11-22-2016, 01:11 AM
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2017, 02:30 PM by Dekalb_Blues.)
~~
"The notion of Armageddon has created a self-defeating prophecy: the more frightened decision makers are,
the more careful they become and the less likely they are to initiate any action that might bring about the
dreaded escalation to nuclear use. Armageddon is averted to the degree it is feared. As a result, nuclear
deterrence has not only worked remarkably well in peacetime and served to limit the scope and intensity of
conventional warfare, but it is likely to work surprisingly well in a large U.S.-Soviet conventional, and even a
limited nuclear war.
"One significant indication of the effectiveness of deterrence is that the Soviet Union and the United States
share the belief that a nuclear war would begin only out of desperation or inadvertence. A weakening or
deterrence could increase the possibility of a calculated 'voluntary' war or worse.
"Deterrence is part objective and part subjective. The objective part is that adequate military preparedness
could be critical in some important circumstances. The subjective is, in part, the perception by the potential
enemy of the other side's power, determination, and courage, as well as its estimate of the wartime effective-
ness of the other side's relative nuclear capability. If the aggressor believes that his opponent has the
weapons and will use them, deterrence is likely to be effective. Therefore, a nation's defense lies, in part,
in the credibility of its threat to use nuclear force as a last resort, which means that the need remains for coherent
and plausible policies for the use of nuclear weapons."
-- The nuclear strategist Herman Kahn (1922-1983; for better or worse one of the 20th century's most influential savants, applying cybernetics and
game theory to the most horrific of Cold War issues; associated with the very influential Rand Corporation and his own Hudson Institute, highest-level
"think tanks" advising the U.S. Federal government and its allies),from his book Thinking About the Unthinkable in the 1980s (NY: 1984)
-- quoted on the "Opinion" page of The Wall Street Journal (Monday, November 21, 2016, "Notable & Quotable: Herman Kahn's Deterrence", p. A19)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Kahn
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/06/27/fat-man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqD8lIdIMRo
Inessa S. (Youtube channel operator): "Traditionally, a changing world order has been accompanied by either
a large global conflict or a series of regional conflicts. Similarly, we are living through a time in which a unipolar
world is reluctantly transforming into something new. One tool at the disposal of political elites is the manipulation
of the media. This channel is geared at providing accurate translations of primary sources that are unlikely to
air in Western mainstream media. This can hopefully counter incorrect perceptions of Russia's foreign policy.
I am not connected to the Kremlin, FSB, RT, Batman, Captain Planet, or other sources of influence. I have a
laptop and access to the internet.
"This [video's] candid conversation took place with representatives of various media outlets during the
St Petersburg International Economic Forum, in June 2016. Putin urged journalists to report genuinely on the
impending danger that is a nuclear arms race.
"Nobody has anything to gain from a nuclear stand-off against Russia. The power hungry decision-makers are
few in number, but powerful enough to have subverted mainstream media to misrepresent Russia as the main
threat to international security."
[from comments appended to this video:]
Jonathan Munoz 1 month ago
As a US Citizen. I wouldn't say Vladimir Putin looks like evil. but what he does seems normal at
my point of view with it... but. Can someone explain to me in short sentences what's his plan there?
I'm confused a bit...
[reply:]
Dr Sharc 1 month ago
In short he said that America defied the balance of power that kept the peace for so long by building
a missile defence system in Romania. They say they did that because of the nuclear threat from Iran.
The problem with that which creates the imbalance is:
1)Iran has no actual nuclear power
2)The defence system they built, in a few years, will be able to reach Russia due to technological advances
3)Surprise, they didn't build it for Iran but for Russia
4)They also try to hide the fact by saying it's a DEFENCE system when it actually isn't, it's defence used as
OFFENCE and it upsets the balance nontheless,
5)Also they can simply load it with offensive missiles instead of defensive and nobody would know until
they're bombed so point number 4) doesn't really matter
Note that this otherwise neutral video ends with a reflexively pro forma anti-Russian jab at the supposed perfidy
of President Putin's also-supposed New Evil Empire.
