Are we on the brink of WWIII?



My wife woke up one day and saw that someone had stolen a potted plant(including the pot) from our front porch. So, she grabbed a bat, hopped in the truck and went looking for the perpetrator.

She never found them, but it lead to me getting involved in city planning/rezoning which was geared towards making it less easy for lowlifes to spend time there. Wheels turn slow, I spent years doing meetings. End result, the problems at the time were pretty well resolved, but increased urbanization brought a whole different set of issues.

You can alter where you live if you have the energy and desire. Altering state or national issues takes a hell of a lot more than most individuals can offer. I'll stick with making things better on the local level and hope some of it drifts upward.
 
no, we are on a brink of major psychotic break-down on the basis of the sheer stupidity and gullibility
 
As far as the Middle East goes, pretty well every American president of the last 30 years probably wishes that the whole region would disappear into a black hole never to be heard from again.

Hmm, but it's supposedly where the "good Lord" put "the prize."


"The good Lord didn't see fit to put oil and gas only where there are democratically elected regimes friendly to the United States. Occasionally we have to operate in places where, all things considered, one would not normally choose to go. But, we go where the business is".
Dick Cheney at the Cato Institute, June 23, 1998


"Oil remains fundamentally a government business. While many regions of the world offer great oil opportunities, the Middle East with two thirds of the world's oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize ultimately lies, even though companies are anxious for greater access there, progress continues to be slow."
Dick Cheney at the London Institute of Petroleum, 1999

And no, don't give me the shit the about how USA needs the oil from there. It' doesn't.

The USA and/or allies have no "need" for oil and/or gas?


Syria protests Israel’s approval for oil drilling | The Times of Israel

Iraq picks Russia firm to fix Syria pipeline | Reuters

Arab Gas Pipeline (AGP), Jordan, Syria, Lebanon - Hydrocarbons Technology

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirkuk–Baniyas_pipeline

PressTV - Kissinger: US media lying about Syria

Wes Clark and the neocon dream - Salon.com

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LTdx1nPu3k]Gen Wesley Clark Reveals US Plan To Invade Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Lybia, Somalia, Sudan, And Iran - YouTube[/ame]


Don't make me linkbomb you people with factual, well researched articles from reputable sources from the web.

How reputable do you consider this one below? (serious question)


Iran-Iraq-Syria Pipeline Must Tempt Europe - OilPrice.com

"Analysis: On 25 July, Iran, Iraq and Syria signed a deal for the construction of what would end up being the largest gas pipeline in the Middle East...

Recommendation: We have stressed numerous times that this is one of the main reasons for the conflict in Syria. Right now there is a race on to get gas through this region, to Europe."
 
And no, don't give me the shit the about how USA needs the oil from there. It' doesn't.

shocked-o.gif
 
My wife woke up one day and saw that someone had stolen a potted plant(including the pot) from our front porch. So, she grabbed a bat, hopped in the truck and went looking for the perpetrator.

Would your wife have beaten down the plant thief had she of found them? Or was the bat for "just in case" self-defense? If you ask me plant thievery seems rather innocuous for the threat of retribution by a Louisville Slugger.
 
Would your wife have beaten down the plant thief had she of found them?
The pot was too large to carry any significant distance without a vehicle so they were obviously long gone and no one was at risk.

My kind of roundabout point was that people often have a strong emotional reaction when faced with a perceived injustice. One possible solution is to grab a bat, but analysis, planning and resolution can provide a more lasting solution. It takes an awful lot of dedication though and as I said, other factors outside the scope of your plans can significantly affect those plans.
 
If WWIII is going on since centuries then when WWI and WW II took place :1orglaugh: in 1800 AC


Well... strictly speaking the first global conflict was the Napoleonic wars (1799 - 1815), which involved everyone - France (which had built an empire in Africa including Egypt) , the Ottoman empire (which controlled Turkey, Greece, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq), the Austro-Hungarian empire (Austria, Hungary and all those Balkan states), the Spanish, the Portuguese, the Dutch, Russia, Britain - even Switzerland was invaded and saw fighting. There was even some fighting in South America. And in the middle of it, the Americans decided to invade Canada, 'cause Britain was busy and it seemed a good moment to try their luck, and Britain had to send an army to beat them back and ended up burning down the White House in 1814.

This kind of stuff seems to happen every 100 years (WW1 happened almost hundred years after the Napoleonic wars ended).

So we're due something similar around now. Or maybe not. Parliament has said No, and you can't have a world war without Britain, can you?
 
It's the other way around though. The US starts wars because it is broke. Without military dominance the US dollar would be abandoned because it is so inflated. The only thing that keeps the dollar afloat is because oil is traded in dollars and therefore the US needs control of the oil markets of the world. Saudi Arabia is in on this, but Iran, Libya and Venezuela are not.

Fuel was like 10 cents a gal in libya. Sucks we fucked up that country.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iOUmpzemVss]Tripoli - Libya - YouTube[/ame]
 
greed, fear, and money working at its finest.

While everyone looks east, the rest look west. Water is becoming a huge issue, nevermind oil/gas.

If US goes in alone/in partnership, i dont think the chinks will be impressed. Im more concerned with china as opposed to russia.