Shlomo has some more bright new ideas for America and the world.
US Power 'to Decline by 2025' : US National Global Trends Report.
US economic and political power is set to decline over the next two decades and the world will grow more dangerous as the battle for scarce resources intensifies, a report by US intelligence agencies has predicted.
(America will continue to grow, and become stronger, and more technologically advanced as the years progress into 2025 (Yawn, Yawn). According to Goldman Sachs the American economy will grow to $35 trillion, at 2006 prices into 2050, from the current $13 trillion. The population will increase to about 450 million depending on the immigration situation of America, more than anything else. So NO, not a nation in decline.
So what are they talking about? In relative terms America as the "sole-hyper power" since 1991 will disappear. There will be other challengers to this position, and greater equilibrium in terms of global power viz America.
China will pose a challenge to America's position, and according to Goldman Sachs again, its economy will reach between $44----$48 trillion by 2050. Surpassing the USA by 2040. My own perception is that it is already the biggest industrial power and hence the most powerful nation on earth (tanks, planes, missiles, munitions come from factories) and this industrial power can be easily translated into military power. China however is at the moment technologically backward, and will need about a decade to catch up with America in terms of smart military technology, where China in 10 years time will still be socially backward, but like the Soviet Union, with the huge industrial, scientific and investment base will be able to churn out in huge quantities relatively sophisticated weaponry that are durable and effective in any future military battle field.
My own judgment is that China can surpass the USA much sooner than Goldman Sachs predicts, in a matter of a few years and not as they say by 2040, if the strange self defeating economic policies of America continue for much longer, and China continues to grow stronger at current rates. My prediction, unlike Goldman Sachs is that China can over take America by 2012 economically, as it is already the biggest industrial power; soon to be the biggest exporter, with the biggest FCR's approaching $1.8 trillion. China is a nation that is consistently growing stronger.
Is this bad for the world? No in my opinion if it brings equilibrium and balance to global power. If it leads to curtailing American global aggression under the PNAC master plan document. The only concern would be that China will still be a Communist run dictatorship when it achieves number 1 position globally, where in the past it has used national chauvinism (cloaked in extreme Communist dogma) to start and illegally initiate wars of aggression against Tibet 1950, Korea 1950, India 1962, Vietnam 1979 and 1984.
No, America's real threat to its long term survival, and sustainability, with its 220 year unique identity of being a liberal enlightened beacon comes from the machinations of "enemies within" America. That is where the real threat to America lies. Its NAFTA agreements with Mexico, and Canada submerges its identity; the open borders; initiation of the police state through the actions of false flag ops, with the American Jewish mafia and MOSSAD (some service to the nation!), banana republic economics, and ceaseless war in the Greater Middle East for little Israel, America's best friend in need.
This constitutes the real threat to America's long term integrity, and security. It really all depends how you look at things, and for whose interest you serve. You don't have to be an 'expert' to see the true answers, and the courage to speak them)
"Scare resources boogie"---get it while you can!
The current global financial crisis is the beginning of a weakening of the US dollar to the point where it becomes "first among equals", said the National Intelligence Council's (NIC) Global Trends 2025 report published on Thursday.
(The real problem for the American $, and the wider American economy is the Federal Reserve, and the inability of American governments to deal with and control this "state within a state". The weakening of the $ is a deliberate act by sections of the American elite and is by no means inevitable. In identifying these hidden agendas we can then identify the real causes of why America is weakening, and why it will be replaced by a new currency the Amero, shared with Mexico and Canada.......yes America will decline as a nation in relative terms, but this is purely due to actions of the American elite, juxtaposed with the natural growth of other nations)
the deliberate manufactured hyper inflation of Wiemar Germany, after which Jewish bankers provided a "solution" for Germany and the world.
One of the main conclusions of the report is that "the unipolar world is over, [or] certainly will be by 2025", said Thomas Fingar, the NIC's deputy director, at a press conference in Washington DC. China and India were likely to join the US at the top of a multipolar world and compete for influence, the report added.
(China certainly, with India I am not so sure, its iffy. India certainly will have a big economy, and according to Goldman Sachs again India's economy will be $28 trillion by 2050, but economic size does not always determine how "active" a nation is in the global arena. There are many complicated factors which determine why a nation embarks on a proactive global agenda. More often than not it is a matter of national self perception, and the consequent activities of its elite.
