Jump to content


Photo

ORIGINS OF THE FOURTH WORLD WAR


  • Please log in to reply
61 replies to this topic

#41 bm_cali

bm_cali

    Member

  • Admin
  • 3,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco hinterlands, USA
  • Interests:Winning the next world war. General curmudgeon-ship.

Posted 04 August 2006 - 10:30 AM

It has been estimated that in order to reliably destroy the infrastructure of the Los Angeles connurbation and take it completely out of commission for the purposes of true Clausewitzian war, some 70 nuclear warheads of average megatonnage would be required.

Now, consider what would be required to take out the Pearl River complex.

;)

;)

#42 bm_cali

bm_cali

    Member

  • Admin
  • 3,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco hinterlands, USA
  • Interests:Winning the next world war. General curmudgeon-ship.

Posted 10 October 2006 - 08:27 PM

This thread, a few months ago, got a nearly violent reaction.

Why is this book such a hot button?

It is not very popular. Not many elite sorts of folks have read it, let alone, ended up agreeing with it.

At best, a small core of mostly humble patriotic citizens of Western (and pro Western) countries might read it and undertake some modest preparations as noted by JR. Certainly, the chances of bigwigs who could have anything to do with hiding B2s reading it and taking action are slim.

So far as I can see, the only folks who would be strongly threatened by this book would be leaders and intel services of SCO nations, who might be concerned about a widely distributed, diverse Western / pro Western group who might, on the fly, organize unexpected resistance during an attempted conquest of the West by its enemies. The other group threatened, more weakly, would be Westerners who make their livings based on maintaining the notions of "the world beyond history" which lead to free trade with nations who are not allies of the US.

Very interesting indeed, the reactions this thread has provoked in the past.

#43 Shawna11

Shawna11

    Member

  • Admin
  • 810 posts

Posted 13 October 2006 - 12:59 PM

This thread, a few months ago, got a nearly violent reaction.
Why is this book such a hot button? . . . So far as I can see, the only folks who would be strongly threatened by this book would be leaders and intel services of SCO nations, who might be concerned about a widely distributed, diverse Western / pro Western group who might, on the fly, organize unexpected resistance during an attempted conquest of the West by its enemies. The other group threatened, more weakly, would be Westerners who make their livings based on maintaining the notions of "the world beyond history" which lead to free trade with nations who are not allies of the US.


Those threatened by the message of JRN's book comprise a much bigger group than those immediately and directly benefitting, either politically or economically, from the "end of history" worldview.

Origin of the Fourth World War: Parable: from a tale of science fiction about a planet which achieved perfect bliss.
--How the people of this planet were thereby degenerated and made ready for slavery.
--How the most barbaric and least "comfortable" element enslaved them.
Lessons to draw from this parable? One must avoid achieving perfect bliss. For the regime of perfect bliss is not sufficiently rigorous. It makes weak. It makes stupid. It makes lazy. Only a morality which preaches to the muscles, which develops the moral muscles, has any future in it.
The case against economic hedonism.--America's calamity has to do with the doctrine of progress conceived as the development of sensual bliss instead of moral muscles. Under this doctrine: rather than exerting one's powers in the cause of self-restraint, one always gives in to one's desires. The spirit, placed in this situation, quickly loses its masculine aspect. It grows flabby, weak, and incapable of thinking painful thoughts. Ergo, it loses the power of self-examination and self-rectification. In fact, it becomes incapable of any genuine thought whatsoever. Therefore one acheives, in all actuality, a regress and a downgrading of human character, where people become immoral as well as stupid. . . Do you imagine that politics and morality are easy? Do you imagine that solutions to human problems ask no blood, or fail to demand the spitting-up of various and imaginary happinesses? And wasn't it Christ who Himself paradoxically argued that the first shall be last and the last shall be first?--which is to suggest that men have always misconstrued the very essence of that which is good and desirable. It seems that we cannot help asking for good things which are not really good. At the same time, we avoid those necessary evils which lead us to suffer for a better end.pp. 245


Thus doth hedonism, plenty, and ease make cowards of us all (well, of many).