One would think it were 1956 instead of 2016...
http://discussions.flightaware.com/post201211.html
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-n...-Denver-US
This could be taken as a menacingly cautionary show of the kind of force summonable by the Deep State,
theatrically intended to impress upon President-elect Trump and his faction a lesson about just whose finger is
actually in control of The Button, regardless of any transient jack-in-office's policy. Or it could be dismissed
as just another strictly routine flight of just that airborne part of the nuclear triad utilizing a command-and-control
platform from which it would be possible to initiate launches and oversee and coordinate supportive military
maneuvers around the world in the event of nuclear conflict. Or, of course, there could be a reason for it which
is not conceivable from the conditioned-worldview paradigm which reflexively opts for one of the aforementioned
rationales.
“Today, every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be habitable.
Every man, woman, and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable
of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished
before they abolish us.”
-- American President J. F. Kennedy in an address to the U.N., 1961
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
Puzzling data which lo! these 53 years into the post-Dallas dispensation have barely found their way into the received knowledge
of the public domain, as the body of information has been forbiddingly ringed 'round with the most virulently ideological taboos
to ward off any rational critical consideration:
https://www.sott.net/article/269311-JFK-...mb-factory
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb54...1961-1962/
http://www.wnd.com/2004/07/25751/
https://ironlight.wordpress.com/2010/05/...y-secrets/
https://www.amazon.com/Seeds-Fire-Behind-Attack-America/dp/1893302547
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2G9MR1n7Es
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/diachose.php
The question of truth in a world like ours is a serious matter indeed, to those who understand what's allowable per the Law of Confusion
in the range of distortion of the truth, and who intuitively see the implications of weaponizedly engineered versions of history being accepted
as history by the major portion of the planet's human population -- said majority proceeding along this spurious avenue, paradoxically making it, in
practice, real history, with its own self-corroborating evidence supporting its seeming legitimacy. Past a certain point along this avenue, one
may enter a state of non-correctability of one's orientational epistemology. Which is less than optimum, more than somewhat, for one so entrained.
To put it politely.
The catalysis of the arrogant overreach of the Crusader faction so earnestly addressing its tender destablizatory attentions to this planet, its escalating
attempts at the imbalancing of the strategic balance in the subtle polaric sphere from which manifests the mundane Earthian geopolitical order as we
commonly experience it, is of a hubristic nature which calls into being its own uniquely scale-appropriate Nemeses. These comprise, among other things,
the awakening, as it were, of a class of Wanderer designed for durable undistorted consciousness and competent benign action in multiple hostile domains
of varying aetheriality forbidden by their toxically chaotic nature to other Wanderers, who have important "noncombatant" roles to fill in other areas.
Said spheres may present in this world as infospheres and other human-cultural virtual realities of tremendous power, with what amounts in practice to their
own superorganismic-entity intelligences, capable of astonishingly adroit feats of self-preservation if threatened. These feats may involve transcendences of
consensus-reality assumptions of timespace limitations, rather malignly wielded (think "psychic greetings" to the next order of magnitude); thus the need
for requisitely-adept specialists when dealing with such phenomena. Usefully germane information about this type of thing, transduced by such Wanderers,
is one of the services they offer to those whose intuition and critical rationality have reached a certain balance.
https://www.nexusmagazine.com/products/free-downloads/doc_view/323-so-much-more-than-nuclear-weapons
"Detach from fixed ideas and preconceptions. And face what is to be your lot."
-- Sheikh Abu-Said Ibn Abi-Khair
“In actions of all men, especially princes, where there is no recourse to justice, the end is all that counts.
A prince should only be concerned with conquering or maintaining a state, for the means will always be
judged to be honourable and praiseworthy by each and every person, because the masses always follow
appearances and the outcomes of affairs, and the world is nothing other than the masses. The few do not
find a place wherever the masses are supported.”
-- Niccolò Machiavelli, Il Principe [The Prince] (1513)
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/biglie.php
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/reframe.php
Spoiler: the Good Guys eventually "win" (so to speak), have no fear. However, this does not imply that en route there may
be a bit of... unpleasantness. But it's all in a good cause, what! Quite.
