Great article.
Two things I think might be mentioned, among others I am not well enough versed to address really at all.
A token Jewish homeland had been a small concession, mainly by the British, to try to keep the Russians in the war, in 1917. DK mentions the mandate, in 1919.
DK also mentions US Japan negotiations breaking down during WWII.
What most Americans do not know, it seems to me, is not only was Stalin justifiably concerned about a second front in Asia against Japan, but also that he was perfectly willing to enter into an agreement, the 1941 Pact with Japan, to, in effect, give Japan a free hand to the south in Asia against the Allies, but especially against the US, which although it had not yet entered the war as an ally, nevertheless was Japan's principle threat to expansion and domination in the Pacific. This Pact paved the way for Pearl Harbor and the Japanese destruction of the Pacific Fleet.
There is no doubt that Stalin knew this at the time. Just as he was trying to send Hitler against the West, he then succeeded in sending Japan against them, and us.
BOOMERBUSTER
OLD CELLO
Saturday, October 24, 2015
Friday, October 23, 2015
CHINESE IMMIGRATION
Huge problem for Russia.
Most liberal Americans say, let everyone in who wants in.. anywhere they happen to want in.
Globalist, ultra conservative, civil libertarians ought, at least in principle, to have the same view, don't let any government, anywhere, push an individual around.
Laissez faire.
Most liberal Americans say, let everyone in who wants in.. anywhere they happen to want in.
Globalist, ultra conservative, civil libertarians ought, at least in principle, to have the same view, don't let any government, anywhere, push an individual around.
Laissez faire.
HISTORICALLY AMERICA IS BASED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF WEAK GOVERNMENT EVERYWHERE
At least for the moment, you got your wish in many places.
How do you like it?
It won't get better before it gets much much worse.
How do you like it?
It won't get better before it gets much much worse.
Thursday, October 22, 2015
RE NYT PUTIN ISOLATED
He is not isolated, it seems, by China, apparently.
Why, do you think?
Take a guess.
If he is isolated, is he not a threat to global growth?
Another interesting point, why is China not also 'isolated',
so to speak,
rather than merely a 'threat' to global growth?
What is the difference, if any, between being isolated from, versus being a threat to, global growth?
Great question.
Terms search: Zephyr
Why, do you think?
Take a guess.
If he is isolated, is he not a threat to global growth?
Another interesting point, why is China not also 'isolated',
so to speak,
rather than merely a 'threat' to global growth?
What is the difference, if any, between being isolated from, versus being a threat to, global growth?
Great question.
Terms search: Zephyr
CLASSIC POST SOMEONE SAW THIS
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2014/04/dustys-got-em-out-by-th-coach-karats.html
RE GLOBAL GROWTH
RE BBC CHINA POSES THREAT TO GLOBAL GROWTH, IMF
Global growth itself is a failed ideology.
Just one example of why, is that one country, like China, can threaten it, so to speak.
Global growth itself is a failed ideology.
Just one example of why, is that one country, like China, can threaten it, so to speak.
Wednesday, October 21, 2015
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Xi Hinkley Point kiss your leverage THE LONG GOODBYE
Kiss your leverage, with this, along with other major concessions, re financial markets, accomodations, etc.,
that you had, perhaps, once, thought you had had,
goodbye.
Call it the long goodbye.
that you had, perhaps, once, thought you had had,
goodbye.
Call it the long goodbye.
Monday, October 19, 2015
SOMEONE SEES THIS IT WAS ONE OF MY BETTER EFFORTS
http://bozonbloggon.blogspot.com/2010/10/cinderella-three-penny-opera-marilyn.html
RE CHINA REPORTEDLY VIOLATES
"I am shocked, shocked, to see that gambling is going on here", (at Rick's).
Never, in the history of human conflict.......
Steingart has a passage p 163 echoing my remark, "Never in the history of human conflict...."
"BUSINESS EXECUTIVES ARE LOATH TO DISCUSS..."
"Never before in history has there been such a massive transfer of knowledge--without war or conquest-- from one social group to another"
Never, in the history of human conflict.......
Steingart has a passage p 163 echoing my remark, "Never in the history of human conflict...."
"BUSINESS EXECUTIVES ARE LOATH TO DISCUSS..."
"Never before in history has there been such a massive transfer of knowledge--without war or conquest-- from one social group to another"
THIS IS WHAT I SEE RE HITS TODAY HOW LONG CAN THERE BE NO STATS YET THINK ABOUT IT
Referring URLs
No stats yet, check back later.
|
Referring Sites
No stats yet, check back later.
|
Search Keywords
No stats yet, check back later.
|
Sunday, October 18, 2015
RANDALL COLLINS GREAT STUFF
http://sociological-eye.blogspot.com/2015/10/even-without-gun-control-warning-signs.htmlat
What was of special interest to me was the apparent connection to Asperger's Syndrome, a mental condition I have studied casually re L S Lowry, and his art work.
What was of special interest to me was the apparent connection to Asperger's Syndrome, a mental condition I have studied casually re L S Lowry, and his art work.
RE RUSSIA GEOPOLITICS CIVILIZATIONS
There may be those for whom my isolated remarks here have created an erroneous impression, and implied hostility to Russia.
I believe that Russia, and all Russians, would have been better served by a return to a dynastic monarchy, and gradual steps toward constitutional monarchy, than what occurred in 1917 and after.
Furthermore, I believe that Russia was too big, even then, to be well served by one overarching autocratic Imperial system.
It was a threat both to its own civilizational brethren, and to other smaller states in neighboring civilizations, even as it still is today.
That is why I suggested that it should have been partitioned back in 1917 1918. Get the Bolsheviki out, return to monarchy, move toward constitutionalism, etc.
It was not a suggestion merely trying to be mean to Russians, but rather to look to solve problems caused by so large and overhanging an expanse, both within, and adjacent to, the Orthodox world.
I believe that Russia, and all Russians, would have been better served by a return to a dynastic monarchy, and gradual steps toward constitutional monarchy, than what occurred in 1917 and after.
Furthermore, I believe that Russia was too big, even then, to be well served by one overarching autocratic Imperial system.
It was a threat both to its own civilizational brethren, and to other smaller states in neighboring civilizations, even as it still is today.
That is why I suggested that it should have been partitioned back in 1917 1918. Get the Bolsheviki out, return to monarchy, move toward constitutionalism, etc.
It was not a suggestion merely trying to be mean to Russians, but rather to look to solve problems caused by so large and overhanging an expanse, both within, and adjacent to, the Orthodox world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)