#44 Guest_secretannexe_*

Guest_secretannexe_*
  • Guests

Posted 19 June 2007 - 07:54 PM

It has been estimated that in order to reliably destroy the infrastructure of the Los Angeles connurbation and take it completely out of commission for the purposes of true Clausewitzian war, some 70 nuclear warheads of average megatonnage would be required.

Now, consider what would be required to take out the Pearl River complex.

:blink:

;)


I read a paper which included a Russian general's judgment that they had determined that it would take 451 nuclear warheads to completely destroy the metro Los Angeles area. Imagine that.

#45 bm_cali

bm_cali

    Member

  • Admin
  • 3,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco hinterlands, USA
  • Interests:Winning the next world war. General curmudgeon-ship.

Posted 17 August 2007 - 04:39 PM

If you have the time this weekend, I urge folks here to reread the following chapters:
- Fiendish Logic
- War and Its Aftermath

#46 Guest_eskie_*

Guest_eskie_*
  • Guests

Posted 22 August 2007 - 03:36 PM

If you have the time this weekend, I urge folks here to reread the following chapters:
- Fiendish Logic
- War and Its Aftermath

"A society determined to survive modern war cannot be democratic after the latest American fashion. Military preparations need to emanate from an efficient executive. Domestic politics and the luxurious regime of 'total rights' must give way to emergency measures: the merciless protection of state secrets, the uprooting of subversive elements, and the reestablishment of moral standards. This grotesque imperative, so inconsistent with our liberal ideals, must one day transform our Republic; but not in time to prevent the death of two hundred million Americans." -- Origins of the Fourth World War, 7.19

#47 bm_cali

bm_cali

    Member

  • Admin
  • 3,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco hinterlands, USA
  • Interests:Winning the next world war. General curmudgeon-ship.

Posted 29 August 2007 - 09:02 PM

I see Eskie reread the two chapters. Anyone else?

Next, I'd recommend reading the following two additional chapters:
- The Madness Of Columbus
- Elements of Strategy

#48 NG874

NG874

    Member

  • Members
  • 116 posts

Posted 06 December 2008 - 11:25 AM

JRN's most recent Financial Sense column ("The Collapse of Capitalism") and chapter 10 ("Critique Right") of his book deal with the suicidal march of the free-market West into socialism: how capitalism creates conditions that make its demise nearly inevitable:

http://www.financial.../2005/0729.html

"He [Joseph Schumpeter] . . . clarified his idea by stating, 'All that we mean by the March into Socialism is, therefore, the migration of people's economic affairs from the private into the public sphere.' There are many versions of socialism, but all involve 'public control' over private property. Whatever mistaken notions we have about the global triumph of capitalism over socialism, the gradual advance of government control continues in America and elsewhere. The process may be as subtle as environmental regulations that effectively prevent an owner from harvesting resources on his own land, or as blatant as 'nationalization' (i.e., outright seizure)."

He then goes on to list Schumpeter's reasons for believing that the very success of capitalism leads to the destruction of "national and religious loyalties" and the rise of a new elite (of managers, bureacrats, and special-interest intellectuals) to supplant the leadership of the owner/entrepeneur class.

Chapter 10 of Origins of the Fourth World War focuses on the strange-but-true irony that liberal democracy, which is inherently decentralizing and anti-authority, can only survive if it subordinates itself to a higher authority than the idea of free markets and individual rights.

