaeus]

Ditto.

That's not entirely fair. Sure, in a global conflict, China's military would be toasted, it's economy flattened, and ultimately, would have to either resort to nukes or capitulate. But China's military has had specific pathways of development and in those pathways, it isn't to be trifled with.

The specific goals for China's military are not to challenge for world hegemony. The US will remain a global hegemon for some time. But in the areas that China identifies as important, such as in terms of access to the Taiwan straights, even US war games place China as capable of winning a conventional fight over the short term in a localised context - where it might not have to defeat the US, but just capture and hold, and polling in the US currently doesn't reveal any strong desire to risk US lives on the defence of Taiwan (the US being war shy now). This is exactly what China has done in the South China Sea - they know that the US could obliterate every single island China has captured, but they also calculate that the US wouldn't want to do that. We see with Hong Kong, that China is going to continue to nibble away.

IMO Trump was correct to put a spotlight on Taiwan's defensibility - as we will see a point in the future where China seeks to test the US's policy of ambiguity over defence of the island - or at least to make the US have a public policy.

But there's another thread for this conversation. This thread is where we make fun of the propaganda.

[skh1]

Your reproof is fair and deserved as I have (as usual) expressed myself incoherently and to no purpose. The "ditto" was not intended to affirm Sir Adrian's point but to repeat the assertion "It is never wise…" etc. We can only ever know the efficacy of a country's military preparations by the ultimate trying of conclusions. It is hoped that those in positions of responsibility know that things never are as they seem and plans never work out as hoped. We, who are not in positions of responsibility, can bloviate as much as we like.

[antaeus]

Your reproof is fair and deserved as I have (as usual) expressed myself incoherently and to no purpose. The "ditto" was not intended to affirm Sir Adrian's point but to repeat the assertion "It is never wise…" etc. We can only ever know the efficacy of a country's military preparations by the ultimate trying of conclusions. It is hoped that those in positions of responsibility know that things never are as they seem and plans never work out as hoped. We, who are not in positions of responsibility, can bloviate as much as we like.

I really sounded like a dad in that post... Mostly, I think hyperbolic reaction to the type of material that Exarch posts is the desired outcome. So I like to acknowledge where propaganda reflects some sense of reality, while clearly challenging where it doesn't - propaganda works best when it harnesses truth to push plausible fallacy. We must clearly separate the two.

[Exarch]

I'd query whether "Rome" ever really fell in the sense that Exarch is meaning anyway. Let alone because of some sort of moral failing.

Certainly Rome fell; no-one speaks latin outside of the vatican and no-one practices Roman rituals and rites, nor do they practice Roman values. This is a fascinating topic though so we can take up a new thread on it as well.

No it did not.

You got that conclusion out a peaceful march. Dude this is America any group can probably turn a tiny armed peaceful march from the NRA - to Greenpeace - to gay pride.

So why are black militia marches all the more common now? Something's rotten in the state of Denmark.

Already, we can see capital flight taking place in america:

Renouncing American Citizenship Hits All-Time Record

[COLOR=var(--emphasis-color)]ROBERT W. WOOD FEBRUARY 07, 2021[/COLOR]
Treasury Department records show that 2020 set a new record for the number of Americans who renounced their U.S. citizenship or gave up their long-term green cards. Common reasons for renouncing can be family, tax and legal complications for people who generally live outside the United States. There is an official list published quarterly, and the names for the fourth quarter 2020 made the annual total 6,707, a 237% increase from 2019. That may not sound like many, but the [COLOR=var(--emphasis-color)]actual [/COLOR]number of expatriates is often assumed to be higher, with many apparently not counted. Both the IRS and FBI track Americans who renounce. Some renouncers write why they gave up their U.S. citizenship, but tax considerations are often part of the equation. Expats have long clamored for tax relief. Adding fuel to the fire is FATCA, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. This U.S. tax law was passed in 2010 and requires an annual Form 8938 filed with the IRS if your foreign assets meet a threshold.

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertw...h=1c4a73da5127

That's not entirely fair. Sure, in a global conflict, China's military would be toasted, it's economy flattened, and ultimately, would have to either resort to nukes or capitulate. But China's military has had specific pathways of development and in those pathways, it isn't to be trifled with.

The specific goals for China's military are not to challenge for world hegemony. The US will remain a global hegemon for some time. But in the areas that China identifies as important, such as in terms of access to the Taiwan straights, even US war games place China as capable of winning a conventional fight over the short term in a localised context - where it might not have to defeat the US, but just capture and hold, and polling in the US currently doesn't reveal any strong desire to risk US lives on the defence of Taiwan (the US being war shy now). This is exactly what China has done in the South China Sea - they know that the US could obliterate every single island China has captured, but they also calculate that the US wouldn't want to do that. We see with Hong Kong, that China is going to continue to nibble away.

IMO Trump was correct to put a spotlight on Taiwan's defensibility - as we will see a point in the future where China seeks to test the US's policy of ambiguity over defence of the island - or at least to make the US have a public policy.

But there's another thread for this conversation. This thread is where we make fun of the propaganda.