Indians by nature, despite the best efforts of Bollywood, are a passive people with a considerable self reflective attitude towards life, mixed with religious superstition and a tendency to ponder about just about everything. It is a nation that has never attacked its neighbors let alone sailed off to far off destinations to spread the Indian civilization (Its Monks, Merchants have traditionally done so more effectively). Hence it has never attacked, Sri Lanka, Myanmar, Nepal, Tibet and China.........spanning 5,000 years of history, and probably more.
So yes India will be big economically speaking as it always has been, but that does not necessarily translate into a proactive aggressive foreign policy in the future. Its neighbor Pakistan is managed by the USA/UK to its detriment, with considerable Chinese influence. Backed by this "Dutch courage" provided by these powers, little failed state Pakistan has repeatedly attacked India from 1948, 1965, 1971, 1990 almost and 1999. Bangladesh is managed by the British, and USA to a lessor extent and is not in the best of terms with India. Myanmar is managed by China. Nepal is going Maoist, and may become less close to India, even though it is the only other Hindu country in the world. Sri Lanka is not manged by India. So we have a whole set of nations which theoretically should be close to India due to geography, but aren't.
The weakness of Indian foreign policy, and the ambivalence of their general state machinery is certainly a major factor for this. Where they become richer in the future this will not necessarily translate into having a more effective foreign policy which has a general objective, which subsequently bind nations to India strategically and in many other respects. Hari Om Shanti, Hari Ohm Shanti!)
Russia's future was less certain, but Iran, Turkey and Indonesia were also seen by the report as gaining power.
(Yes I agree! Russia will decline as a nation, as the Khazar Jews destroy the country from within, as they have done since 1918 with the Bolshevik revolution. Russia's population will reach about 80 million by 2050, and maybe 30 million by 2100.
With Iran, it is in a similar position to Russia in that you have Jews from Iran running the mullah show covertly (Its deputy head of Intelligence was Jewish, only a few years ago....Saeed Emami) The Iran/Israel vaudeville drama, and war of words may be an elaborate theater with no real substance. Having said that Jewish run and funded Nazi Germany, against Jewish run Soviet Union, did have a war into the finish, killing many many non-Jews, so who can say what the Shlomo's of Iran and Israel decide on in the future.
As long as the mullahs remain in power with their seriously weird and haphazard policies in Iran it is highly unlikely that Iran will become a significant economic and military power. As it is Iran is an one item exporting nation still, with its economy fluctuating according to the price of oil. Thus its economy and financial sector is very vulnerable, and there are strikes we often don't hear about which are quite frequent in the country. 5 million mainly skilled middle class Iranians have left the country, which is a real indictment of the actual situation in the country. Its security forces are divided between the conventional forces (Artesh) and the mullah forces (Pasdaran)..........and they operate not so much to defend the country, but to compete with each other (Apparently the Pasdaran have found a MOSSAD spy ring operating around the Artesh! ha). The mullahs also do not trust the armed forces so that they spend minimal amounts on defense approaching about 3% annually of GDP, with a standing army of 350,000 made up mainly of conscripts of dubious quality. A nation supposedly about to be invaded and attacked by the USA/Israel.
With Turkey Mashallah! It has real possibilities of becoming a significant regional power. Thats all I am going to say. It was a super power once, and it can be at least again a significant regional power, acting as an important bridge and communication between Europe and the Middle East and Central Asia. Its only "weakness" if one may call it that is the presence of the Donmeh (Jews pretending to Muslim in order to advance in Turkish society....."The Young Turks" 1908 were wholly Donmeh, funded by the Rothschilds of London), with their dominance within the Turkish security structure still to this day, and their allegiance to Israel in a way that may not be totally beneficial to Turkey. Finally their willingness on numerous occasions in the past to subvert the Turkish state in order to follow their very narrow agendas. It seems maybe with what is going now in Turkey, the country is coming to grips with this "problem" finally. If this is so, then I wish the best for the Turkish people and nation.