"Mr. Laissez-Faire . . . cannot grasp that the free market is not free. He cannot understand something above and beyond supply and demand. He does not know that liberal institutions need illiberal supports. He cannot grasp that blood is above money, that consumer values are not ultimate values because they cannot stand alone. In order for markets to be possible, one must look higher, to the warrior who protects markets, and who sheds his blood in the struggle of empires . . . Capitalism needs a protector. Capitalism needs to be placed in a subordinate position if it hopes to survive." pp. 161-162, 165


I had read Origins of the Fourth World War in 2007 and found it to be an interesting read. The fictional (or maybe not, who knows) account of the actual war and its socio-economic-political effects on CONUS is especially instructive in outlining the problems and emergency solutions during wartime. Perhaps, as unfortunate and undesirable as this sounds, an Arch General may need to appear during "peace time" to forstall a possible combined economic and military attack on the USA.
Jeff also addresses a key point-a disconnect between the mindsets of national security and social unity and the social atomism of the regime of free trade/free market/shopping mall regime/market hedonism:

"Mr. Laissez-Faire . . . cannot grasp that the free market is not free. He cannot understand something above and beyond supply and demand. He does not know that liberal institutions need illiberal supports. He cannot grasp that blood is above money, that consumer values are not ultimate values because they cannot stand alone. In order for markets to be possible, one must look higher, to the warrior who protects markets, and who sheds his blood in the struggle of empires . . . Capitalism needs a protector. Capitalism needs to be placed in a subordinate position if it hopes to survive." pp. 161-162, 165"

Hence, a regulated form of capitalism would be needed to protect the social stability of the nation, our national security, while not lurching into the dangerous option of collectivism and extreme forms of socialism. If we had a pure free market/free trade utopia, then we would trade with everyone, regardless of the social or even worse national security considerations. A dangerous situation indeed.

I've had the opportunity to correspond with with Jeff via email and even had several telephone conversations with him. He is probably one of the most well spoken and erudite individuals I have ever dealt with during my academic pursuits, writing, and interests. He is also very even tempered and pleasant to correspond with. :)

#49 KABUD

KABUD

    Member

  • Members
  • 96 posts
  • Location:New York, NY
  • Interests:strategic planning, economics, finance, politics, defense, security, God, arms, Constitution, history,

Posted 07 December 2008 - 12:21 AM

I would like to add to your comment on free trade not being FREE this:

we trade with China, OPEC and other similar inhuman non-free regimes/economies on the level of

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. Or more. Which constitutes almost 10% of our GDP.

THERE IS NO FREE TRADE AT ALL in this setup.

Spit in the eye of any fool who will tell you this bull**** words FREE TRADE.

This is the most dangerous enemy propaganda.

-
ps

And of course Mr. JRN is a person of highest respect, intelligence, character and knowledge.

#50 NG874

NG874

    Member

  • Members
  • 116 posts

Posted 09 December 2008 - 02:36 PM

I would like to add to your comment on free trade not being FREE this:

we trade with China, OPEC and other similar inhuman non-free regimes/economies on the level of

ONE TRILLION DOLLARS A YEAR. Or more. Which constitutes almost 10% of our GDP.

THERE IS NO FREE TRADE AT ALL in this setup.

Spit in the eye of any fool who will tell you this bull**** words FREE TRADE.

This is the most dangerous enemy propaganda.

-
ps

And of course Mr. JRN is a person of highest respect, intelligence, character and knowledge.

I would like to expand upon the valid point concerning the nature of "free trade." The implementation of globalist trade arrangements and agencies such as NAFTA, GATT, CAFTA, etc. seem to smack of the creation of trading blocs more than anything else.
However, I do have a problem when for example, a front or legal company of a hostile nation makes a purchase of machine tools, computers, or other dual use equipment from another private company in the USA or West and utilizes these items to build up their war industries to destroy us. Illustrated here is an example of international commerce at work between two actors with one paying and the other receiving the goods. I have a problem with this concept and it needs to be closely watched.
Certain elements of the libertarian and paleoconservative movement promote this blind worship of the golden calf of the free market and free trade without regard to national security or social cost. Some examples of this include:
Educator and writer Samuel Blumenfeld on China:
http://www.worldnetd...hp?pageId=13242
Scholar and writer Llewellyn Rockwell Jr. on trading with Saddam's Iraq
http://www.lewrockwe.../iraqtrade.html

#51 Guest_ultimathule_*

Guest_ultimathule_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 March 2009 - 01:33 AM

To Mr. Nyquist:

Many thanks to you on this book. I got my copy in the mail a couple days ago, and am half-way through it right now. I will certainly have it finished in the next day or two.