![[Image: herman-kahn-quotes-6504.png]](http://celebriot.com/quotes_img2/h/herman-kahn/herman-kahn-quotes-6504.png)
![[Image: aten.gif]](http://www.ancientegypt.co.uk/gods/explore/images/aten.gif)
"The notion of Armageddon has created a self-defeating prophecy: the more frightened decision makers are,
the more careful they become and the less likely they are to initiate any action that might bring about the
dreaded escalation to nuclear use. Armageddon is averted to the degree it is feared. As a result, nuclear
deterrence has not only worked remarkably well in peacetime and served to limit the scope and intensity of
conventional warfare, but it is likely to work surprisingly well in a large U.S.-Soviet conventional, and even a
limited nuclear war.
"One significant indication of the effectiveness of deterrence is that the Soviet Union and the United States
share the belief that a nuclear war would begin only out of desperation or inadvertence. A weakening or
deterrence could increase the possibility of a calculated 'voluntary' war or worse.
"Deterrence is part objective and part subjective. The objective part is that adequate military preparedness
could be critical in some important circumstances. The subjective is, in part, the perception by the potential
enemy of the other side's power, determination, and courage, as well as its estimate of the wartime effective-
ness of the other side's relative nuclear capability. If the aggressor believes that his opponent has the
weapons and will use them, deterrence is likely to be effective. Therefore, a nation's defense lies, in part,
in the credibility of its threat to use nuclear force as a last resort, which means that the need remains for coherent
and plausible policies for the use of nuclear weapons."
-- The nuclear strategist Herman Kahn (1922-1983; for better or worse one of the 20th century's most influential savants, applying cybernetics and
game theory to the most horrific of Cold War issues; associated with the very influential Rand Corporation and his own Hudson Institute, highest-level
"think tanks" advising the U.S. Federal government and its allies),from his book Thinking About the Unthinkable in the 1980s (NY: 1984)
-- quoted on the "Opinion" page of The Wall Street Journal (Monday, November 21, 2016, "Notable & Quotable: Herman Kahn's Deterrence", p. A19)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herman_Kahn
http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2005/06/27/fat-man
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kqD8lIdIMRo
Inessa S. (Youtube channel operator): "Traditionally, a changing world order has been accompanied by either
a large global conflict or a series of regional conflicts. Similarly, we are living through a time in which a unipolar
world is reluctantly transforming into something new. One tool at the disposal of political elites is the manipulation
of the media. This channel is geared at providing accurate translations of primary sources that are unlikely to
air in Western mainstream media. This can hopefully counter incorrect perceptions of Russia's foreign policy.
I am not connected to the Kremlin, FSB, RT, Batman, Captain Planet, or other sources of influence. I have a
laptop and access to the internet.
"This [video's] candid conversation took place with representatives of various media outlets during the
St Petersburg International Economic Forum, in June 2016. Putin urged journalists to report genuinely on the
impending danger that is a nuclear arms race.
"Nobody has anything to gain from a nuclear stand-off against Russia. The power hungry decision-makers are
few in number, but powerful enough to have subverted mainstream media to misrepresent Russia as the main
threat to international security."
[from comments appended to this video:]
Jonathan Munoz 1 month ago
As a US Citizen. I wouldn't say Vladimir Putin looks like evil. but what he does seems normal at
my point of view with it... but. Can someone explain to me in short sentences what's his plan there?
I'm confused a bit...
[reply:]
Dr Sharc 1 month ago
In short he said that America defied the balance of power that kept the peace for so long by building
a missile defence system in Romania. They say they did that because of the nuclear threat from Iran.
The problem with that which creates the imbalance is:
1)Iran has no actual nuclear power
2)The defence system they built, in a few years, will be able to reach Russia due to technological advances
3)Surprise, they didn't build it for Iran but for Russia
4)They also try to hide the fact by saying it's a DEFENCE system when it actually isn't, it's defence used as
OFFENCE and it upsets the balance nontheless,
5)Also they can simply load it with offensive missiles instead of defensive and nobody would know until
they're bombed so point number 4) doesn't really matter
Note that this otherwise neutral video ends with a reflexively pro forma anti-Russian jab at the supposed perfidy
of President Putin's also-supposed New Evil Empire.