With Indonesia, a population of 220 million, and resource rich it faces many of the challenges that many other Third World nations face. Whilst Jakarta is very modern, rich and beautiful, vast areas of Indonesia are very very backward by global standards, and this is a wider reflection of Indonesian society where you have a few very rich people, and the vast majority being very poor. The Indonesian military dominate Indonesian society since the American backed coup of 1965, which consequently led to genocidal campaigns in various parts of Indonesia. The Indonesian military also have linkages to Islamic fundamentalists, which they manage and control (the most prominent leaders being sent to Afghanistan for training in the 1980's and 1990's, with full knowledge of the Indonesian state). Since the dominance of the military in Indonesian society, development of the country has been uneven, with a few benefiting significantly. (The same in Pakistan).
So given the present scenario of uneven development through the military dominance in Indonesian society, with Islamic fundamentalism, and the negative presence of the Americans and Australian in the country operating through the military, it is HIGHLY unlikely that Indonesia will emerge as a very prosperous nation, with a significant uplift of the lives of the majority of the people, since the Americans and Australians may not want Indonesia to "succeed" as a great regional power. For that to happen a civilian nationalist leader of the Mohammed Mahatir type, capable and intelligent would need to emerge and take power, and reduce the security presence and influence of the Americans and Australians in the country.
"The world of the near future will be subject to an increased likelihood of conflict over scarce resources, including food and water, and will be haunted by the persistence of rogue states and terrorist groups with greater access to nuclear weapons," said the report.
(One of those bog standard statements that come out of such people, whether working for governments or for the various UN organizations..............it is meaningless in terms of its sweeping generality.
Human conflict is a perennial human condition that has sadly been with us since........unfortunately I can safely predict that into 2025 it will not cease. Whether it will increase by 2025 because of scarce resources, well I can only refute this statement by saying that the whole premise of global resource scarcity is false, and a calculated lie ("get it while you can you brave noble Americans, while it lasts; a call to more war?" Kind of like a cheap car boot sale)
There are huge quantities of resources untapped into the trillions of $ that have not yet been explored on the landmasses of Russia, Brazil, the Arctics, and Africa. Then you have trillions of $ worth of resources in the sea bed. Which nations are best placed to explore and exploit these resources?......Why of course rich countries which are technically advanced. Then there is the huge incalculable factor of human ingenuity and the ability of humans to create new things which save resources, make better use of resources and create new resources. Then you have space exploration, and the resources of other planets. Like "Peak Oil", the scarce resources boogie is shoved out at every opportunity so that it drives up prices to unrealistic levels, barrel of oil $150, and now below $50..............in a very short period of time, why? speculation, and profits for a few people operating in markets in London, New York, Rotterdam and a few other places.
I can safely say that there are enough resources on this earth to last all of us well into the next century and the next. The only challenge is whether humans will still be around on earth to utilize all of it. Some scientists say it is 50/50, whilst a few others say that this is the century when it all ends, for all.
Generally always resources wars that actually occur, are not initiated by Third World actors. They are first initiated by Western based MNE's using local proxies, and the classic example of course here is Africa, in places like the Congo, Angola in the past and so on. In addition in the second place it is Western nations that initiate resource wars through their state apparatus, and diplomacy, and one thinks here of the American actions in South America for big business, and the securing of resources in that region for America. So the bland comment about there being more resource wars is misleading, 1) Because it falsely assumes there will be shortage of resources in the future, 2) That somehow Third World nations will slog it out with each other for this scarce resource, which given the history of the European colonial 19th century, and 20th century is an inaccurate description of who actually exploits more effectively newly founded resources around the world.
The population of the world will increase from the current 6.4 billion to about 9 billion in 2050. A land base can only support a certain amount of people, and we will see a decline in population there after from 2050. This will be trimmed by nature, according to what the resources of any given country can support. The solution of course to this is not mass migration of Third World people into rich countries, as it does not solve the problem, but merely spread it. In that sense the immigration policies of the USA, with its open borders is highly irresponsible as an example to the other modern industrialized nations.
As to rogue states and terrorists which nations are we talking about, Israel?)
"Widening gaps in birth rates and wealth-to-poverty ratios, and the uneven impact of climate change, could further exacerbate tensions." The reports are produced every five years and based on a global survey of experts by US intelligence analysts. This year's was more pessimistic about US status than on previous occasions.
(And who benefits from such tensions?)
It also highlighted the risk of a nuclear arms race in the Middle East where a number of countries have considered developing or acquiring technologies that would be useful to make nuclear weapons. "Over the next 15-20 years, reactions to the decisions Iran makes about its nuclear programm could cause a number of regional states to intensify these efforts and consider actively pursuing nuclear weapons," the report said.