The book is very deep. It was not what I expected (That's not an insult, JR.) - it's just that I expected a lot more analysis on Golitsyn, CIA, etc. - and it turns out that the book is more fundamental and philosophical than I expected. It is a tremendous achievement, and I am enjoying it quite a bit, though it is certainly a sobering piece.

We had some friends over for dinner tonight, and the conversation turned to some interesting talk on economics, nuclear power, the Chernobyl disaster (which is an incident I have studied a bit), and ultimately came around to ideas regarding nuclear weapons. I then read this passage to them:

"Disarmament is not the ultimate solution because the Bomb can be reintroduced at any time. Potential rearmament precludes the possibility of true disarmament. In the end we cannot get rid of the Bomb because we cannot get rid of the idea of the Bomb. True disarmament would mean lobotomizing the whole human race. Let us be men and prefer the Bomb."

The looks on their faces were priceless. It was the look of someone who has been fed [leftist dadaist] gruel for 20 years and all of a sudden got a bite of [commonsense reality] Steak Oscar.

Thanks again.

#52 WmWallace

WmWallace

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 2,930 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 26 March 2009 - 11:41 AM

Ultimathule,

If you want to ensure that JR receives your kind words and encouragement, you may want to also e-mail him: JRNyquist@aol.com

(Due to his schedule and so many other commitments, I don't think he has enough of a chance to read all the posts here - he might miss your message here.)




To Mr. Nyquist:

Many thanks to you on this book. I got my copy in the mail a couple days ago, and am half-way through it right now. I will certainly have it finished in the next day or two.

The book is very deep. It was not what I expected (That's not an insult, JR.) - it's just that I expected a lot more analysis on Golitsyn, CIA, etc. - and it turns out that the book is more fundamental and philosophical than I expected. It is a tremendous achievement, and I am enjoying it quite a bit, though it is certainly a sobering piece.

We had some friends over for dinner tonight, and the conversation turned to some interesting talk on economics, nuclear power, the Chernobyl disaster (which is an incident I have studied a bit), and ultimately came around to ideas regarding nuclear weapons. I then read this passage to them:

"Disarmament is not the ultimate solution because the Bomb can be reintroduced at any time. Potential rearmament precludes the possibility of true disarmament. In the end we cannot get rid of the Bomb because we cannot get rid of the idea of the Bomb. True disarmament would mean lobotomizing the whole human race. Let us be men and prefer the Bomb."

The looks on their faces were priceless. It was the look of someone who has been fed [leftist dadaist] gruel for 20 years and all of a sudden got a bite of [commonsense reality] Steak Oscar.

Thanks again.



#53 Guest_ultimathule_*

Guest_ultimathule_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 March 2009 - 03:44 PM

Wow. I finished the book, and it has made a deep impression on me. I will return to it again and again, I have no doubt.

Funny, I have read (and enjoyed) Nyquist's columns for years. The book has a raw clarity that goes way beyond his columns. Really, Origins of the Fourth World War is a phenomenal piece of work.

Well done, JR Nyquist. (Thanks for the info, WmWallace, I will indeed e-mail him.)

#54 JRNyquist

JRNyquist

    Member

  • Admin
  • 88 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 03 May 2010 - 09:42 PM

Nope. Missed on all accounts bm_cali. I quoted Sun Tzu. Not a pacifist by a long shot. Been in two hot wars. Been a military intelligence analyst and a international relations specialist for more than two decades.