Actually, China is mere years way from matching and then overtaking US military in terms of capabilities and assets. within the decade we can expect to see Chinese carrier groups off the coast of the Hamptons, ready to rain nuclear hellfire down upon the Pizzagate partygoers.

The fact that US policymakers keep trying to get other nations to do the fighting and dying for them when they previously would have been the first to lead as in A-stan and Iraq, shows the sheer decline in fighting spirit and ability.

[enoch]

So why are black militia marches all the more common now? Something's rotten in the state of Denmark.

Actually, China is mere years way from matching and then overtaking US military in terms of capabilities and assets. within the decade we can expect to see Chinese carrier groups off the coast of the Hamptons, ready to rain nuclear hellfire down upon the Pizzagate partygoers.

The fact that US policymakers keep trying to get other nations to do the fighting and dying for them when they previously would have been the first to lead as in A-stan and Iraq, shows the sheer decline in fighting spirit and ability.

They aren’t more common. Did you miss the 70s?

Why would China want carrier groups off the the Hampton's? That would be an obvious blunder. Very unlikely though. In 10 years China will still be consolidating its home rule, absorbing Taiwan and HK, and increasing control and influence in various parts of the 3rd world.

^The US using proxies and allies is new. LEL

[Exarch]

They aren’t more common. Did you miss the 70s?

J Edgar Hoover and the FBI made a point to castrate the Black Panthers and "suicide" key black leaders; the fact that the USG in its capacity as an apartheid state has done nothing to improve the lives of the black community and has rather sought to exterminate them, proves once again the need for black ethno-state.

The Federal government is weakening, unable to control the increasingly angry and armed black militia groups. The Feds hoped that propaganda such as "Peppy Mulatto" would calm the black population but it was led to them demanding more and more, hence the rise of white nationalism.

Why would China want carrier groups off the the Hampton's? That would be an obvious blunder. Very unlikely though. In 10 years China will still be consolidating its home rule, absorbing Taiwan and HK, and increasing control and influence in various parts of the 3rd world.

china doesn't want to have to threaten WASP white americans but the leadership doesn't have a choice, any more than Rome didn't want to have Carthage and Hannibal trying to kill them every year.

Sooner or later, there's going to be Chinese bases out of Venezuela, Cuba or the Dominican Republic to fly nuclear bombers up and down the East Coast.

[enoch]

J Edgar Hoover and the FBI made a point to castrate the Black Panthers and "suicide" key black leaders; the fact that the USG in its capacity as an apartheid state has done nothing to improve the lives of the black community and has rather sought to exterminate them, proves once again the need for black ethno-state.

The Federal government is weakening, unable to control the increasingly angry and armed black militia groups. The Feds hoped that propaganda such as "Peppy Mulatto" would calm the black population but it was led to them demanding more and more, hence the rise of white nationalism.



china doesn't want to have to threaten WASP white americans but the leadership doesn't have a choice, any more than Rome didn't want to have Carthage and Hannibal trying to kill them every year.

Sooner or later, there's going to be Chinese bases out of Venezuela, Cuba or the Dominican Republic to fly nuclear bombers up and down the East Coast.

Why is there no depth or complexity in these statements? Where does this messaging come from? Why is it so generic and easily dismissable is my real question? It's so shabbily done I wonder what audience they think this stuff could fool.

[Exarch]

Why is there no depth or complexity in these statements? Where does this messaging come from? Why is it so generic and easily dismissable is my real question? It's so shabbily done I wonder what audience they think this stuff could fool.

I'm confused, i've provided sources and evidence; What more do you want?

In fact, remember the "transitory" inflation J-Pow and his mates at the Fed said were gonna be a one off thing?

It's now permanent, hyperinflation is a-coming, and stagflation as well:

U.S. Manufacturers Blame Tariffs for Swelling Inflation

Some economists differ, saying removing tariffs on metal, lumber wonÂ’t mean big drop in prices

Source: https://www.wsj.com/amp/articles/u-s...on-11622367001

Either way, the US is gonna have to swallow their pride and remove tariffs, a climbdown from the pompous trump years and a further indication of the declining power and prestige of the once great anglo empire of the United States.

[antaeus]

You certainly provided sources. But I'm not sure your sources count as evidence, and where they do, your interpretation is stretching the meaning of what is said well beyond reasonable assessment and well into the realms of hyperbolic exaggeration.

Although, to be fair, it has always been widely acknowledged outside the Trump administration that his trade war was punitive in intent, and that he was happy to harm American businesses in order to force a change in the US/China trade relationship.

[Exarch]

You certainly provided sources. But I'm not sure your sources count as evidence, and where they do, your interpretation is stretching the meaning of what is said well beyond reasonable assessment and well into the realms of hyperbolic exaggeration.

Although, to be fair, it has always been widely acknowledged outside the Trump administration that his trade war was punitive in intent, and that he was happy to harm American businesses in order to force a change in the US/China trade relationship.

tbh, Trump ruined what was essentially a good thing going for the United States; China was more than happy to support the US and was even amenable to making compromises to resolve the tech and trade war. Hell, Huawei was going to give the licences and tech for 5G to the americans because US firms were that far behind.