One would think it were 1956 instead of 2016...
http://discussions.flightaware.com/post201211.html
http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-n...-Denver-US
This could be taken as a menacingly cautionary show of the kind of force summonable by the Deep State,
theatrically intended to impress upon President-elect Trump and his faction a lesson about just whose finger is
actually in control of The Button, regardless of any transient jack-in-office's policy. Or it could be dismissed
as just another strictly routine flight of just that airborne part of the nuclear triad utilizing a command-and-control
platform from which it would be possible to initiate launches and oversee and coordinate supportive military
maneuvers around the world in the event of nuclear conflict. Or, of course, there could be a reason for it which
is not conceivable from the conditioned-worldview paradigm which reflexively opts for one of the aforementioned
rationales.
“Today, every inhabitant of this planet must contemplate the day when this planet may no longer be habitable.
Every man, woman, and child lives under a nuclear sword of Damocles, hanging by the slenderest of threads, capable
of being cut at any moment by accident, or miscalculation, or by madness. The weapons of war must be abolished
before they abolish us.”
-- American President J. F. Kennedy in an address to the U.N., 1961
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samson_Option
Puzzling data which lo! these 53 years into the post-Dallas dispensation have barely found their way into the received knowledge
of the public domain, as the body of information has been forbiddingly ringed 'round with the most virulently ideological taboos
to ward off any rational critical consideration:
https://www.sott.net/article/269311-JFK-...mb-factory
http://nsarchive.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb54...1961-1962/
http://www.wnd.com/2004/07/25751/
https://ironlight.wordpress.com/2010/05/...y-secrets/
https://www.amazon.com/Seeds-Fire-Behind-Attack-America/dp/1893302547
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U2G9MR1n7Es
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/docs00s/diachose.php
The question of truth in a world like ours is a serious matter indeed, to those who understand what's allowable per the Law of Confusion
in the range of distortion of the truth, and who intuitively see the implications of weaponizedly engineered versions of history being accepted
as history by the major portion of the planet's human population -- said majority proceeding along this spurious avenue, paradoxically making it, in
practice, real history, with its own self-corroborating evidence supporting its seeming legitimacy. Past a certain point along this avenue, one
may enter a state of non-correctability of one's orientational epistemology. Which is less than optimum, more than somewhat, for one so entrained.
To put it politely.
The catalysis of the arrogant overreach of the Crusader faction so earnestly addressing its tender destablizatory attentions to this planet, its escalating
attempts at the imbalancing of the strategic balance in the subtle polaric sphere from which manifests the mundane Earthian geopolitical order as we
commonly experience it, is of a hubristic nature which calls into being its own uniquely scale-appropriate Nemeses. These comprise, among other things,
the awakening, as it were, of a class of Wanderer designed for durable undistorted consciousness and competent benign action in multiple hostile domains
of varying aetheriality forbidden by their toxically chaotic nature to other Wanderers, who have important "noncombatant" roles to fill in other areas.
Said spheres may present in this world as infospheres and other human-cultural virtual realities of tremendous power, with what amounts in practice to their
own superorganismic-entity intelligences, capable of astonishingly adroit feats of self-preservation if threatened. These feats may involve transcendences of
consensus-reality assumptions of timespace limitations, rather malignly wielded (think "psychic greetings" to the next order of magnitude); thus the need
for requisitely-adept specialists when dealing with such phenomena. Usefully germane information about this type of thing, transduced by such Wanderers,
is one of the services they offer to those whose intuition and critical rationality have reached a certain balance.
https://www.nexusmagazine.com/products/free-downloads/doc_view/323-so-much-more-than-nuclear-weapons
"Detach from fixed ideas and preconceptions. And face what is to be your lot."
-- Sheikh Abu-Said Ibn Abi-Khair
“In actions of all men, especially princes, where there is no recourse to justice, the end is all that counts.
A prince should only be concerned with conquering or maintaining a state, for the means will always be
judged to be honourable and praiseworthy by each and every person, because the masses always follow
appearances and the outcomes of affairs, and the world is nothing other than the masses. The few do not
find a place wherever the masses are supported.”
-- Niccolò Machiavelli, Il Principe [The Prince] (1513)
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/biglie.php
https://www.laetusinpraesens.org/musings/reframe.php
Spoiler: the Good Guys eventually "win" (so to speak), have no fear. However, this does not imply that en route there may
be a bit of... unpleasantness. But it's all in a good cause, what! Quite.