I have asked a friend to send me the book. I will read it, and then I will formulate further comments.

I will say this: I do not jump quickly to conclusions that there is an axis of any kind and lump particular nations into one "side" or another, that certain leaders have created a collusion with a single design and are fully cooperating with each other towards an end goal. Didn't work in WWII. Didn't work in Korea. Didn't work in Vietnam. Didn't work in Gulf War I or II. In each case, each participating nation in the conflict had its own agenda that often did not coincide hand-in-glove with so-called allies.

There are definitely adversaries, and each of them require thorough study and watching. I, for one, do not view the world in simplistic terms but try to look for all the ramifications behind surface developments, actions, published statements, covert operations, et. al.

All I am saying is that to lump Russia, the PRC, North Korea, and others into an axis bent on combining their military forces into a concentrated attack upon the United States (and other Western nations) is an over simplification of real-world events, agendas, and goals.

Oh, BTW, I'm 57.


I couldn't help responding after reading the quote above: "I do not jump quickly to conclusions that there is an axis of any kind ... or ... that certain leaders have created a collusion with a single design and are fully cooperating with each other towards an end goal. Didn't work in WWII." This really is an extraordinary statement, as if we haven't all heard of the collusion famously known as D-Day, or the many other famous collusions that brought about victory in Europe and against Japan. These victories were a collaborative effort of many nations, including major powers like Britain, the United States, China, the USSR, Canada, Brazil, Australia, and numerous governments in exile. Really extraordinary to read this. Very amusing.

#55 bm_cali

bm_cali

    Member

  • Admin
  • 3,905 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:San Francisco hinterlands, USA
  • Interests:Winning the next world war. General curmudgeon-ship.

Posted 18 May 2010 - 11:25 PM

I couldn't help responding after reading the quote above: "I do not jump quickly to conclusions that there is an axis of any kind ... or ... that certain leaders have created a collusion with a single design and are fully cooperating with each other towards an end goal. Didn't work in WWII." This really is an extraordinary statement, as if we haven't all heard of the collusion famously known as D-Day, or the many other famous collusions that brought about victory in Europe and against Japan. These victories were a collaborative effort of many nations, including major powers like Britain, the United States, China, the USSR, Canada, Brazil, Australia, and numerous governments in exile. Really extraordinary to read this. Very amusing.


Jeff, I wondered at the time if that particular reader may have been Thomas P. M. Barnett and was simply lying about his age. His world view was certainly in line with the whole Barnett schtick..

#56 kulthur

kulthur

    Member

  • Members
  • 348 posts

Posted 21 May 2010 - 08:57 AM

It's funny how many people in the intelligence and military communities think this way - coordination is ultimately impossible for strategic periods of time, governments' interests compete and cause operational breakdown, other countries can insinuate themselves into the conspiracy via other vital interests and undermine cooperation, unknown or unknowable events are bound to destabilize relationships, sometimes fatally, etc. I was talking to a longtime family acquaintance of my ex-fiancee who loved that i was going to vote for Giuliani. i was three sheets to the wind at a big family BBQ and we were sitting by the fire. he was in Army intelligence for many years and lived in McLean, VA. i basically talked to him about TFP and TFP-related stuff. he seemed like a guy who was very depressed about the liberal anti-Boosh nonsense - I think this was in 2007 - and he was so happy i was right-leaning and actually interested in the Soviets. but even he at one point interjected and said "yknow i realize it's very tempting to believe that there is a conspiracy on this scale, and the soviets certainly tried, but be careful in believing such things because they're more difficult to pull off than you may be able to imagine." or something like that. so i said "well i defer to you - you were in intelligence, i just read a lot of books and newspapers. so how does my version fit into things, as you're allowed to disclose?" but he basically just smiled and wouldn't say.

it's funny. i got the impression that he didn't think TFP was necessarily true, but it was almost as if he recognized in me what he himself had believed - and still sort of believed? an interesting encounter, and a pleasure to meet the guy.