Unfortunately, Trump's people were racists who still thought China was China of the 50s, and decided that yes, they were happy to harm american businesses if they thought they could get another Plaza Accord 2.0 out of China. The rest is history.

To paraphrase trump quoting The Wire, when it comes to China; you come at the king, you best not miss.

Well the USG/Trump/Trump officials miscalculated and now Chinese companies are only 2 years away from full tech supply chain self reliance, including semiconductors and chips; US companies are desperate to appease China, look at how much of a kiss ass Elon Musk is when it comes to China. US FDI into China increased since 2020 and US money is going into Chinese denominated debt as opposed to US Treasuries, accounting and contribution towards current inflation.

Basically, the anglo american believes they need to start a war with China now before Chinese military reaches parity with the US. And when it comes to military doctrine, the Pentagon is openly talking about using nukes when it comes to China because every single war-game planned resulted in US defeat until they used cheat codes and gave themselves a complete tech tree to win. Needless to say, nukes, even tactical nukes results in strategic nuclear annihilation for anglo american cities. Try telling the survivors that you only tried to use tactical nukes.

All in all, it's really quite amusing to see america/anglo leaders acting quite hysterical when it comes to China.

[conon394]

china doesn't want to have to threaten WASP white americans but the leadership doesn't have a choice, any more than Rome didn't want to have Carthage and Hannibal trying to kill them every year.

Sooner or later, there's going to be Chinese bases out of Venezuela, Cuba or the Dominican Republic to fly nuclear bombers up and down the East Coast.

Why would China do something so strategically irrational.

In fact, remember the "transitory" inflation J-Pow and his mates at the Fed said were gonna be a one off thing?

It's now permanent, hyperinflation is a-coming, and stagflation as well:

I see you avoided Macro economics in school

https://tradingeconomics.com/united-.../inflation-cpi
The annual inflation rate in the US soared to 4.2% in April of 2021 from 2.6% in March and well above market forecasts of 3.6%. It is the highest reading since September of 2008, amid a surge in demand as the economy reopens, soaring commodity prices, supply constraints. There is also a base effect weighing as the coronavirus pandemic dented economic activity bringing the inflation rate to 0.3% in April 2020. The biggest increases were recorded for gasoline (49.6% vs 22.5% in March), fuel oil (37.3% vs 20.2%) and used cars and trucks (21% vs 9.4%). Inflation also accelerated for shelter (2.1% vs 1.7%) and new vehicles (2% vs 1.5%) and rebounded for apparel (1.9% vs -2.5%), but slowed for medical care services (2.2% vs 2.7%) and food (2.4% vs 3.5%). Meanwhile, compared to March, prices rose 0.8%, the most since 2009 while monthly core consumer inflation increased 0.9%, the most since 1996. source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics


If you the line number you are very much looking mostly at supply side shock particularity oil (remember the weather in Texas) and chips crating a really odd distortion in the auto market. Outside of those what I see is inflation actually getting away from the risk of deflation we have had for a while more or less not a real risk.

edit: although I do think we are clearly looking a bubble in house prices. The Fed should act on that but I doubt any economic model could really have effectively forecast one the aspects of the pandemic the Odd fact that say the top 30% of wage earners would easily slide into zoom work for a year, and thus have a huge pool of saving to blow on say a different or new house and a job that might not be so tethered to here you are anymore. Nor can I imagine anyone had chip shortages and the used car market in their Econometrics. If you want to be a Inflation doom sayer you really need say 3 months of data and granularity to see if inflation is creeping into the sectors not directly impacted by supply shock.

Actually, China is mere years way from matching and then overtaking US military in terms of capabilities and assets. within the decade we can expect to see Chinese carrier groups off the coast of the Hamptons, ready to rain nuclear hellfire down upon the Pizzagate partygoers.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/mili...ier-plans-more

So not really kinda not liking the cost. Also of course the problem you seem to want to ignore is no decision happens in a vacuum. That kind of power projection might well simply make the US commit to rapidly building say Forrestal type CVs and and maybe handing them off to Japan or the ROK. I don't doubt China wants control of the south China sea but I really don't think it wants a global arms race that get rather expensive.

rain nuclear hellfire down upon the Pizzagate partygoers

So you really do not understand how MAD works than right where did you get a secondary education at

Sooner or later, there's going to be Chinese bases out of Venezuela, Cuba or the Dominican Republic to fly nuclear bombers up and down the East Coast.

So why does china want bases that effectively hostage to a mainland strike from the US again. And if we are playing war games here who more of population of native Hispanic speakers to recruited to you loiter about in central and south america and make bad things happen in these hypothetical Chinese bases before a first strike.

[enoch]

Exarch: in 10 years China will own the world, carrier groups off the Hamptons, bases throughout the Americas.

Gets rekt by

All in all, it's really quite amusing to see america/anglo leaders acting quite hysterical when it comes to China.

[antaeus]

Exarch: in 10 years China will own the world, carrier groups off the Hamptons, bases throughout the Americas.

Gets rekt by

You can't win a debate with a propagandist. It's a futile exercise. All you can do is undermine the propaganda by pointing out it's flaws. You don't actually need to engage more than that...