(I am aware that Algeria, Egypt, Turkey, Saudi Arabia have shown some interest in that direction. But again it falsely assumes that Iran's non-existent nuclear weapons program is the main cause of this interest, and not Israel which is a nation that does have nuclear bombs already in large quantities thanks to the covert illegal help of Norway, UK, USA, France and many other nations. Yes sadly I think because of the presence of Israel's nuclear bomb's, and the toppling of the Shah by America in 1979 (he planned to build 20 nuclear power stations into 2000 with American urgings) and the speeches and theatrics of the mullahs in Iran and the region, AND the artificial drama generated by Israel and America over Iran's peaceful civilian nuclear program.......OBVIOUSLY will generate curiosity of certain Middle Eastern governments in that direction. The more Israel huffs and puffs about Iran and its civilian program, the more Middle Eastern governments will show an interest in that direction-----HUMAN NATURE---old boy!
Whose fault is this ? Well its Israel's, USA, France and lastly the UK's fault for toppling the Shah of Iran in 1979. For being so smart again. His legitimacy in international circles, and his ambitious nuclear program begun in 1974, with urgings from Kissinger and others would not have generated so much interest from other Middle Eastern governments.
But I suppose the Americans will next say that what happened in Iran in 1978/79 was a popular peoples uprising, and America had nothing to do with it....honest)
It also said some African and South Asian states could wither away altogether and that criminal gangs could take over at least one state in central Europe. The document also predicted that conflicts of food and water resources could increase but that new technology could help develop a replacement for oil-based technologies. "Types of conflict we have not seen for a while - such as over resources - and this could reemerge," it said.
(I see Pakistan being threatened, and disintegrating not because the nation is not viable, but because of the actions of the USA/UK against this country for the better part of 60 years. I see that Israel has a lot of interest in Pakistan's nuclear program since the 1970's, mainly articulated through Israel's proxy, the USA. .........other than that in history nations come, nations go.
In which Central European country could criminal gangs take over? Germany, Austria, Czech Republic............history is replete with criminal gangs taking over, masquerading as patriotic flag waving politicians in many countries.........The Bolsheviks of the Soviet Union, The Young Turks out to loot the Armenians and their wealth, Mussolini and of course the Freudian IRONY of the statement nearer to home, the "Administration" of GW BUSH. The criminality of the Bush administration is breath taking........couple trillion $ unaccounted for. Though one assumes a lot of the criminal habits developed, and were sanctified as normal business during the "blowjob" presidency of slick Willie)
Global wealth was seen as shifting from the West to the energy-rich Gulf states and Russia, and to Asia, the rising centre of manufacturing and some service industries. Global disparities between the rich and poor would grow, the report said, leaving Africa vulnerable to increased instability.
( Global wealth has not shifted, but that other areas of the world, and especially Asia has become more productive.........productive Asians aren't taking the West's money, but rather they are creating their own wealth through sound economic policies. Russia is merely recovering lost ground after the economic collapse of the 1990's, though I think living standards are still below that of the late Soviet Union period, just before it collapsed, so nothing really spectacular about Russia........just one set of Jewish mafia fronts replacing another set of Jewish mafia fronts, as in America)
Rahul Mahajan, a political analyst and author, told Al Jazeera the report was too pessimistic in some areas. "It seems very pessimistic about the future political prospects of countries in the Third World. It seems to pay little or no attention to indigenous or self-generated prospects for democratisation and greater representation." Mahajan also said the report was "ridiculously optimistic" about the development of an alternative to oil as a fuel source.
(Oil is natures gift to man and can be used almost as a free commodity, since there is so much of it. The problem is that oil companies periodically give the impression that it is a commodity that is about to run out, which is far from the truth. Which is also the reason why alternatives to oil as a fuel is not adequately researched because of the oil industry; we really don't need an alternative because of the abundance of oil in the first place, but from a scientific perspective it would be interesting.
As to the Third World and their prospects, battered and bruised, Third World nations are still slowly emerging fom the shackles of colonialism, and the threats of Jewish neo-colonialism. The Third World is better educated and better organised than ever before, and because of this their chances of advancing in this century are much more promising.)