#57 Guest_Aurelius_*

Guest_Aurelius_*
  • Guests

Posted 27 June 2010 - 05:16 PM

Last November I had published, via Amazon.comís CreateSpace, a Cold War/espionage novel on the subject of the Soviet Union's long-term strategic program aimed at the West.

Within the confines of a war/action/espionage thriller, I believe my novel, Best Laid Plans (see link below), best conveys KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn's main thesis of Soviet Strategic Deception. I believe a general audience would be more reachable with a novel than wading through the heavy prose of Golitsyn's book New Lies For Old. If you should read the novel and like it, feel free to spread the word or write a review for it on Amazon.com. Maybe word of mouth will get the novel moving.

http://www.amazon.co...h...5320&sr=1-8

#58 WmWallace

WmWallace

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 2,930 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 28 June 2010 - 03:27 AM

Last November I had published, via Amazon.comís CreateSpace, a Cold War/espionage novel on the subject of the Soviet Union's long-term strategic program aimed at the West.

Within the confines of a war/action/espionage thriller, I believe my novel, Best Laid Plans (see link below), best conveys KGB defector Anatoliy Golitsyn's main thesis of Soviet Strategic Deception. I believe a general audience would be more reachable with a novel than wading through the heavy prose of Golitsyn's book New Lies For Old. If you should read the novel and like it, feel free to spread the word or write a review for it on Amazon.com. Maybe word of mouth will get the novel moving.

http://www.amazon.co...h...5320&sr=1-8


I just bought it after having first reviewed a number of pages made possible by Amazon's "Look Inside" feature (downloaded it on my Kindle).

The one thing that motivated me to actually go ahead and buy it (actually, the quality of writing was the first thing that made me consider buying it) was the exerpt that the Amazon "Surprise Me" feature took me to a part in the book where a CIA director mulls over the information that a main polygraph specialist was a mole and, because of it, there was no way of determining just how damaging it was. Just how infested was the "Company"?

From what I can tell so far, this was quite an undertaking.

Enlightening via a novel can be a very powerful tool.

#59 Guest_Aurelius_*

Guest_Aurelius_*
  • Guests

Posted 28 June 2010 - 12:33 PM

I just bought it after having first reviewed a number of pages made possible by Amazon's "Look Inside" feature (downloaded it on my Kindle).

The one thing that motivated me to actually go ahead and buy it (actually, the quality of writing was the first thing that made me consider buying it) was the exerpt that the Amazon "Surprise Me" feature took me to a part in the book where a CIA director mulls over the information that a main polygraph specialist was a mole and, because of it, there was no way of determining just how damaging it was. Just how infested was the "Company"?

From what I can tell so far, this was quite an undertaking.

Enlightening via a novel can be a very powerful tool.



Thank you for purchasing the novel!

When I began writing the novel I didn't know where to place the mole in the CIA that the novel needed in order to make my story work. As I continued to write, the case of CIA counterintelligence officer Aldrich Ames ( http://en.wikipedia....ki/Aldrich_Ames ) came to mind. He had, we are told, passed two polygraph tests even though he was actively (we are told) passing on classified information to the KGB. I thought, Eureka! The CIA's polygraph office would be the perfect haven for a Soviet mole.

#60 WmWallace

WmWallace

    Administrator

  • Admin
  • 2,930 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 June 2010 - 12:19 AM

As I continued to write, the case of CIA counterintelligence officer Aldrich Ames ( http://en.wikipedia....ki/Aldrich_Ames ) came to mind. He had, we are told, passed two polygraph tests even though he was actively (we are told) passing on classified information to the KGB. I thought, Eureka! The CIA's polygraph office would be the perfect haven for a Soviet mole.


Eureka, indeed!

My reading is limited lately, but I'll eventually get through your book.

It is quite an accomplishment to write and publish a novel.

Congratulations!